The outcome of the Appeal Court session in Kyiv in the Gongadze-Podolsky case came as no surprise, except that the long-lasting case revealed fresh intrigue. The key perpetrator, Oleksii Pukach, sentenced to life by the Pechersk District Court, once again found himself in limbo as his sentence remains to be executed. The Kyiv Court of Appeals has spent a year and a half trying to start hearing the appeals on their merits, with various legal obstacles constantly emerging and slowing down the process.
On May 19, at the start of the session, Presiding Justice Stepan Hladii read the response from the Pechersk Court that boiled down to the expert commission on secrets (it includes representatives of the Pechersk Court, the Interior Ministry, Security Service, and the Prosecutor General’s Office [Ukr. abbr. GPU]) needing more time to determine the presence of state secrets in the Pechersk District Court records.
To this GPU responded by proposing to allow the expert commission more time and Myroslava Gongadze’s defense counsel Valentyna Telychenko concurred: “We must let the expert commission have more time to determine the presence of classified data in the court records.”
Oleksii Podolsky had a different view on the matter: “Why do you start the session again by referring to secrets?” he asked the bench, adding, “I remember the previous session failed to solve another issue, the crime of blackmail and threats against Pukach on the part of Pechersk Justice Andrii Melnyk, Volodymyr Shylov and Roman Volshyn of the Prosecutor’s Office, as well as Myroslava Gongadze’s defense counsel Valentyna Telychenko. I want to finally hear from you whether the Prosecutor’s Office has responded or is still ignoring this court? The persons I have named have committed a crime which the GPU refuses to respond to. If you ignore this issue, it means that you also have no desire to investigate into this crime. As regards the secrets, I am surprised at the stand you have taken, considering that there have been accusations alleging that Podolsky is delaying the process. It is being delayed by officials who spend months pondering some fictional secrets. Do please put an end to this circus and stop delaying the process. It is necessary to start an investigation as per statements made by Pukach first and then proceed to hear the appeals on their merits.”
Oleksandr Yeliashkevych, acting on behalf of Podolsky, spoke in court: “Considering that Ukraine as a state once again refuses to honor its international commitments, that those in power have no desire to punish the individuals who have ordered high profile crimes and, instead, keep playing the secrets game, I suggest that the bench contact the president as a man who has repeatedly stated that the Gongadze case is a matter of honor for him, who has to carry out his presidential duty, and ask him to punish those responsible for procrastinating the declassification of the documents and order their declassification. I wish to draw your attention to the fact that the files in the case contain letters by Helsinki Commission member Steve Cohen that have been chronically ignored by our government. The bench has to realize their legal role in this process, although our society has long realized that Kuchma, Lytvyn, and other members of this organized group must be held criminally responsible. Regrettably, Mr. Poroshenko is still reluctant to deal with these matters. He is covering up for Kuchma and Lytvyn. I see no other explanation of Poroshenko ignoring the US Helsinki Commission’s appeal and failing to answer Steve Cohen’s letter.”
Oleksandr Yeliashkevych also declared: “I think that the presence of Andrii Melnyk on the declassification commission is inadmissible because the man must be brought to justice for falsifying a number of criminal cases. How can Melnyk supervise an investigation into his own unlawful court rulings? Your Honors, I propose a mechanism for expediting this process. Get in touch with the president. If Petro Poroshenko ignores your message again, this will be his next mistake. His previous mistakes are known. The presence of Leonid Kuchma during the negotiations in Minsk and on the Constitutional Commission is a shame to and a crime against the Ukrainian people. I want to remind all of you that on May 21 Georgy Gongadze would have marked his 46th birthday. To refresh the memory of those ‘upstairs’ concerning those horrible events, I will ask MP Vitalii Kuprii to make an appropriate statement in parliament to remind them all of that hair-raising tragedy, to make those in power finally act in accordance with the law.”
Vitalii Kuprii, Podolsky’s other representative in court, informed the bench that he had recently met with members of the PACE Monitoring Mission: “They could not understand why a resolution of that organization, calling for a final investigation into the high profile criminal cases involving Yeliashkevych, Podolsky, and Gongadze, had not been carried out for 15 years.”
After a short break, the bench returned to order the expert commission to complete declassification work before June 2 and the leadership of the Interior Ministry, SBU, and GPU to take measures in response to the commission’s failure to commence work. Pukach was ordered to finish familiarizing himself with the files in the case within 120 hours. Then the session was adjourned until 11:00 June 4 and Presiding Justice Stepan Hladii told the participants in the process to get prepared for a hearing of the case on its own merits.
And now about a very illustrative situation. As earlier mentioned by The Day, the Gongadze-Podolsky case has long become the acid test for politicians, public figures, and journalists. Quite a few of them have eventually failed it. No administration has had the guts to legally finalize these criminal cases. MP Vitalii Kuprii put the current one to the test with his official inquiry entitled “On the Inadmissibility of the Constitutional Commission Membership of Ex-President of Ukraine Leonid D. Kuchma.” On April 20, he forwarded copies of the inquiry to the members of parliament and asked for their opinion on this important issue. Supporting an MP’s inquiry takes 150 yeas and forwarding it to the head of state requires 226 yeas. An appropriate inquiry addressing Speaker Volodymyr Hroisman and the chairman of the Constitutional Commission was announced on April 24.
“The inclusion of Ex-President Leonid Kuchma of Ukraine (1994-2005) in the Constitutional Commission was a shock to Ukrainian society,” reads the inquiry. “This is a big shame to the author of the Edict and an insult to the Ukrainian people. Kuchma is the godfather of corruption in Ukraine, founder of the Kuchma-Yanukovych System against which two Maidans rebelled. This system has not been overcome to this day and inflicted tremendous losses and sufferings on Ukraine. Regrettably, Leonid Kuchma’s actions have not been properly legally assessed to this day, although he is objectively accused of having perpetrated numerous high profile crimes.”
So what’s the result? Says Vitalii Kuprii: “I’m ashamed to give you the figures. Just a handful of MPs, including some from Svoboda, our team of 15-20, I mean the inter-factional group UkrOp, and several others. I’m not going to comment on this because I’m more interested to know why we weren’t supported by the Samopomich (Self-Reliance), Batkivshchyna (Fatherland), and the Radical Party. These factions position themselves as locomotives of reform and constantly make statements about violations of human rights, the law, and so on. They turn out to be inactive when it comes to dealing with crucial issues. This is especially true of Self-Reliance because I used to regard it as one of the most progressive factions. I have many friends there, yet their general stand indicates that they have become part of the stage setting we all of us see now. There are no reforms in Ukraine…
“Then there was an inquiry addressing Speaker Hroisman, requesting that he ask the president to change the Constitutional Commission’s membership and recall Leonid Kuchma. Volodymyr Hroisman did not respond to the inquiry although it had been properly made in parliament. Now this is a breach of the law. I think that our MPs need some upgrading because what’s happening in Ukraine, within the Coalition and Opposition Bloc is proof that they don’t want to work for the good of Ukraine, that they do not answer the ideals of the Maidan and the Revolution of Dignity. That is why we have questions to ask of the Ukrainian Parliament.”
It is true that there are many such questions. Our parliament remains badly infected, even as the post-Maidan Verkhovna Rada.
MAY 19, 2015. KYIV COURT OF APPEALS IN SESSION / Photo by Artem SLIPACHUK, The Day
“Perhaps they will eventually respond to the inquiry,” Oleh Bereziuk, head of the Self-Reliance Faction, told The Day. “The thing is that Leonid Kuchma is ex-president of Ukraine to me. Today the Verkhovna Rada and the Cabinet can accomplish much more by showing a quality performance. What’s done can’t be undone, we must learn this historical lesson and keep working. Learning this lesson is our task and each of us must do his job. If the president puts Kuchma on a negotiating team, that’s his call. The oligarchic system formed and asserted itself in 2004 – regrettably as a result of the ‘first bourgeois revolution.’ Without a doubt, Kuchma played his role there, and I’m not defending or attacking him. For me, he is a historical figure. Therefore, we must carefully study our mistakes, positive experience, and do our job.”
We talked to several MPs who had at one time acted as Leonid Kuchma’s inveterate enemies, but whose stand seems to have mellowed with time.
“I never received such a message,” said Yurii Lutsenko, leader of the Petro Poroshenko Bloc (PPB), adding, “as for Leonid Kuchma being on the Constitutional Commission, that’s not my jurisdiction. I do not appoint commission members. I have my own attitude to the matter and I consider that what Kuchma did as president is unacceptable. I think that each of our presidents, even those I don’t like, had enough experience to voice his opinion when drafting the Constitution.”
The following are the opinions of two former journalists of the Ukrainska Pravda founded by Georgy Gongadze.
“I’ve heard that Kuprii wrote such a letter, but I never received a copy. If I do, I’ll read it. There is nothing I can say at the moment. On the whole, I was surprised to learn that Leonid Kuchma is a member of the Constitutional Commission. Well, I didn’t make a decision on the commission and I don’t know the procedures,” said PPB MP Mustafa Nayyem.
An interview with another PPB MP, Serhii Leshchenko, proved quite unusual. When asked by The Day’s Dmytro Kryvtsun, the man asked, in turn, “What media do you represent?” The Day, said Kryvtsun. “Has Kolomoisky bought your stock?” asked Leshchenko. “He hasn’t. Has Pinchuk bought yours?” countered Kryvtsun. Leshchenko finally answered the first question: “I’ve replied to Kuprii. Ask him for a copy, tell him I said it’s OK. It can be published if he and I are talking about the same thing.”
When asked about Leshchenko’s response, Kuprii said, “I haven’t received it as yet.”
This situation serves to illustrate the relationships within the Ukrainian political elite and its condition. It is infected with the Kuchma virus, including those who were his outspoken opponents only yesterday. And there are a number of journalists who are deeply involved. However, this isn’t the end of story. The struggle for justice and fair play is still underway. But the atmosphere in this society will not change until all the i’s are dotted and t’s crossed in the Gongadze-Podolsky case.
