Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and found that the punishment of expulsion into a zone of military action was ill-founded and in contradiction to the principle of humanism and the requirements of international norms. In the second case, however, the judge refused to extend the time to file an appeal, so V.’s attorney had to file an appeal with the deputy chair of the Saint Petersburg City Court, who recognized that there was a real threat to V.’s life and health due to the situation in eastern Ukraine and noted that in this particular situation expulsion would not be in line with the goals and principles of the punishment imposed and would also contravene international norms (the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention Against Torture, and the European Convention). In the decision, the judge noted that it was important to consider that V. had filed an application for temporary asylum in Russia in September 2017. The second decision of the district court was only cancelled in November, so V. had to spend over two months in the inhuman conditions of the foreign national detention center. Her common-law husband, who came to court and begged for V.’s release, passed away without seeing his wife’s release. Deprived of her liberty, V. was not even able to say goodbye to him.31 Russian courts have also attempted to expel people from eastern Ukraine who were already essentially stateless persons: L., an orphan and former resident of a children’s home, ended up in Russia immediately following the start of military actions in eastern Ukraine. When crossing the border, he lost his Ukrainian passport, which meant that he was not able to return to Ukraine when the period for his legal stay in Russia ended. In September 2017, a Saint Petersburg court adopted a decision to expel L. with preplacement in a foreign national detention center. The Consulate General of Ukraine cold not confirm his citizenship, since Luhansk Oblast, where L. was registered, was not under the control of Ukraine. Thus, L. became a stateless person in all but name: his expulsion could not be realized and his deprivation of freedom in the detention center became indefinite, with no lawful or attainable goal. L’s attorney was able to appeal this decision, but L’s expulsion was not cancelled and was instead replaced with “independent controlled 31 ADC Memorial archives. 18