| Issue 5: Monday, 6 February 2012 |
 download in.pdf
1: Special Report. Ukrainian justice: protecting citizens or empowering the elite?
Special Report. Ukrainian justice: protecting citizens or empowering the elite?There was a saying supposedly used by Mexican presidents: "for my friends, anything - for my enemies, the law". To day it seems the same principle is operating in Ukraine. The performance of the Ukrainian legal system throughout 2011 betrays the real attitude of Ukraine's authorities to the people and society. Ukrainian courts clearly had different modus operandi for the evaluation penalisation of different social groups. Football fans who dared to shout slogans or sing songs of a vaguely political nature during matches in Ukraine were the first to receive the hard end of this judgemental bias. One football fan, Korenivsky, was officially charged with hooliganism delivering the sentence of potentially up to 4 years imprisonment or 5 years in a correctional centre. Kolesnichenko, People's deputy from the Party of Regions, has now filed a draft law suggesting penalty measures for anyone voicing political songs or slogans during or around Euro-2012 matches(1). Students also felt the hard hand of the law. The court case over the death of a young student Igor Indylo, who died under suspicious circumstances in police custody, resulted in a very mild punishment without any imprisonment for the militia officers who are implicated in the student’s death. In fact, this is part of an ongoing trend where Ukrainian courts refuse to deliver serious punishments to law enforcers known to be responsible for the mysterious deaths of young people in their custody. Ukrainian justice was also particularly cruel upon the political opposition, with perfect examples being the cases against former prime-minister Tymoshenko, former minister of interior Lutsenko, and many others. According to Human Rights Watch the public trust in Ukrainian courts has fallen dramatically. The organisation's annual report concludes that the guilty verdicts delivered to Tymoshenko and other former government officials have shattered public confidence in the independence of the courts(2). Entrepreneurs have also felt the sting of the judge’s gavel, with activists from 'Tax Maidan' being accused of damaging paving stones on Maidan square where protests were held. Relatives of high state officials who commit crimes with indisputable evidence against them somehow receive special treatment in the courts. They do not account for fatal road accidents they cause whilst children with wealthy parents feel free to beat-up ordinary citizens. In January a deputy's sun was recognised guilty for beating a young girl and sentenced to 3 years of imprisonment with probation period of 2 years. He was immediately released in the court and, provided he does not get caught breaking the law over the next two years, may well go free; one has to wonder if this is really enough to deter other elite children from similar behaviour. Representatives of the European Union have on many occasions publicly condemned the selective nature of Ukrainian justice(3).This was one of the reasons why the Association Agreement between Ukraine and EU was not ratified last year. Decreasing public confidence in the legal system creates some distinct risks for the governing authorities. Ukrainian sociologists report that citizens are choosing to blame the situation in the country near-solely on President Yanukovych. Bichenko, Director of the Ruzumkov Centre, believes that the President will pay in full for every governmental failing(4). Thus, the court system losing its independence will result directly in people losing their confidence in Yanukovych. The situation over the justice system in Ukraine in 2011 gave Freedom House the reason to believe that Ukraine has made a huge step backwards in the fight to preserve civil rights and freedoms. The level of political rights has fallen from the 3rd to the 4th category in the Freedom House rating. The main reason is the common belief that the governing authorities are trying to destroy the Ukrainian opposition using the court system, putting pressure on the media and resorting to forceful measures while dealing with protest(5). At the same time the government makes occasional claims to an understanding of problem with the system of justice in Ukraine. For example, the President recently announced a new Criminal Code, to be adopted in Ukraine in the nearest future. Yanukovych believes the Code will positively influence the development of Ukraine as it introduces the principle of competition between prosecution and defence. Balance, rule of law, presumption of innocence and proper protection of human rights are allegedly just around the corner. The President of Ukraine is confident that the new Criminal Code will be an important step towards creating an efficient system of state administration, creating balance among all the branches of power and establishing democratisation(6). Let us hope that the governing authorities realise the danger of the court system losing its independence, as should it happen, it will utterly undermine the balance of the whole political system of the country. (1)http://censor.net.ua/news/181094/fanatu_dinamo_svetit_4_goda_za_spasibo_jitelyam_donbassa (2) http://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2012/01/23/6927095/ (3) http://www.newsru.ua/ukraine/19sep2011/teysheyra.html (5) http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2012 (6) http://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2012/01/24/6929383/ People First Comment: On a warm summer’s afternoon in central Kyiv last year, a young judge’s assistant mounted the curb in her Mercedes 4x4 and proceeded to drive down the sidewalk looking for a place to park. In any other European city, a driver doing this would attract the attention of the public and, if available, the police. In Kyiv however, it is common practice; with pedestrians having to squeeze their way past cars parked half, or often fully, on the pavement. Sadly this story doesn’t end with one girl’s disregard for the Ukrainian traffic code. In what local police believe to have been a momentary confusion between the brake and accelerator pedals, Miss Nataliya Solovey lost control of her vehicle, running down and killing Mrs Svitlana Teterevkova; a married mother of three. When the case went to court in November, a verdict was delivered that might shock readers who are unfamiliar with the ways of the Ukrainian legal system: freedom from prosecution, return of impounded vehicle, return of driving licence and no entry into criminal record – which would have otherwise impacted her job at the state judicial service. Judge Volodymyr Bugil explained that the amnesty was granted on compassionate grounds – Miss Solovey being a mother with two young children; a compassion contrasted by the fact that the victim’s family will see neither justice nor compensation. Apparently Ukraine’s judiciary can be as selective in its compassion as it can in its wrath: one need only cite the case of Mr Yuriy Lutsenko, a key political opponent to the government, who was jailed for 6 months, before even a case against him was submitted to court, and has remained there for a further 7 months as new allegations periodically materialise. Optimistic hopes that these are but freak-cases are to no avail – they embody what in Ukraine is common knowledge: a connection to Ukraine’s ruling political and business elite, which are largely one and the same, effectively bestows immunity from prosecution; whilst outsiders must choose between compliance or pseudo-legal persecution. Whether it is a Councillor’s son crushing a motorcyclist with his Bentley, or a Deputy’s son beating a 20-year-old girl to a pulp in the middle of a crowded restaurant (as witnessed by thousands since the CCTV footage was leaked to YouTube), or even the theft of an entire shopping centre from its international owners, the elite know that by carrot or by stick they have the means to generate near-enough whatever verdict they like. Aside from the damage such a partisan judicial service does to the injured parties, attention should be paid to the impact its toleration by the Ukrainian people has upon the notional relationship between justice and the rule of law. Despite the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s office having a 98% conviction rate, making it perhaps the most effective legal body in the world, trust for it and other state arms, such as the militia and secret service, exists in only 10-16% of the population. The divorce between the legal system and the public sense of social security is a manifest threat to the organisational fabric of the nation itself: as the power of the state and the institutions that support it are perceived as oppressors to the common man; echoing the totalitarian aspects of the bygone Soviet era. Though calls from European neighbours for a strengthening of the rule of law might seem constructive, until the public believe that the laws and law makers act in the national interest, rather than their own, stricter enforcement will only have a further destabilising effect at the social level. If politicians can get away with murder, the public will see no shame in testing the rules themselves, such as driving on the pavement or perhaps rising in violent protest. Quote of the week. Bruno KreiskyThe ideas and principles of democracy should not be limited to politics, but must pervade all areas of social life. Bruno Kreisky |
