Politicians are stirring before the Maidan anniversary. Society will remember, and start asking questions. It is not even the matter of changes in the country, for which people fought during the Revolution of Dignity, it is a separate topic: a question of unpunished criminals, who tortured and killed Maidan activists.
In words the government often makes correct, even harsh statements. One of the recent ones sounds as follows: “We simply do not have the right to further procrastinate with this issue. Those who executed and organized these crimes must be punished, and every single victim must be avenged,” said the president during a meeting with heads of security agencies these days.
And what are the concrete results? “Seven criminal cases involving 13 persons who committed crimes against participants of protest rallies have been sent to court. Investigation of crimes against Automaidan members is in process. Charges have been brought against 5 road police officers, and 27 more cases against 7 road police inspectors are opened,” Prosecutor General of Ukraine Vitalii Yarema said at the abovementioned meeting. He added that the investigation of mass shooting of people in Instytutska Street and activists in Mariinsky Park at Hrushevskoho Street was in process.
Interior minister Arsen Avakov and head of the Security Service Valentyn Nalyvaichenko reported about the results too. Detailed information can be found on the president’s website.
Experts have repeatedly emphasized that it will be hard to solve crimes committed during the Revolution of Dignity. Time and professional work are needed. But a year’s time is more than enough. The most important and lingering question is why isn’t anyone punished so far?
“The main answer is that not people of Maidan, but people from the Maidan stage came to power,” explains an active participant of the events of 2013-14, lawyer Hennadii Druzenko to The Day. “Those who came to power still remain part of the old system, which they are afraid of reforming. It can be seen in many areas, including the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Defense. The system and the civil society are still on opposite sides of the barricades. I do not rule out that some time in the future we might learn about some negotiations or information we do not know yet. And of course, we see that there is an obvious lack of political will needed for punishing the criminals.”
These days other disturbing news in this regard appeared. It turns out that the highest representatives of the former political regime do not fall under restrictions on the issuance of Schengen and other European visas, and therefore have a right to enter the territory of the European Union. An informed official from the EU bodies said this in a commentary to European Truth, when talking about the motives of visa issuance to former first deputy head of the Presidential Administration Andrii Portnov.
The argument is that the actions of these persons (Yanukovych and his sons, Azarov and his son, Pshonka and his son, Zakharchenko, Yakymenko, Kalinin, the Kliuiev brothers, Portnov, Lukash, Tabachnyk, Bohatyriova, etc.) “did not involve a threat to territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine.” Consequently, Yanukovych’s public urges to Putin to “use the armed forces of the Russian Federation to restore the rule of law, peace, order, stability, and protection of the population of Ukraine” are not the actions which jeopardized the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine.
Another important moment: on February 25, the Verkhovna Rada submitted an application to the International Criminal Court asking for criminal prosecution against senior officials of Ukraine for crimes against humanity on Maidan. With a delay, only on September 22, the Prosecutor General’s Office did submit information confirming these crimes to the Hague tribunal. And these days, a delegation of the Prosecutor’s Office of the International Criminal Court arrived in Ukraine with a working visit in order to “understand whether the crimes that were committed in Ukraine during protest rallies from November 21, 2013, to February 22, 2014, fall under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.”
So, it turns out they might be beyond its jurisdiction? “Ukraine should have turned to the European Union providing it with schemes, objective indictments of embezzlement, and carrying out terrorist activity for the EU to be able to take a decision on introduction of individual sanctions and prosecution of specific persons,” says expert, president of the European Association of Ukrainians Oleksii Tolkachov in his commentary to The Day. “There are very few facts proving criminal activities, there are only unsubstantiated statements about the ‘crimes of the previous regime’ and the ‘shootings on Maidan.’ Ukraine failed to create a clear and reasonable picture Europe would believe in.”
“The government failed even to submit the majority of the former officials to the Interpol wanted list. When Russia wanted to declare Yarosh wanted through the Interpol they did it very quickly,” Tolkachov continues. “We take a passive stance, waiting for someone to do the job for us. A bright example of such behavior is the implementation of sanctions against Russia. The West has done it, while Ukraine never introduced harsh sanctions. And now we demand again that the EU rushes headlong into the thick of it before Ukraine and proves the guilt of our former officials. It does not work that way.”
When assessing the situation after Euromaidan, a certain impression of deja vu resembling the Orange Revolution appears. Back then the public in particular demanded to solve high-profile criminal cases of crimes against public activist Oleksii Podolsky, journalist Heorhii Gongadze, MP of the second and third convocations Oleksandr Yeliashkevych, and others. Moreover, this demand was made by European structures. But the then leaders of the country did not do it. As regards Podolsky and Gongadze, everything ended with conviction of executors, and the Yeliashkevych case was a complete farce.
Today we observe similar actions by politicians, rather aimed at procrastination and decreasing the anger in society. “It looks like we can receive another symbolic ‘Gongadze case,’” Druzenko emphasizes. “The system does not bite itself. The scale is different, of course, but the essence is the same. All this can lead to the continuation of the revolution. Yes, it is dangerous for the country, but people’s logic is simple: when the law-enforcement and judicial systems do not work, dissatisfaction is accumulated, which is followed by an outbreak of people’s anger.”
