The decision of the European Court of Human Rights assessing the blocking of “VKontakte” and “Odnoklassniki” for compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights represents the first Ukrainian precedent in such disputes. National Council member Oleksandr Burmahin explained how this ruling may influence the future regulation of online platforms during the “United News” marathon broadcast on Inter TV.
According to Oleksandr Burmahin, in its decision the ECHR analyzed the main arguments from years of debate on whether Ukraine violates human rights by restricting access to resources of the aggressor state. Ultimately, the Court declared the users’ complaints inadmissible, as they failed to demonstrate that their rights had been violated, while the state had substantial grounds for imposing sanctions and acted proportionately.
One of the key factors in this case was the context of Russian aggression. Ukraine demonstrated that services such as “Yandex” and “Mail.ru” are tools controlled by Russian security agencies, in particular the FSB. They were used to collect data on Ukrainians, spread disinformation, and influence socio‑political processes.
“The Court took into account that these platforms are resources of the aggressor state and pose a real threat to national security. It is also important that users failed to prove their status as ‘victims’: the blocking was not absolute, since technical access remained possible through VPN, and there were sufficient alternative platforms for communication,” Oleksandr Burmahin noted.
Despite criticism following their introduction, the sanctions achieved their purpose. Russian social networks that once dominated the Ukrainian segment of the internet rapidly lost popularity. Ukrainians migrated widely to Facebook, Instagram, and other digital platforms, and the story of the two Russian services in Ukraine effectively came to an end.
In the context of discussions regarding the possible blocking of other platforms that pose a threat to national security (Telegram) or potentially pose such a threat (TikTok), this decision of the European Court of Human Rights may have a precedent-setting character. However, each case will be considered individually, taking into account all the nuances.
“Each case will be considered individually. And if it is established that a particular platform poses a security threat, and the conditions for restricting access to it are similar (availability of alternative services, possibility of access via VPN, the complaint being filed by a user rather than the platform owner), the European Court of Human Rights will likely once again side with the state,” noted a member of the National Council.
At the same time, he emphasized that Ukraine’s experience is unique due to the state of war and the fact that the blocked platforms belong to the aggressor state. For other European countries, in the event of applying similar restrictions, it will be more difficult to justify them, since they are not in conditions of full-scale war.
Reference:
On 26 March 2026, the European Court of Human Rights announced its decision in the case of Boyarov and Others v. Ukraine. The ECHR judges unanimously declared inadmissible the applications of four Ukrainian citizens who had challenged the blocking measures introduced by the Decree of the President of Ukraine in May 2017.
