Numerous decisions of the ECtHR against Ukraine state that non-execution of a court decision awarding 133 a person monetary compensation violates not only the right to a fair trial, but also the right to free possession of one’s property. In effect, this is a violation of the right to own and dispose of one’s property within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the Convention (ECtHR judgment in Shmalko v. Ukraine of 20 July 2004, Naumenko v. Ukraine of 9 November 2004, Varanitsa v. Ukraine of 5 April 2005, and Shchukin and others v. Ukraine of 13 February 2014). Example In August 2019, P., a resident of Lviv Oblast, wrote to the Commissioner regarding the non-execution of a decision by Sokal District Court of Lviv oblast on 6 September 2011. The decision had awarded the applicant a lump-sum cash benefit of UAH 1,373.00 as a war veteran. In response to the Commissioner’s request, the Treasury reported that the decision of Sokal District Court of Lviv oblast of 6 September 2011 was only executed on 20 May 2019 – eight years after the final court decision in the case. The Commissioner received numerous complaints from citizens regarding non-enforcement of court decisions on recovery of funds in cases where the debtor was a state body. These complaints were sent to the Treasury with requests to clarify the reasons for long-term non-compliance with court decisions and to take measures to restore property rights. In response, the Treasury reported that according to paragraph 2 of sub-item 1 of item 9 of Section VI “Final and Transitional Provisions” of the Budget Code of Ukraine, the undisputed write-off of the state budget amounts is carried out by the Treasury in the order of receipt of such decisions. The amount of funds established annually by the laws of Ukraine within the state budget is insufficient for the timely execution of court decisions by the Treasury. Non-enforcement of court decisions in Ukraine is systematic. During 2019, 278 applicants filed complaints with the Commissioner regarding non-enforcement of court decisions. Similar to the above, this is the result of many economic and legislative factors. Following consideration of these complaints, in August 2019 the Commissioner sent a request to the Minister of Justice of Ukraine to take action to address violations of Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms regarding the right to a fair trial. Despite numerous ECtHR rulings against Ukraine that record such violations, the national legal system is still unable to address the root causes of the systemic problem identified by the ECtHR, and to provide an effective remedy at national level. No progress has been made, despite the recommendations made in recent years, in particular the interim resolutions of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which called on Ukraine to take the necessary decisive action in its domestic legal system without further delay. CHAPTER 6 Chapter 6. Compliance with the rule of law in the exercise of justice