The armed conflict in Eastern Ukraine led not only to obvious consequences such as casualties among civilians and combatants, the humanitarian disaster in Donbas or the complication of domestic politics, the war also provoked the sort of excesses that all states affected by conflict have to deal with. One example is the collective suspicion of Ukrainian citizens who live in the occupied territories and who may or may not have committed crimes against the state or their fellow citizens. On this issue opinions among human rights activists diverge widely.
Draft law on the prohibition of collaborationism (6170)
This legislation project was submitted on March 9, 2017 by Igor Lapin, a member of the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine’s Parliament. Looking at the text from the perspective of a common citizen (whose fate should be the main concern of the law) the vagueness of definitions is striking. For instance, already in the first paragraph of article 1 the following definition of “collaborationism” is given: “the collaboration of a Ukrainian citizen with the Russian occupying force or with an illegal armed formation supported by the Russian government” in Crimea or in ORDLO, short for the occupied zones of Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts. The text does not mention, however, what constitutes such collaboration. Could it be for instance becoming a member of an organization such as a citizen of the “Donetsk People’s Republic” (as which many are registered who themselves are unaware of it)? Or could it be the payment of utilities thereby contributing to the “state budget”? Or could it be the registration of a company with the commercial register? This is just the first paragraph of the first article and it leaves us with a string of open questions.
In some cases, it will be impossible to clarify let alone prove the motivation behind someone’s participation in a demonstration for “DNR” or “LNR”. Often people were forced to join such crowds by their employers, who in their turn were under pressure from militias. It is also questionable whether citizens should be punished for receiving “LDPR passports” or, in annexed Crimea, passports of the Russian Federation. Oftentimes people had no choice but to receive such passports if they wanted to keep their job or be sure they and their family members would not end up in a basement prison.
The legislation project also contains the formulation “any other form of collaboration…”. This is a phrase that has no place in a document that demands precise definitions for all terminology.
Mister Lapin still suggests changing Ukraine’s criminal code accordingly.
In the view of the law’s author, his draft would exempt anyone from responsibility for collaborationism who “was forced to collaborate”. This then would again raise the question what “being forced” means in this context and which evidence could be used as prove for forced collaboration.
Legislation project about the protection of Ukrainian statehood from collaborationism (7425)
This legislation project was registered in Verkhovna Rada on December 20, 2017. Its initiators are a group of nine members of parliament, among them the already introduced Igor Lapin.
The authors of the project – Vitaly Ovcharenko and Iryna Loyuk – insist that its intention is bringing just punishment to perpetrators. Who would be punished would be decided on the basis of the examination of citizens suspected of collaborationism. These examinations will be conducted by special “truth commissions”, which would practically take on the functions of a court. Truth commissions would be made up of activists that, in the words of the authors, are “widely renowned”. There is no more precise specification about how someone would qualify for these commissions.
The first section of the legislation project names a number of offenses that, according to the authors, would qualify as collaborationism. However, the misdeeds described there could involve almost any action. What is more, international law does not operate with the term “aggressive action”, which is used by the authors of the document as if it was intuitively clear what it meant. This term, that comes up repeatedly, also remains without an explanation.
The legal project in its current form, lacking precise definitions of the offenses and the criteria for punishment, could lead not only to the punishment of innocent citizens, but could also easily be abused as a tool against opposition politicians, business competitors or civil society activists.
One more thing is important: there is a procedure that regulates the registration of legislation projects. According to these regulations those who wish to submit an alternative project to an earlier submission must do so within 15 days. But as we see, in this case one project was registered March 9 and the second December 20, 2017. According to the authors of these legislation projects, they allegedly concern different spheres, regulate different issues and are being discussed by different committees. Already a quick look at the title makes it clear that both draft laws concern the same
On October 2 at 16:00 in Poltava Art Museum human rights defenders presented the publication "City, where the war had started" about...
On October 2 at 16:00 in Poltava Art Museum human rights defenders will present the publication "City, where the war had started" ab...
Interactive exhibition of testimonies "On the Rift" about the violation of rights of civilians during the war in Donbas was presente...
The Secretariat of the Coalition «Justice for Peace in Donbas»
04060, Kyiv, Ryzhska str., 73 G