Le rapport de Turquie sur la violation des droits des Tatars de Crimée par la Russie confirme qu'après l'annexion de la Crimée, il y a eu un sérieux déclin de l'exercice des droits et des libertés fondamentales, comme le droit de réunion, de manifestation publique et de liberté d'expression.
Les autorités autoproclamées ont poursuivi une politique systématique de répression et d'intimidation.
Ils ont également intensifié la répression des Tatars de Crimée et ont poursuivi la politique d'isolement et de discrétisation des personnalités de la communauté tatare de Crimée et des membres du Majlis visant à la marginalisation et la neutralisation de cette organisation.
Les lois de la Fédération de Russie sur l'extrémisme, le séparatisme et le terrorisme ont été utilisés comme un moyen d'assujettir toutes les parties d'opposition.
Malgré le fait que la langue des Tatares de Crimée a reçu le statut de langue officielle après l'annexion son utilisation est très limitée.

Le rapport en anglais - http://www.aa.com.tr/documents/AA/haber/crimea_report.pdf 

 · After the annexation, there was a serious decline in the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms, such as the right to assembly and demonstration, and the freedom of expression. The de facto authorities pursued a systematic policy of suppression and intimidation.
· As the de facto government came into power, it intensified the repression of the Crimean Tatars and pursued a policy of isolation and discrediting prominent figures of the Crimean Tatar community and the members of the Majlis. The de facto authorities pursue a strategy of marginalization and neutralisation towards the Majlis.
· It is observed that after 18 March 2014, the Russian Federation's laws on extremism, separatism, and terrorism were used by the de facto government as a means to subdue all parties opposed to them in Crimea, especially the Crimean Tatars. Prominent Crimean Tatar figures have been accused mainly of extremism and inciting people to mass disobedience. The prohibition on Crimean Tatar leaders, such as Mustafa Kırımoğlu (Cemilev), Server Kadirov and Refat Çubarov's and Ismet Yuksel's entering Crimea are based on these baseless allegations.
· The refusal by the Majlis members to cooperate with Russia led to an increase of oppression, intimidation and threats against them. Evidence of the pressure includes systematic questioning of the members, home raids, abductions, and torture and the confiscation of the assets of the Crimea Foundation (Fond Crimea).
· Obstructing the commemoration of symbols, dates and events of national importance, ignoring of national values, the abolition of national institutions and their replacement with new symbols, dates and institutions are among the practices being carried out by the de facto Government. The Commemoration Meetings of the Forced Exile of Crimean Tatars on 18 May, which had been held freely in Crimea ever since their return to the homeland, was banned in 2015 as it was branded a "provocation" by the officials. The de facto authorities do not allow demonstrations and meetings that criticize the Russian Federation while they do permit pro-government ones.
· The pressure on and control of media intensified, which significantly curtails freedom of expression and freedom of information. Pressures on Crimean Tatar media outlets continue with bans on some media executives entering Crimea, continuous summons to testify, raids and long searches in the broadcasting centers, or the non-renewal of broadcasting licenses. Telephones, e-mail and Facebook are also being monitored by the state.
· A suppression policy exists aimed at spreading fear and distrust in the neighborhoods where Crimean Tatars are settled. Compared to their population the employment of Crimean Tatars in public institutions is extremely low; and they are not employed if they are considered as dissidents.
· Even though the Crimean Tatar Language was granted official language status after the annexation, its usage has remained limited in practice and the pursuance of an education policy of promoting the Russian language has adversely affected the National Schools. There are currently 15 schools as such, however in view of the size of the population of Crimean Tatar children, 200 schools are in fact needed. It is stated that hours of instruction in the Crimean Tatar Language have been reduced in all schools.
· After the annexation the autonomy of Crimea was abolished. The Russian Federation declares that it considers Crimean Tatars to be one of the native communities of the Russian Federation, but not as the indigenous people of Crimea.
· The number of official residence permits for foreigners in Crimea is limited to 5,400. This regulation makes the acceptance of Russian citizenship the only option. Those who did not accept Russian citizenship could not benefit from any citizenship rights. (This applies not only to Crimean Tatars but to all people living in Crimea) Refusal of Russian citizenship would result in not being able to benefit from the following: pension, protection of property rights, medical and educational services, employment in public institutions. Persons refusing to hand over their Ukrainian passports are either not employed or dismissed.
· Freedom of travel of persons not citizens of the Russian Federation is also restricted. Those who acquired Russian citizenship, but having residence permits (propiska) in Crimea are not granted visas by the countries not recognizing the annexation of Crimea, thus they can only travel abroad by using their Ukrainian passports. Those who have to hand over their Ukrainian passports to Russian officials do not have even this option.
· There has been a number of unsolved cases of killings and disappearances, the investigations are not conducted properly. One of the most important threats to the right to life is perceived as the Self-Defense Units, which were granted official status on 11 June 2014 by the de facto Crimean authorities. These armed paramilitary forces which were active during the invasion and annexation periods, were important actors in human rights violations. Some of the Crimean Tatars’ homes were raided, supplies in homes were destroyed and some properties seized. The privacy of residences was not respected.
· The de facto authorities pursued a policy aimed at increasing state control over religious activities and institutions in line with the laws of the Russian Federation and supported alternative religious structures to this end. Pressure on the religious institutions reveals itself in the raids conducted against Crimean Tatars’ mosques and madrasas. It is stated that religious institutions giving education to children had been raided by special operations teams during the classes.
· The delegation received some information indicating that the de facto Government had a tendency to manipulate some radical Habeshi, Wahhabi and Salafi religious movements. It is also claimed that there were efforts to affiliate Crimean Tatars with radical movements or melt them down into the same pot with other Muslim groups in Russia.