Chapter 5. Observing rights and freedoms of persons who suffered temporary occupation and armed conflict The main problems faced by Ukrainian citizens living in the temporarily occupied territory of the 115 Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the City of Sevastopol are restrictions to access to financial services in connection with their status as non-residents in the government-controlled area of Ukraine; complicated procedures for civil registration (births and deaths); and violations of the right to religious freedom by the occupation administration. Restrictions to access to financial services in connection with the status of non-residents of the government-controlled area of Ukraine Law of Ukraine 1636-VII “On the Creation of a Free Economic Zone Crimea and on Peculiarities of Carrying Out Economic Activities in the Temporarily Occupied Territory of Ukraine” of 12 August 2014 (hereafter Law 1636-VII) is discriminatory against residents of Crimea and restricts their rights and freedoms compared to other citizens of Ukraine, even those living under the same legal regime of occupation in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. Law 1636-VII categorizes Ukrainian citizens who are registered as residents of Crimea but do not have internally displaced certificates as non-residents, or foreigners. This leads to violations of their civil rights on a daily basis. For example, when receiving inheritance, a non-resident pays 18 per cent in personal income tax, while residents pay only 5 per cent. Ukrainian banks that have established separate structural subdivisions since the start of the temporary occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol are denying citizens of Ukraine who are residents of Crimea the right to withdraw their money from savings accounts, even if they have a court decision ordering that this right be upheld. In August, citizen N. filed a complaint with the Commissioner alleging that a Ukrainian bank had violated his right to withdraw his money from his savings account. In his application, N. stated that he had been unable to withdraw his money from a savings account opened with a Ukrainian bank in the temporarily occupied territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, contrary to the decisions of the court of first instance and appellate court. In support of his claims, the applicant stated that in early February 2014, a savings agreement had been concluded between him and the bank, under the terms of which the money had been deposited in the savings account for a period of 366 days. By the decision of Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv of 26 March 2015 in case 761/33484/14-ts, upheld by a decision of the Kyiv Court of Appeal of 16 June 2015, the bank was charged an amount under the savings agreement in favour of the applicant. In addition, in March 2017, Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv ruled in absentia that the bank was obliged to pay a fine in favour of the applicant. However, at the time of the appeal to the Commissioner, none of the court decisions had been implemented. The bank’s debt to the applicant as a whole amounted to over UAH 1 million. Following the Commissioner’s intervention in September 2019, the bank implemented the court’s decision and paid the debt to the applicant in full. CHAPTER 5 Example