1

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSIONIN UKRAINE – 2003

33(74)

KHARKIV HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION GROUP

KHARKIV«FOLIO»2004

2

67.9(4ENG)

Illustration by O. Gerchuk

This project was supported by the Democracy Fund/Media Develop-ment Fund of the U.S.Embassy, Kyiv. The views of the authors do not

necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S.Government

The book is prepared and published with assistance the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine

and the National Endowment for Democracy

Freedom of expression in Ukraine – 2003 / Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group; Illustration by O. Gerchuk. – Kharkiv: Folio, 2004. – 312 p.

ISBN 966-03-2652-1. This is a special issue No.74 of the informative-analytic bulletin «Prava

ludyny». It contains materials on informational conflicts in Ukraine in 2003.

67.9(4ENG)

ISBN 966-03-2652-1

© Compiled by Ye.Zakharov, M.Nedayvoda, 2004 © Illustration by O. Gerchuk, 2004 © Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, 2004

3

SOME GENERAL DATA

The Ivano-Frankivsk oblast.Informational sphere of the region: statistical data Igor MUDRYK, Kalush, the newspaper «Vikna»:

. 1. The number of the registered mass media According to the data of the representative of the National Council of

Ukraine in charge of TV and radio broadcasting in the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast and the data of the directorate in charge of the press and information of the oblast state administration, 279 mass media are registered in the oblast.

2. The number of printed mass media and their runs There are 238 printed mass media in the oblast. On 1 January 2003 the to-

tal run of the newspapers was: one-time run – 364 587 copies; yearly run – 20 192 918 copies. The runs of magazines and digests (there are about 40 of them) is not

constant. The majority of these editions are published not periodically and with small runs.

3. The number of electronic mass media with the identification of broad-casting diapasons

14 TV companies, 6 FM-radio companies, 7 cable TV companies and 1 cable broadcasting company are registered in the oblast.

Radio companies: Radio «Zakhidny polus», Ivano-Frankivsk – 104.3 MHz, broadcasting

territory –Ivano-Frankivsk; Radio «Dzvony», Ivano-Frankivsk – 105.8 MHz, broadcasting territory –

Ivano-Frankivsk; Radio «Boychuk-studio», Ivano-Frankivsk – 101.3 MHz, broadcasting

territory –Ivano-Frankivsk; Radio «Nova khvylia», Sniatin – 101.8 MHz, broadcasting territory – the

Sniatin district; Radio «Siayvo», Kolomya – 106.8 MHz, broadcasting territory – the

Ivano-Frankivsk oblast; The TV and radio company «Vezha», Ivano-Frankivsk – 107 MHz,

broadcasting territory – Ivano-Frankivsk.

4

TV companies of the oblast: The oblast TV company «Galychchina», Ivano-Frankivsk – channel 26 (1

kW), broadcasting territory – the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast; The TV company «3-studio», Ivano-Frankivsk – channel 30 (500 W),

broadcasting territory – Ivano-Frankivsk, the Kalus district; The TV company «R », Burshtyn – channel 3 (10 W), broadcasting ter-

ritory – the Galych district; The TVRC «Kolomya», Kolomya – channel 37 (10 W), broadcasting ter-

ritory – the Kolomya district; The TVRC «Sniatin», Sniatin – channel 9 (10 W), broadcasting territory

– the Sniatin district; The town TV « », Kalush – channel 33 (100 W), broadcasting terri-

tory – the Kalush district; The district TVRC «Nezalezhnist», Kalush – channel 33 (100 W), broad-

casting territory – the Kalush district; The TVRC «Zakhid», Rogatin – channel 12 (10 W), broadcasting terri-

tory – the Rogatin district; People studio «Tysmenitsa», Tysmenitsa – channel 5 (10 W), broadcast-

ing territory – the Tysmenitsa district; The TVRC «N », Kolomya – channel 23 (100 W), broadcasting terri-

tory – the Kolomya district; The TV company «Nadvirna», Nadvirna – channel 3 (10 W), broadcast-

ing territory – the Nadvirna district; The TV company «Galychu – 1100», Galych – channel 31 (100 W),

broadcasting territory – the Galych district; The district TV company «Kosiv –TV», Kosiv – channel 8 (100 W),

broadcasting territory – the Kosiv district; The TVRC «Zakhid», Dolyna – channel 5 (10 W), broadcasting territory

– the Dolyna district. Cable TV companies: 1) The TVRC «Discovery», Ivano-Frankivsk; 2) The TVRC «R », Burshtyn; 3) The TVRC « +», Kalush; 4) The TVRC «N », Kolomya; 5) The TVRC «Kvant 2», Kolomya*; 6) The company «Ephir», Ivano-Frankivsk*; 7) The company «Khvylia», Kalush*. *– the companies that got the permission of the local power for the con-

struction of cable networks. (According to the information of the newspaper «Vikna», the company «T+» also develops its own cable network).

Cable broadcasting («Mitris» system): The TVRC «Karpaty» Ltd., Ivano-Frankivsk.

5

4. The number of Internet-editions The official structures did not give us these data. The number of mass media mentioned in items 1-4, which are actually

present at the market: Only 80 out of 198 registered newspapers, 9 out of 40 registered maga-

zines and digests, as well as all cable, electronic and wire radio and TV com-panies, are actually present at the market.

B. 1. The number of mass media owned by the state 2. The number of mass media of the communal form of property 23 printed mass media. 9 companies of wire radio broadcasting. 7 TV companies. 1 radio company. 3. The number of privately owned mass media 2 companies of wire radio broadcasting. 3 TV companies. 5 radio companies. 8 companies of cable TV and cable broadcasting TV. 4. The number of mass media of the combined form of property 2 companies of wire radio broadcasting. 4 TV companies. There are no separate statistics on printed mass media. It is known only

that 23 editions are communal, there are no state-owned editions, so the rest 215 editions are privately owned or are of the combined form of property.

C, D. National TV and radio organizations in the region 1) National TV company of Ukraine, TVRC «Era». 2) UT-2, TVRC «Studio «1+1». 3) TVRC «Inter». 4) TVRC « V». 5) TVRC «STB». 6) TVRC «Novy kanal». 7) TVRC «NBM». 8) TVRC « ».9) National TVRC of Ukraine. 10) Radio «Niko-F ».Other TV and radio companies of Ukraine have no licenses of the Na-

tional Council for using the broadcasting channels in the Ivano-Frankivskoblast.

E. The language of the mass media from item A 1) 236 newspapers, magazines and digests out of 238 were registered as

Ukrainian-language editions, and 2 – as Russian-language. 2) All electronic mass media registered in the oblast broadcast their pro-

grams only in Ukrainian.

6

3) The official sources have no information about the Internet-editions. F. The data on the population of the region According to the data of the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast statistics directorate,

on 1 January 2002 the population of the oblast was 1,406,129. The population census of 2001 showed that the oblast is inhabited by the

representatives of the following nationalities: 97,52% – Ukrainians; 1,77% – Russians; 0,1% – Byelorussians; 0,03% – Jews; 0,04% – Moldavians; 0,13% – Poles; 0,41% – other nationalities. 98.9% of the oblast population speak Ukrainian in their everyday life,

0.7% – Russian, 0.4% – other languages. «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 15-30 April, 2003

Monitoring of local mass media in 5 townsof the Prykarpatskiy region The monitoring of local mass media, which that was carried out in 5

towns of the Prykarpatskiy region, showed that there were no independent mass media in four of these towns (except Burshtyn). For instance, the news-paper «Ratusha» (Bolekhiv) was founded by the town council, and the editor and journalists of this edition are officially employed by this power organ.

Administration of the mass media, which were visited by the representa-tives of the newspaper «Vikna», did not regard the privatization of communal and state mass media as panacea, and openly protested against it. Journalists do not conflict with the administration of mass media, since they are absolutely law-abiding, as well as the editions themselves. Almost all provincial mass media have the same problems: pay arrears (since February), inadequate tech-nical base, low salaries and, sometimes, the unbearable work conditions. In particular, the Galytsky district radio company, which is situated in one build-ing with the shop «Seed», works without the license since March 2003 and without the accountant, who left the company in December 2002. However, the journalists dare to protest only in private talks.

Local printed editions religiously obey «temniks» – the recommendations spread by the Directorate in charge of the press and information. After the ap-pointment of a new editor of the newspaper «Golos opislia» (Rogatin), all heads of the departments were dismissed because of bad financing. Among them journalist Miron Melnik was dismissed, who now has legal proceedings with the administration of the newspaper. He believes that the dismissal violated his journalist’s rights, that is was caused by his disobedience and publication of critical materials that displeased the new editor.

7

Salaries in local mass media faintly exceed the minimum wage. The situation in Burshtyn is much more optimistic. A private TV company

exists there, which successfully competes with town mass media. The existence of the TV company «RAI» proves that private mass media can exist even in small provincial towns. The TV company has modern office, digital equipment and decent salaries.

Oksana Guzinets-Mudrik, the newspaper «Vikna»,Kalush, the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast, July 2003

71% of the Ukrainian citizens reckon that political censorship exists at TV and in the press These data were presented by the Ukrainian democratic group, which, on

26 June-7 July, conducted the all-Ukrainian poll by the request of the Institute of politics. 100 respondents were questioned in all regions of Ukraine. The re-spondents believe that some events are elucidated and commented in details, and others are either hushed up or elucidated from the negative point of view. Only 11% did not agree with that. According to the results of the poll, the cen-sorship is practiced by the Administration of the President of Ukraine (46% of the respondents), administration of TV channels and newspapers (25%), own-ers of TV channels and newspapers (23%) and the National Council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting (23%). 59% of the respondents are sure that the political censorship exists at the TV channel «UT-1», 56% – at the channel «1+1», 55% – at the channel «Inter». Only 13% of the participants of the poll reckon that the absolute freedom of speech exists in Ukraine. Every fifth re-spondent pointed out the absence of the freedom of speech, every second an-swered that there were some problems with the freedom of speech in Ukraine. 56% believe that the problems with the freedom of speech are caused by the viola-tions of the operating legal norms by the organs of executive power (37% – cen-tral organs and 19% – local organs), and 13% – by the imperfection of the legisla-tive base.

(«Silski Visti», No. 83, 18 July 2003)

* * *

The respondents believe that the TV channels ICTV, STB and «Novy kanal» are least controlled by censors. 31%, 28% and 27%, correspondently, told that these channels underwent censorship. The experts think that this re-sult is caused by the comparatively narrow broadcasting zones of these chan-nels.

Every sixth respondent reckons that the political censorship is put into practice by the Supreme Rada, every seventh – by the Cabinet of Ministers, and every eleventh – by journalists themselves.

8

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 128, 18 July 2003)

9

17371 periodicals have been registered in Ukrainebefore 1 July 2003 These data were communicated by Viktor Petrenko, a deputy head of the

State committee on TV and radio broadcasting. 6598 editions were founded by juridical persons, 2900 – by physical persons and 802 – by the organs of local self-rule.

According to the statistics, the editions with the commercial orientation and the editions founded by physical persons prevail in the informational space of our state. This fact influences the entire sphere of mass media activi-ties, in particular, forming of the informational process, «which generates some peculiar tendencies». Such situation must make the power structures to look for the new approaches in the relations with mass media independently of the form of property, reckons V. Petrenko. At the same time, the statistical data evidence the increase of the number of the Ukrainian-language editions. In 2000 this number was 1933, and on 1 July 2003 – 2401 (the number of Rus-sian-language editions was 784 and 809, respectively).

(«Slobidskiy kray», Kharkov, No. 161, 29 August 2003)

36% of Kyiv dwellers do not trust to mass media According to the results of the poll conducted by the UNIAN on 2 Au-

gust, 36% of Kyiv dwellers do not trust to mass media. Only 25% of the respondents trust to mass media, 26% believe that mass

media are not always trustworthy. 35% of Kyiv dwellers trust to TV, 13% – to newspapers and magazines, 12% – to radio, 7% – to informational agencies and 6% – to the Internet. All in all, 1323 respondents were questioned.

(«The Poltava oblast media club», No. 40, 7 August 2003)

Three fourth of the amount of TV news of six basic UkrainianTV channels directly concern Ukraine Three fourth of the TV news of six basic Ukrainian TV channels directly

concern Ukraine. These are the results of the research conducted by the Asso-ciation of the Ukrainian press (AUP), which were presented on Wednesday at the press conference in Kyiv.

Natalya Kostenko, the director of the AUP project «Monitoring of politi-cal news of Ukrainian TV channels», informed that «the most Ukraine-centered TV channels are: the First national channel «YT-1» (84% of news concern Ukraine) and «Novy kanal» (81%), and the least – «1+1» (67%) and «ICTV» (62%)». According to N. Kostenko this is a stable tendency, which was also observed last year.

Almost a quarter of the total amount of news is transmitted on the First national channel (23%), «1+1» and «Inter» broadcast 18% and 19% of news,

10

respectively, «STB» – 15%, «ICTV» – 13% and «Novy kanal» – 10%. The same situation is observed with the distribution of the time for broadcasting news: «YT-1» – 26%, «1+1» and «Inter» – 18% each, «STB» – 15%, «ICTV» – 12%, «Novy kanal» – 11%.

The proportion of the political and not-political news in the total informa-tional flow is almost equal: 38% and 36%, respectively (at that «Inter» and «Novy kanal» are most politicized – more than 40%).

Only 11% of political news concern the internal events, and 27% are connected with mutual relations between Ukraine and other countries. More-over, the time of translation of the information about foreign politics is 3.5 times more than the time for internal political news: in other words, the mes-sages about the internal events are usually shorter.

About 25% of the news concerning Ukraine do not contain the references to the sources of information; for political news this number is even more – 29%. The least quantity of such offences is made by the TV channel «STB»: 12%, and the most – by «1+1»: 29%,

Almost 80% of news reflect only one point of view, and only 21% con-tain two or more viewpoints. By the words of N. Kostenko, in 2002 these numbers were 78% and 22%, respectively.

The assortment of the events on the basic Ukrainian TV channels is al-most identical.

The leader of the attention of the news is the supreme executive power, in particular, the President, who is mentioned in every fifth message. At that the information concerning President is, in 99% of cases, positive or neutral, and only 1% of such information is critical or ironical. The local power organs are the most popular objects of criticism among the power institutions – 21% of the messages have the negative tint.

The first week of October (6-11 October) was analyzed in the course of the research. The goal of the project was the study of the dynamics of repre-senting the political news by various TV channels. The duration of the project is 10 months.

The researchers analyzed 35 news features (351 messages) transmitted by six TV channels on primetime (19:00-22:00). They applied the method of con-tent analysis of audiovisual information.

(«Interfax-Ukraine», 5 November 2003, www.interfax.kiev.ua)

11

COMMON

New Civil Code is a noose for journalists Tetiana Montian, a lawyer, specially for «Telekritika», 25 April 2003,

12:15 p.m. It is known that for 12 years our long-suffering country manages to live

according to the Civil Code of the UkrSSR, which «regulates property and … private non-property relations for creating the material and technical base of communism, and more and more complete satisfaction of material and spiri-tual needs of citizens» (Article 1 of the operating Code!). Yet, soon we will get the new Civil Code, which must come into force since 1 January 2004. Yet, if it comes into force, it would be awful! Why? I shall explain.

The drawbacks of the new Code are innumerable. I shall only consider several articles, which concern journalists.

The leader of this rating is, undoubtedly, Article 277: «Any negative in-formation spread about a person is regarded as inauthentic». So, be ready: since 1 January 2004 any critical word about anybody will result in punish-ment for insult of «… honor, dignity and buisness reputation of physical or ju-ridical person», that is for inflicting moral damage that «must be recompensed by money, other property or in other way» (Article 23).

At that «the inauthentic information must be refuted independently of the guilt of the person that spread this information (the same Article 277). Besides, along with the compensation, court may, according to Article 278, prohibit the publication of newspaper, book, movie or TV feature, which are prepared, or to prohibit (terminate) its distribution, or even to seize the run and to destroy it! It is obvious that some mass media will be the first ones that would undergo these measures, like it happened with the newspaper «Svoboda», the run of which was drowned in a river. Yet, since 1 January 2004 such actions would not be a brutal arbitrariness, but legals action based on laws and court deci-sion.

It is obvious that our legislators mean that negative information is re-garded as inauthentic until it would be proved by facts. Yet, they could not state this simple idea in the proper form.

So, let us continue. If the information exists that is apriori negative, then there must exist the apriori positive information. Yes, it is so. Article 302

12

reads: «The information presented by an official in the framework of his ser-vice duties, as well as the information contained in the official sources (re-ports, shorthand records, messages of mass media fouded by state organs or organs of local self-rule) is regarded as authentic». This Article also states that «a physical person that spreads such information is not obliged to verify its au-thenticity and is not responsible in the case of its confutation».

Try to imagine what orgy of the «freedom of speech» will begin after the New Year! Everything that will be said by state officials and deputies of all levels or printed in the corresponding press will be considered as truth, abso-lute and indisputable! For instance, Piskun would say at a press conference that Yulia Timoshenko smuggled the Turkmen gas in China gas lighters, and this would be interpreted as real facts! Yu. Timoshenko, in her turn, would have the right to say that Piskun is a thief and imbecile – and this would be truth too! And so on and so forth. The real schizophrenia will begin, which is, as it is known, the pluralism of opinions in one head!

However, here one can also understand what the authors of the article wanted to say: they meant that a person spreading the words of state officials and organs must not be responsible for the contents of the information. Yet, we have what we have. Other articles of the new Code also suit the analyzed definitions of authentic/inauthentic information. For example, Article 296 states: «… the name of the person, which was detained, or which is suspected or accused of some crime, … may not be used (published) until the court ver-dict about his/her guilt comes into force».

I even cannot imagine what our law-enforcers will tell at press confer-ences, and how the journalists will elucidate the open court sessions, where the accused communicate their names, which are written down to protocols that fully meet the requirements of Article 302! Many other examples may begiven.

There is such juridical concept as the hierarchy of normative acts, which stipulate what to do, if normative acts contradict to each other. According to this hierarchy, the Ukrainian Constitution is more «powerful» than any laws and laws – than decrees or resolutions. When several laws contradict to each other, then the preference is given to that one, which has the latest date of the adoption, and which is accompanied with the comment that all laws, which were adopted before, are operable only in the part that does not contradict it. Yet, lawyers never thought what to do, if the articles of the same law would be contradictory. There was no need to consider this problem earlier, before the Ukrainian MPs presented the result of their joint legislative activities…

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 15-30 April, 2003

13

The National Council got the authority to cancel the licenses for broadcasting without court decision Volodymir Yavorskiy, a lawyer of the Association of network TV and

radio broadcasters of Ukraine The Law adopted on 15 May by the Parliament stipulates the right of the

Central and district voting commissions to present this question to the National Council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting. This unexpected legal norm initiated by the Committee of state construction and local self-rule endangers the work of TV companies during the election.

Theoretically, this law should change only the norms that contradict the law on election adopted earlier. Yet, it has another role too. Adopting this law, the deputies, in fact, created heavy work conditions for Ukrainian TV and ra-dio organizations during the election campaigns and referendums.

Along with the «usual» changes, the law contains the interpretation of Ar-ticle 28 of the Law of Ukraine «On TV and radio broadcasting», which stipu-lates the activities of TV and radio organizations connected with election proc-ess or the process of a referendum. And here we have some pitfalls.

The discussed changes concern the activities of TV and radio organiza-tions not only during the election of people’s deputies. This law stipulates the activities of TV and radio companies during any elections or referendums.

This law gives the additional authorities to the National Council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting related to the control of the fulfillment by the TV and radio organizations of the laws on election. The Council also got the authority «to cancel temporarily (until the end of the election process) the licenses for the use of broadcasting channels on the application of Cen-tral Voting commission or district (territorial) voting commissions».

This norm is rather surprising, since is contains a great number of contra-dictions and inexactitudes.

First, this norm contradicts Article 32 of the Ukrainian Law «On the Na-tional Council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting», which stipulates the rights of the Council and the sanctions that it may apply. This article envisages the possibility «to cancel temporarily (for the term up to two months) the li-censes for the use of broadcasting channels (this measure is used after the ap-plication of other punishment measures, except the cases of violation of the demands of part 2 Article 2 of the Law of Ukraine «On TV and radio broad-casting»)». I want to remind that the election process lasts for 90 days, which is more than two months. Moreover, the mentioned exception has no connec-tion with the election laws. It should be also said that the Law of Ukraine «On election of people’s deputies of Ukraine», as well as other laws, does not give the right to the voting commissions to turn to the National Council with the applications about applying sanctions. According to part 2 Article 19 of the Ukrainian Constitution, «the organs of state power, organs of local self-rule

14

and their officers must act only on the basis and in the framework of their au-thorities using the methods envisaged by the Constitution and laws of Ukraine». So, the presented norm of the Law does not agree with the Constitu-tion too.

Secondly, according to this Law, the National Council may cancel the licenses «in case of transmitting the features that contain the information, the distribution of which is prohibited by the laws on election». This provi-sion violates one of the fundamental principles of bringing to responsibility: any violation must be defined exactly. Here the legislators refer to three laws that stipulate the procedure of election of the President, deputies and organs of local self-rule. It is absolutely incomprehensible which information is prohib-ited for distribution by the law on election and what law is meant. So, it is also incomprehensible what information being distributed may result in the tempo-rary cancellation of the license, although some information of this kind is de-fined in Article 56 of the Ukrainian Law «On election of people’s deputies», which envisages the restrictions during the pre-election agitation. Yet, there are no exact definitions. Thus, the TV and radio organizations do not know for which actions they may be punished. So, they cannot avoid the illegal actions. Such formulation will inevitably result in the misuses on the side of state organs and officers, as well as in the self-censorship of TV and ra-dio companies during the elucidation of election process or referendum.

The probability of the censorship also increases because the responsibility is envisaged for the contents of information, but not for the methods of its dis-tribution. Therefore, for instance, the refusal to spread the agitation materials, political advertisement on the eve of election or other similar abuses are the procedural ones, and the punishment sanctions for them are imposed by court.

Thirdly, the state organs got one more tool of pressure upon TV and radio organizations of Ukraine during the election process, because now they have the right to cancel the licenses. The operating version of the law, unlike the newly adopted one, states that the temporary cancellation of the li-cense may be realized only «after a court decision, except the cases of trans-mitting the features that directly appeal for the overthrow of the constitutional order or violation of the territorial integrity of Ukraine». Here all is defined exactly and understandably. Now we have the situation, when the National Council may cancel the license for spreading some information, which is not clearly defined. This is a good opportunity to exclude the opposition TV and radio organization from the election process. And the National Council, in its turn, becomes a political organ.

Fourthly, this norm again does not agree with European standards in the sphere of TV and radio broadcasting. One of the main principles of independ-ent electronic mass media is the complicacy of the procedure of cancellation the licenses. The sanctions in the form of temporary or complete cancellation of the license may be applied in democratic countries only for numerous (sys-

15

tematic) brutal violations of laws and only after the application of other, less strict, measures. The discussed legal norm envisages the responsibility for the one-time violation of a vague clause of an obscure law.

Finally, this norm does not blend with the general structure of the Ukrain-ian legislation. The Law of Ukraine «On information» is the basic legal act in the informational sphere. So, this very law should contain the list of informa-tion, the distribution of which is prohibited, and the sanctions should be ap-plied for violating this law.

Besides, the discussed norm states: «The activities of TV and radio or-ganizations may be temporarily cancelled after the court decision in the cases envisaged by laws on election». This provision is absolutely incomprehensi-ble. What is the meaning of the phrase «the activities… may be temporarily cancelled»? It is more or less understandable how the license may be can-celled, but it is difficult to understand what this formula means. One may only guess what the legislators wanted to say. Maybe, it is possible to cancel the work of a TV and radio organization as a subject of entrepreneurial activities. Yet, the Ukrainian laws do not envisage the right of state organs to temporar-ily cancel the activities of juridical persons. Besides, the laws on election con-tain no grounds for canceling the activities of TV and radio organizations.

The newly adopted law also widens the sphere of responsibility of the TV and radio organizations for spreading the information, which is contained in the speeches of the candidates for the elective posts. Earlier these organiza-tions were not responsible for such information, but now this is true only for the directly transmitted features. Yet, if such feature was recorded beforehand, then the organization is responsible for the contents of candidates’ speeches. So, now the TV and radio companies must censor and edit the recorded speeches in order not to violate the election laws. And how the candidate would react, if his appearance would be shortened? Moreover, the equality of the rights will be abused, since a candidate, who appears in direct transmis-sion, will be able to say more than another candidate, whose speech will be re-corded. The possibility will also appear to censor the speeches of opposition candidates.

It is noteworthy that the draft was not assessed negatively by the deputies. On the contrary, the authors of the draft took into account the propositions of MPs Yu. Kliuchkovskiy and M. Tomenko. At that, the changes concerning the temporary cancellation of the licenses were presented by Yu. Kliuchkovskiy, a deputy from the party «Our Ukraine». Unfortunately, the deputies did not cor-rect the obvious drawbacks of the draft, and this will undoubtedly influence the elucidation of elections and referendums by Ukrainian TV and radio com-panies.

It is also interesting that these legal changes do not concern printed mass media, but only electronic ones.

16

Naturally, all these drawbacks may be challenged in court, and we hope that electronic mass media will use this right. Let us wait until the next elec-tion campaign, and then we will observe the tendencies of applying these legal norms.

We also hope that the President will use his veto right and will return this law to the Supreme Rada together with his propositions.

«Prava Ludyny», No.5, May, 2003

17

How to guarantee the independence of the National Councilof Ukraine in charge of TV and radio broadcasting in the new version of the Law of Ukraine «On the National Councilof Ukraine in charge of TV and radio broadcasting»? Taras Shevchenko, a lawyer, an expert in the rights of mass media: One of the basic demands to the organs, which realize the regulation and

licensing in the sphere of TV and radio broadcasting, is to guarantee the inde-pendence of these media. Such demands are contained both in the general rec-ommendations of the Council of Europe and in the concrete documents con-cerning Ukraine. In particular, the experts of the Council of Europe, who ana-lyzed the Ukrainian legislation on mass media, more than once pointed out that the National Council of Ukraine in charge of TV and radio broadcasting (the National Council, in what follows) was extremely politicized and had no real independence.

One of the opportunities to guarantee the independence of the National Council is the creation of preconditions for such independence on the legisla-tive level. The Supreme Rada of Ukraine have already registered the new ver-sion of the Law of Ukraine «On the National Council of Ukraine in charge of TV and radio broadcasting», which is now considered by the Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information. The principles that will be discussed below should be realized in this law.

The provisions on the appointment and dismissal of the members, on the election and authorities of the Head, on the place in the system of the power organs, on the accountability and control are the provisions that can influence the National Council directly or indirectly. Certainly, the most important of these provisions is the procedure of the appointment and dismissal of the members of the National Council. The operating system, according to which a half of the members is appointed personally by the President, and another one – by the Supreme Rada, may not be regarded as correct, since if the Su-preme Rada would appoint at least one person loyal to the President, then the latter would master the majority of votes. In the most of countries the right to appoint the members of such state organs belongs only to the Parliament as a collective organ, and sometimes this right is shared among three organs in or-der to exclude the control by any of them. Fortunately or unfortunately, the procedure of the appointment of the members of the National Council is stipu-lated by the Ukrainian Constitution, so the law may not introduce any funda-mentally new norms. Yet, the procedure of the dismissal of the members of the National Council must be changed cardinally.

If to read attentively item 20 of Article 85 and item 13 of Article 106 of the Constitution of Ukraine, one would notice that these articles, which stipu-late the right of the President and the Supreme Rada to appoint a half of the National Council, say nothing about their right to dismiss the members ap-

18

pointed by them. If to analyze other provisions, which envisage the compe-tences of the Supreme Rada and the President, it becomes clear that these norms were formulated in such manner on purpose, in order to guarantee the independence of the National Council. Most of the provisions describing the staff authorities of the President and the Supreme Rada read that the Supreme Rada have the right «to appoint and dismiss» the state officials (for example, the members of the Council of the National Bank, the General Prosecutor, the members of the Central Voting commission), but the norms concerning the members of the National Council and Constitutional Court envisage only the right to appoint, not to dismiss.

Moreover, the last item of Article 85 reads that the Supreme Rada has other authorities stipulated by the Constitution. This means that if some au-thorities are not envisaged by the Constitution, they may not be introduced on the level of laws. Thus, the law may not envisage the authorities of the Su-preme Rada and President to dismiss the members of the National Coun-cil, since that contradicts the Constitution of Ukraine. Besides, one may draw one more conclusion: the operating law of Ukraine «On the National Council of Ukraine in charge of TV and radio broadcasting» disagrees with the Constitution of Ukraine in the part, which envisages the utter-ance of distrust and dismissal of the members of the National Council. It is necessary to liquidate these disagreements during the preparation of the new law draft.

The impossibility, according to the Constitution, to dismiss the members of the National Council entails the introduction of some additional changes into the laws. In particular, this concerns the accountability of the National Council to the Supreme Rada and President. If the Supreme Rada and Presi-dent have no right to take decisions on the basis of the results of the account-ing, then the serious doubts appear as to the advisability of such accounting. In my opinion, the principle of accountability must be cancelled at all. Thedemand of the law about the preparation and publication of the report by the National Council is normal, but it must not be realized in the form of listening to the report at the Supreme Rada sitting. I believe that the report must be pub-lished and its copies must be passed to the Supreme Rada and President.

From the very moment of the appointment of a member of the National Council there must not be any difference whether the Supreme Rada or Presi-dent appointed this member. The only case, where this difference may be de-fensible, is the procedure of forming the administration of the National Coun-cil, when the Head and the First Deputy may not be appointed by the same or-gan or person.

From the viewpoint of independence, the advisability of the demand to agree the normative acts of the National Council with the profile committee of the Supreme Rada is disputable. This demand is stated in Article 5 of the Law of Ukraine «On TV and radio broadcasting». This article was regulating the

19

activities of the National Council before the adoption of the Constitution and the separate law on the National Council, but it is still valid. I think that two approaches to the legislative activities of the National Council are possible: ei-ther the Supreme Rada distrusts the National Council and reckons that the lat-ter cannot adopt the sublegal acts on its own, and, as a consequence, maxi-mally regulates all relations by legal norms; or the Supreme Rada entrusts some questions to the National Council and does not demand the agreement with the profile committee. The status and legal essence of such agreement is surprising from the viewpoint of the theory of law: the National Council is a structural sub-unit of the Supreme Rada, so its independent legislative authori-ties look rather strange. The question on the registration of the documents in the Ministry of Justice must be solved separately. Since the National Council is not an organ of executive power, but has a special status, then it should be il-logical to demand the registration of its acts.

Is it expedient to use the rotation principle? First of all, it should be noted that frequently the term «rotation» is used incorrectly: it is interpreted as a synonym of the terms «dismissal» or «utterance of distrust». Rotation is a system, when the members of an organ are replaced not simultaneously, but gradually. This system guarantees a certain «hereditivity» of the work of the organ, since new members join to old ones and obtain the necessary experi-ence from them. At that the members of the organ occupy their posts for the entire term. The term may be shorter only in the very first composition, be-cause some of the members must be replaced after a half of the term in order to start the system. The rotation system is imperfectly described in the operat-ing version of the law, and, it seems to me, it was never applied in practice. The members of the National Council were appointed at different time, so the term of their authorities did not finish simultaneously. Thus, the rotation sys-tem functions de facto and must not be additionally stipulated by law.

The grounds for terminating the authorities. The impossibility to dis-miss the members of the National Council by the organs, which appointed them, does not mean their absolute irresponsibility and impunity. The law must define precisely which circumstances must result in the loss of the authorities of a member of the National Council; these circumstances must include, among all, the commitment of a crime. The grounds for the dismissal must be objective, and their application must be described in details. For ex-ample, if a member of the National Council has the right to submit his resigna-tion or to write the appeal about his dismissal, then it should be determined, to whom the application must be handed: either to the Head of the National Council or to the entire composition of the Council. The guarantees of inde-pendence of the judges of the Constitutional Court are stipulated rather well in laws. This experience (of course, within reasonable limits) might be used dur-ing the development of the law on the National Council.

2 0

It should be also advisable to consider the possibility of increasing the term of authorities of the members of the National Council. There are at least two arguments in favor of this idea. Firstly, according to the operating system, the President of Ukraine may appoint the members of the National Council twice during one term of his work, since the term of the authorities of the President is five years, and the term of the members of the National Coun-cil is four years. If the President has the right to appoint a person for the sec-ond time, then this person may be more loyal to him. So, it should be advisable to increase the term of the authorities of the members of the National Council to five years.

Secondly, the system, in the accordance with which a member of the Na-tional Council can be appointed to his post for the second time, also does not promote the independence. For example, judges of the Constitutional Court are appointed to their posts for 9 years and may not be appointed again. If to liquidate the right for the second appointment, then it should be logical to in-crease the term of the authorities. Nine years is a great term, but even the term of five or six years without the right to be appointed for the second time should be also sufficient.

The problem of the authorities of the Head of the National Council is also very important. The National Council is a collective organ, so the au-thorities of the Head must be minimal. The majority of the questions should be solved collectively, and the role of the Head should lie in presiding at sittings, signing documents and external representation. One of the effective methods of diminishing the role of the Head is the decrease of the term of occupying this post to two years without the right to be elected again (at that the person continues to be a member of the National Council until the end of the term).

Of course, I may not affirm that the introduction of the suggested changes will be sufficient for guaranteeing the independence of the members of the Na-tional Council of Ukraine in charge of TV and radio broadcasting. However, I believe that these changes are necessary for the achievement of this aim.

03 June 2003, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Tomenko proposes to interpret some concepts of the law adopted as a result of the hearings on the freedom of speech The Parliamentary Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and in-

formation intends to conduct the joint sitting with the plenum of the Supreme Court of Ukraine for the interpretation of some concepts of the new law adopted as a result of the Parliamentary hearings on the freedom of speech in Ukraine. This information was communicated by Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, at the UNIAN press conference.

21

According to the information of the UNIAN correspondent, M. Tomenko remarked that after the approval of the law «On the introduction of changes to some laws of Ukraine as a result of the parliamentary hearings «Society, mass media, power: freedom of speech and censorship in Ukraine» the judges came across the problem of interpreting the concepts introduced by this law, in par-ticular, «evaluative judgment» and «socially important information». M. To-menko believes that the meaning of these concepts must be defined more pre-cisely. Besides, he does not exclude the possibility that the committee will ini-tiate the introduction of changes to this law with the aim of interpreting these concepts.

The UNIAN reference. On 3 April the Supreme Rada of Ukraine ap-proved the Law «On the introduction of changes to some laws of Ukraine as a result of the parliamentary hearings «Society, mass media, power: freedom of speech and censorship in Ukraine». This law introduced the changes to some legal acts connected with the questions of guaranteeing and unhampered reali-zation of the citizens’ right for the freedom of speech.

According to this law, nobody may be brought to responsibility for ex-pressing the evaluative judgments. The law reads that the evaluative judg-ments (except insult or libel) are the judgments that does not contain factual data, in particular, criticism, evaluation of actions and the statements, which may not be interpreted as ones that contain factual data taking into account the use of special turns of speech, such as hyperboles, allegories or satire. The evaluative judgments must not be refuted, and their authenticity must not be proved.

A person is released from responsibility for divulging the information with the restricted access, if a court would acknowledge that this information is socially important.

9 June 2003, UNIAN, http://www.unian.net/ukr/news/free/ «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

H. Severinsen is not satisfied with the application of the laws directed towards the improvement of the situationwith the Ukrainian mass media The application of the norms of the Constitution of Ukraine and the laws

directed towards the practical improvement of the situation with the Ukrainian mass media is extremely unsatisfactory, stated deputy of the Danish Parlia-ment Hanne Severinsen, a reporter of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Ukraine, in her appeal to the Institute of mass informa-tion and the Forum of journalists «Legal self-protection», which was conducted yesterday in Kyiv.

According to IMI information, H. Severinsen pointed out that «the Gen-eral Prosecutor’s office very rarely investigates the facts of exerting pressure on journalists», and «it seems that it became a rule, when the matter concerns the

22

journalists, who criticize the power, or the mass media, who publish the agitation for some politicians». By the words of H. Severinsen, the illegal inspections are conducted in these mass media: tax, sanitary, fire, etc. Sometimes the mass media are forced to stop their activities or to change the editorial policy as a result of such inspections. «The censorship is prohibited, but the self-censorship continues to exist», stated the PACE reporter and recommended to read the Human Rights Watch report «News: the haggling is possible» devoted to this topic.

H. Severinsen believes that there also exists the problem of the lack of transparency of the legislative system. «Why you are afraid of various checks? An innocent person must not be afraid of anything. Yet, the Ukrainian journal-ists are afraid, because the legislative system is non-transparent», she re-marked.

H. Severinsen pointed out that the Supreme Rada improved the level of realizing the obligations, which were taken by Ukraine when joining the Council of Europe. Yet, there are still many things that must be done, and the special attention must be paid to the development and application of the laws by the power organs.

H. Severinsen is sure that the discussion around «temniks», which is last-ing during the last half a year, evidences the deterioration of the situation, but, at the same time, this discussion is a positive feature showing that the journal-ists begin to comprehend the situation.

Hanne Severinsen wished good luck to the new professional union of journalists. «I hope that the journalists of Ukraine are aware of their responsi-bility in the consolidation of democracy. They represent the fourth power, so they play an important role in the development of the freedom and democracy in the country. Ukraine needs a great number of brave journalists, who will be able to describe objectively the coming Presidential election», she said.

The PACE reporter reminded that the Council of Europe will discuss the situation in Ukraine at its September session, in particular, «the problem of media environment».

H. Severinsen expressed the hope that the discussion would result in the continuation of the monitoring and they would «be able to scrutinize the peri-ods before, during and after the election».

11 June 2003, UNIAN, http://www.unian.net «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Open appeal to the President of Ukraine in the connection with the new law on the introduction of changes into the laws con-cerning the protection of state secrets Igor Lubchenko, the head of the National Union of journalists of Ukraine,

Nikolay Tomenko, the head of the Parliamentary committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, Natalya Ligachova (site «Telekritika), Alek-

23

sandr Paliy (secretariat of the Public council in charge of the freedom of speech and information) and Valeriy Ivanov (Academy of the Ukrainian press) turned to President Leonid Kuchma with the open appeal.

The appeal reads that the new law on the introduction of changes into the normative acts concerning the protection of state secrets introduces the term «confidential information owned by the state». The right for information is re-duced to the right to obtain, use, spread and store the information «with the open access». According to the law, the USS gets a number of additional au-thorities in the sphere of the ODA. Authors of the appeal state that the provi-sions of the mentioned law contradict to the norms of the Ukrainian Constitu-tion and international legal standards in the sphere of guaranteeing the free-dom of speech and the open access to information.

«Thus, the interpretation of the right for the freedom of speech contained in the considered version of the law, which has been adopted by the Parlia-ment, significantly diminishes the amount of the constitutional rights and free-doms of citizens, which is inadmissible», reads the appeal. In the accordance with the Law of Ukraine «On information», in some peculiar cases the infor-mation with the restricted access may be made public, the appealers remind. In their opinion, the abolition of this decision «will not promote the stable devel-opment of democracy in Ukraine». It is also declared that the state may not own all confidential information, but only the information, which is related to state secrets. The state may possess the confidential information owned by other persons. The regime of using such information is «strictly defined by op-erating laws».

The law also envisages the administrative responsibility for violating the order of registration, storage and use of the documents containing «confiden-tial information owned by the state». Every citizen can be a subject of this of-fence. At the same time, only that person is brought to responsibility, which had the access to the information or possessed the state secret because of his/her professional activities.

However, the USS head Vladimir Radchenko advises to journalists to be careful when using any information.

(«Segodnia», No. 157, 17 July 2003) (See also – «Ukraina moloda», No. 128, 18 July 2003)

Ukrainian agency of author’s rights plans to get 502 thousand UAH from TV companies The function of the Ukrainian agency of author’s and adjacent rights

(UAAAR) consists in the pre-trial and court consideration of the cases con-nected with the payment of author's emoluments. The agency works in all oblasts of Ukraine, in Kyiv and the Crimean republic.

2 4

During 2001 the juridical department of the UAAAR took part in the con-sideration of 42 cases on collecting the author's emoluments from users; more than 300 thousand hryvnas were collected.

In 2002 the juridical department considered 78 cases on the total sum of 1.4 millions hryvnas. All in all, in 2002 the department worked with 78 claims against theaters, circuses, philharmonics, TV and radio companies connected with the non-payment of royalties to authors for public performance of their compositions or the use of the compositions without the agreements with au-thors. There were 6 cases concerning the invalid state registration.

On the basis of the Law of Ukraine «On author’s and adjacent rights» and the instructions of the State department of intellectual property, the UAAAR conducts the monitoring of TV and radio space concerning the observance of author’s and adjacent rights by the users of the objects of these rights. Accord-ing to the results of the monitoring, a number of the violations of author’s rights were disclosed. 12 claims against TV channels were compiled on the to-tal sum of 502 thousand hryvnas.

The UAAAR presented 11 claims on the sum of 113.7 thousand UAH (among them 4 suits on 80.8 thousand UAH) after the complaints of the au-thors, who had turned to the agency.

The total amount of the claims and suits in 2001-2002 was 2.2 million hryvnas. 500 thousand hryvnas were collected, these money were transferred to the UAAAR accounts and paid to the authors.

State department of intellectual property 28 July 2003, Institute of mass information, www.imi.org

The problem of liquidation of state mass media The complete liquidation of state mass media in Ukraine can result only

in the destruction of informational systems and informational sovereignty of Ukraine, believes Ivan Chizh, the head of the State committee on TV and radio broadcasting. In his speech delivered at the sitting of a «round table» in Khmelnitskiy, he pointed out that the proportion of state mass media in the in-formational space of Ukraine was insignificant, so it was inexpedient to change their form of property.

Now only 3% of electronic mass media and 3% of central newspapers are owned by the state, said Ivan Chizh. Therefore, in his opinion, there is no need to attack and destroy the small informational islets owned by the state and regional communities.

Ivan Chizh, the head of the State committee on TV and radio broadcast-ing of Ukraine:

– Today it is very simple to destroy a district or town newspaper. Yet, it is much more difficult, and sometimes even impossible, to restore the local in-

25

formational flow. So, it is necessary to strengthen the support of the editions by their founders, contacts between newspapers and readers, thus upholding the editions. The newspapers must be interesting, dynamic, reflecting the real problems.

(«Telekritika», 6 August 2003)

26

The open letter by Igor Lubchenko, the head of the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine, to the members of the Union, all workers of mass media, to everybody concerned about the freedom of speech Respected colleagues, all admirers of printed and outspoken word! This summer we have observed the open confrontation of some state of-

ficials and the President of Ukraine. The head of the state twice, in June 2000 and March 2002, promised (at his meetings with journalists of regional mass media) to endorse the idea of liquidating the state mass media. He said that separate editions should not be financed from state budget.

In spite of that, the administration of the State committee of TV and radio broadcasting, under the aegis of public organizations headed by the officials from this structure (what a nonsense – a state official and, at the same time, the presi-dent of a public organization!), organizes round tables in the regions, the partici-pants of which protest against the idea of liquidating the state mass media and ap-prove the corresponding appeals to the Supreme Rada.

The organizers of these round tables resort to the banal demagogy, persuad-ing their auditory that, allegedly, the press is not owned by the state already. Ac-cording to their words, only 3% of printed mass media exist now, which were founded by the power structures.

This proportion was calculated by the officials of the State committee on the basis of the number of the editions, which had been registered since 1994 – about 17 thousand. And the real situation is the following: this summer the subscription was carried out for 2528 all-Ukrainian and 1938 local newspa-pers and magazines. Let us ignore the light reading and specialized editions (for gardeners, housewives, fishers, hunters, etc.). Then we will see that the number of socially-political editions (and the state and communal mass media are just such) is much less. So, this proportion is much more then the above-mentioned 3%. Yet, who needs this arithmetic? Maybe the officials of the State committee of TV and radio broadcasting seriously believe that the editions, which were founded not by the state, work against Ukraine? If such facts exist, and the officials observe these facts indifferently without turning to court with the demand to close the mass media, then these officials are committing crime and may not occupy their posts.

However, there are no such facts! Both Lviv newspaper «Vysoky zamok» and Donetsk newspaper «Donbas», as well as the all-Ukrainian newspapers «Den», «Dzerkalo tyzhnia», «Kievskie vedomosti», «Komunist», «Molod Ukrainy», «Narodna spravedlivist», «Silski visti», «Tovarishch», «Ukraina moloda», «Fakty i kommentarii» and hundreds of other editions create the polyphonic informational space of the state, help to build the democratic state after the European standards.

27

The main reason of the categorical statement of Mr. Chizh is not the anxiety about the future of mass media, but the wish to control the state and communal mass media, to dictate them the topics of their publications. When, in 2002, Leonid Kuchma introduced I. Chizh to the members of the collegium and the then State committee of informational policy, Mr. Chizh assured that he, being a representative of the opposition, would do his best for the development of the freedom of speech in Ukrainian mass media. Now «oppositionist» Chizh fights for the subjection of journalists to the power. God save us from such opposition!

The State committee of TV and radio broadcasting never tried to protect journalists from the pressure exerted by authorities, to stop the process of exclud-ing the journalistic collectives from the ranks of founders of newspapers and of firing the editors opposed to local authorities, to guarantee the fulfillment of the agreements completed between the co-founders.

It is impossible to finance the state mass media now, when the state owes to its citizens many billions hryvnas of salaries and pensions. The state must face the truth and help the collectives of these editions to earn money for themselves. Otherwise, the collectives of the liquidated mass media will lose their work and will be thrown into the street.

There exist no state or communal mass media in democratic countries. Moreover, they also do not exist already in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Georgia.

The liquidation of mass media, founded, completely or partly, by power structures, is extremely urgent now. By the way, that is one of the demands of the Council of Europe for the integration of Ukraine to the European community.

The Ukrainian association of the publishers of periodicals handed to the Parliamentary committee the draft of the Law of Ukraine on the liquida-tion of state printed mass media. This draft was developed with the assistance of foreign investors. The main essence of the draft is that the power structures should leave the composition of the co-founders of mass media, and the property of edito-rial boards should be sold by auction (the editorial collectives have the right to purchase this property for 50% of its price).

The National union of journalists cannot agree with this principle. In our opinion, the buildings of the editorial boards and their printing shops were built for the money earned by the newspapers, which had been founded by trade un-ions, party, komsomol and other Soviet organs. So, we are sure: before the liqui-dation of state mass media, this property must be handed over to the collectives of the editions. And the editorial boards of the mass media, which were created by the organs of representative or executive power after the declaration of independ-ence of Ukraine and occupy the buildings built not at the expense of the editorial boards, must have the right to purchase the buildings in the accordance with Arti-

28

cle 11 of the Law of Ukraine «On state support of mass media and social protec-tion of journalists».

The editorial boards also must have the right to purchase other property of the editions (computers, copying equipment, transport, paper, furniture, etc.) at the depreciated cost with installments for 10 and more years. Now this property is re-garded as communal. The tax administration should release the mass media from taxes for 1 year (2 years, according to some propositions) after the change of the form of property. I know many journalists of state and communal mass media, who are afraid that they would lose the right for the pensions, which are paid to state workers, after their editions would stop to be state-owned. The Union reck-ons that all journalists working in TV and radio organizations and periodicals founded by citizens’ unions, state research organizations, educational establish-ments and communication enterprises should be equated with state workers in the sphere of pensions.

So, we stated the main principles of the draft of the Law of Ukraine «On the liquidation of state and communal mass media and establishment of the form of property needed for the work of the organizations, which deal with mass informa-tion» prepared by the NUJU.

The first version of the draft was sent to the oblast organizations of the NUJU. We generalized their propositions and developed the new version of the draft, which was sent to the group of editors of communal mass media. We plan to discuss this problem at the plenum of the NUJU board with the participation of lo-cal journalists. We endorse the development of the documents concerning this complicated question. Yet, we protest against the haste and forcing the journalist collectives into the «radiant future».

In our opinion, the law on the liquidation of state mass media should be ap-proved during this year and come into force since 1 January 2005. This process must not be single-stage, and it should be begun from those collectives, who want that today. The mechanism of the future actions can be improved on their exam-ple.

Every journalistic collective, either communal or not, knows that this is not a simple problem. The problem must be discussed by the society seriously and with-out hurry. Unfortunately, the State committee of TV and radio broadcasting did not react to the both law drafts presented by our Union. The committee also ignored my proposition to conduct, in the first half of October, the joint sitting of the NUJU board and the collegium of the State committee with the participation of top state officials, representatives of ministries, agencies and editorial collectives.

So, I ask President Leonid Kuchma: – to declare one time more his approval of the process of democratization,

liquidation of state mass media and the development of the freedom of speech in our country;

– to demand from the administration of the State committee on TV and radio broadcasting to give the concrete explanations about what they have done and what they are going to do for the development of the freedom of

29

speech in the sphere of mass media, creation of proper legal and material con-ditions for their activities, protection of mass media and journalists from ad-ministrative and court persecution;

– to order the Ministry of Justice to check whether the work of the officials from the State committee of TV and radio broadcasting in public organizations agree with the Ukrainian laws and statutes of these organizations;

– to raise the question about the conception of liquidation of state mass media at the sitting of the Council in charge of informational politics;

– to charge Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Supreme Rada committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, the NUJU, other parlia-mentary committees, collectives of mass media and lawyers with the develop-ment of the draft of the basic program of preparing the editions for the change of the form of property, to discuss this draft in journalists’ organizations.

Now the problem looks as following: either the Ukrainian journalism will, at last, blend with the context of world journalism, or it will transform into the toady of the power. So, journalists and society must make their choice.

(«The Poltava oblast media club», No. 43, 21 August 2003)

Introduction of changes to the legislation on information – «the territory of truth» Evhen Zakharov, a co-chairman of the Kharkov group for human rights

protection: «If the introduction of changes to the legislation on information would

have some real consequences, then it would result in the improvement of court practices. This will give journalists the opportunity to become more liberal in the assessments of the activities of political figures. However, now judges can-not interpret the considered norms properly, since these norms are new for them. It is doubtful that the judges will ground their decisions concerning the conflicts with mass media on new law provisions. Advocates should exert many efforts for persuading the judges to act in the correspondence with new legal realities. Mykola Tomenko, the mouthpiece of these changes, stated that the adopted documents would not have the great effect. So, I believe that these amendments will not influence the situation with the freedom of speech very much. Nevertheless, advocates will have the opportunity to use these norms as arguments for the protection of mass media workers. Thus, we have now the «deferred-action weapon», which will go off earlier or later, but not in the cur-rent political season. I do not think that the newly adopted laws will spur jour-nalists to the freer elucidation and discussion of the political life in the country. The mass media need some other additional stimuli. Will the renewed legisla-tive base influence the interrelations between the political forces? The «bat-tles» between these forces are rather chaotic, and I believe that the situation will remain the same: both during the preparation to the election and the ap-proval in the Parliament of the law on the constitutional reform, which, in the nearest future, is going to be the main reason of the confrontation between the

30

parliamentary majority and the opposition. The role of the press also would not change, if no cataclysms would happen. Let us hope that they will not happen.

(«2000» – «Svoboda slova», No. 37, 12-18 September 2003)

31

* * * Our legislators widened «the territory of truth» by the adoption of a num-

ber of laws on mass media, reckons Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Parlia-mentary committee in charge of the freedom of speech.

M. Tomenko told to a correspondent of «UM» about the work of MPs at the last session and about their «creative plans»:

«I reckon that we fulfilled the minimal program: prevented a great part of claims against mass media, widened the so-called «territory of truth»… The law on the struggle with censorship came into force. By now we have more than ten court resolutions grounded on this law. They concern the cases, where the claims were rejected at all, since these claims were handed by the organs of state power or local self-rule, and the cases, where the consideration was ceased because the affair concerned the evaluative judgments, for which journalists had the right».

We plan to consider the drafts of two laws at the coming session: the law on TV broadcasting (it was adopted in the first reading) and the law on TV and radio broadcasting, which was supported by the committee, but has not been adopted in the first reading yet. The first law describes in details the pro-cedure of giving licenses, which will liquidate many conflicts. The law envis-ages the precise mechanism of the adoption of decisions and turns the National Council to the collegiate organ. The law on TV and radio broadcasting stipu-lates the regulation of the relations between national TV companies, regional TV companies and the operators of cable TV. Today the discussion is con-ducted about the social (narrow) and commercial packages for the operators of cable TV. Our position is the following: the law should envisage everything concerning the narrow package. This package must obligatory include all na-tional and regional TV channels. If some free space remains, then the opera-tors have the right to add other channels: Russian, German or whatever they like. The commercial package may contain any TV channels, but the operators must pay for this…

The law on censorship gives journalists more freedom in the political context, and the law on advertising widens their economic potential. For a long time we debated on the question how to extend the economic potential of printed mass media. We believe that after the adoption of this law the financial injections to printed mass media and the support of Ukrainian TV and radio companies will become more active, and the attempts will be made to organize the retransmission of the foreign radio companies with their (paid!) advertis-ing. This law will become a powerful incentive for the economic independence of mass media».

At the same time, points out Mykola Tomenko, the norms are multiplying in the sphere of legislative novelty, which norms may in no way be regarded as progressive and democratic ones. For example, one of the articles of the

32

newly adopted Civil Code reads that «any negative information spread about a person is regarded as inauthentic», whereas the information «presented by a state official in the framework of his service duties… is regarded as authen-tic». The quoted article is a real «gold-mine» for any unscrupulous official, since from now any nonsense, even an obvious lie, generated «in the frame-work of service duties» would be regarded as an absolute truth, which is be-yond any doubt and may not be criticized. So, it turns out that the officials are always true, and common citizens must listen to them, trust them and even like them, because any «negative information» will transform the author of this in-formation into a liar and slanderer.

«We proposed to introduce some changes to the Civil Code, since it has not come into force yet (this will happen only on 1 January 2004). In particu-lar, we proposed to change this absurd Article 277 (about the negative infor-mation) and similar passages. I hope that the proper committee will consider our propositions before 1 January 2004. Unfortunately, we had not enough votes to prevent the adoption of another harmful law: on state secrets. Accord-ing to this law, a USS officer has the right to come to a journalist without any warrant and to question him about the sources of information».

Naturally, the Law «On introduction of changes into some legal acts of Ukraine», which was adopted by the Supreme Rada on 9 July 2003, essentially extends the authorities of the Security Service and, correspondingly, narrows the right of citizens for the freedom of expression. Now the right of printed mass media to collect, store and spread information concerns only the «infor-mation with open access». By the way, according to M. Tomenko’s words, «MPs plan to conduct the Day of government, on which the government will inform us about the use of the classifications restricting the access to informa-tion. Now three types of classifications are applied: «for service use only», «not for publishing» and «secretly». It appeared that the last category includes, for instance, the staff lists of President’s Administration, tax administration and cus-toms service, that is the items, which, according to the operating laws, must be open».

The above-mentioned law also gives the right to the USS to detain jour-nalists for compiling the protocols in the case of violation by the mass media workers of the laws on state secrets, to conduct personal search of the detained and search of their private things. Besides, the legislators propose to fine citi-zens for storage, purchase and use of technical means for collecting the infor-mation. Such fine equals to 50-100 untaxed minimal wages for common citi-zens and 200-500 untaxed wages for state officials. So, soon an owner of a dictaphone should have to obtain a permit, as if he owned a gun or something like that. We are curious, should we interpret the creation of this law draft as too literal understanding of the metaphor «a word is a weapon» or our legisla-tors are afraid of the followers of major Melnichenko?

33

«However, it is not the last surprise from the legislators and not the last mentioning of the security service in the Ukrainian laws. One more law has appeared: on the monitoring of telecommunications», tells M. Tomenko. «It is not less dangerous, and our committee rejected it. This law, in fact, legalizes the right of the USS to wiretap anybody. I have the suspicion that they wiretap anybody even now, although, according to the operating laws, they may do that only after a court decision. If this law would be adopted, our security ser-vice would not need any court decisions. The committee unanimously rejected the presented version of the law on the monitoring of telecommunications».

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 171, 18 September 2003)

* * * Andriy Shkil, an MP: Unfortunately, one may not speak about any widening of «the territory of

truth», even if the Supreme Rada would adopt the maximal possible number of the laws concerning mass media, because the Supreme Rada has no authorities to control the fulfillment of these laws, especially if this fulfillment is shared between other branches of power. None of the laws can stop the murders of journalists, and none of the laws can stop the application of censorship. Cer-tainly, the laws of direct action connected with the problems of the press are necessary, since they regulate the activities of mass media in the democratic state. Yet, to make these laws function effectively, such state must be created. The state, where the journalists will really be the fourth power. And there is no other way.

Much work must be done for the achievement of this goal. The legislators must elaborate the law on political advertising; this term, as well as all kinds of the concealed political advertising, must be defined distinctly. This will, un-doubtedly, weaken the pressure on journalists, since there are two different things: the political advertising and forcing journalists to serve somebody’s in-terests against their will.

A great number of very important laws are still not adopted. At the same time, such drafts as the new Criminal-Procedural Code appear instead of the high-quality product. By the way, one of the tasks of this code is to control the actions of those people, who struggle against the arbitrariness of state authori-ties in Ukraine and must be protected with efficient laws. For example, jour-nalists, who fulfill their work religiously, should be sure that their rights would be protected at any time and in any situation.

The problem is that there is no respect in our country either for journalists or for the laws regulating their activities. After all, the respect or disrespect for some people is a personal affair of an individual. Yet, respect for the laws may not called in question under any circumstances. And the law on struggle with censorship would not liquidate this phenomenon (it will continue to exist in the concealed forms) until the society would not free itself from the yoke of

34

the totalitarian system. Only free society, where journalism occupies the due place, is able to liquidate censorship.

Besides, the laws are not developed yet, which regulate other questions: in particular, the personal protection of journalists and the protection of infor-mational sphere.

(Ukraina moloda», No. 171, 18 September 2003)

The problem of liquidation of state mass media The greater part of the «serf» editions (recently the journalist call so the

communal and state mass media) categorically protest against the privatiza-tion: they want to continue to have the budget subsidies and the privileges concerning the subscription. Frequently such editions do not care about the readers’ demands: they mostly attend to the publication of reports or obscure references passed to them from higher instances. The «administrative resource» (that is some coersive measures) is often used to make people to subscribe to these editions. It is obvious that the civilized competition cannot exist under such condi-tions. Suffice it to say that private mass media pay taxes to the budget, from which their competitors are financed.

At the same time, the collectives of many great newspapers, which are pa-tronized by the power structures, want to get free of this «care» and to work inde-pendently. If the competent state newspapers would obtain the independence and the freedom of speech, some of them would be able to become serious competi-tors for many private editions.

(«Delovaya Odessa», No. 19, 12 September 2003)

The squad of «informational killers» Andrey Karafka: The squad of «informational killers» was created with the support of

President Kuchma. This information was given by MP Mykola Tomenko, the head of the parliamentary committee in charge of the freedom of speech and in-formation.

M. Tomenko paid attention to the Internet-edition «Tyzhden». The MP states that the edition publishes the ordered materials exceeding the limits of journalist ethics, which materials flay not only the opposition, but also pro-President politicians, who conflict with the SDPU (u).

Tomenko reckons that one may ignore this «trash dump» (the number of visitors of the site is very little), but it is indicated on the site that it was de-signed and developed by the structure «YPA Internet». The matter is, To-menko points out, that the official web site of the President of Ukraine was created by the same structure.

Besides, the head of the committee mentions the telecast of the First Na-tional channel, which is devoted to press roundup. «The peculiar feature of

35

this telecast is that almost a half of messages refer not to, for instance, informational agency «Ukrinform» or some competent editions, but to the site «Tyzhden», remarks M. Tomenko. According to his words, the analysis of the style of the materials published on the site «Tyzhden» allows to claim that the false letters of Viktor Yushchenko were also compiled by the «writers» of this site.

«This absolutely marginal site developed by the structure, which also made the official site of the President, becomes an official informational agency of the power», summed up the MP.

(www.vv.com.ua, 25 September 2003)

Round table «Corruption in mass media» (Odessa) According to the data of the State statistical committee, the number of

magazines and other periodicals in Ukraine has increased more than nine times since 1990, and the number of newspapers increased twice. Some of them are profitable, and others are used as the political arenas by their owners. Today the corruption contaminated almost all branches of economics. In this connec-tion the Odessa national juridical academy and the Odessa informational cen-ter in charge of the problems of fighting the organized crime conducted, last week, the round table «Corruption in mass media». The participants of the round table, journalists and specialists from the academy, debated on the situa-tion on the mass media market. They also discussed the problem whether it was possible to find some compromise in the framework of the legal sphere. The following questions were discussed at the round table: mass media as a kind of business; shadow economy and money-laundering; financing of mass media and the problem of independent press; political PR and new technolo-gies in mass media. All these topics were very interesting for both journalists and lawyers. That is quite comprehensive, since until now the phrase «cor-rupted journalist» has aroused either the bewilderment or distrust. Today, when the space in newspapers and time in TV air are sold to anybody, who can pay for it, nobody is surprised by the situation when a journalist deals with «black PR» or ordered articles, and this is not considered as corruption from the viewpoint of the legality of such activities. Some lawyers have the opposite opinion, so the round table had the aim to clarify the function of mass media, to determine the degree of influence of the «fourth power» on the society and the possibility to affect the corruption through mass media.

Viktor Driomin, the head of the department of criminology of the Odessa national juridical academy, pointed out in his opening speech that mass media were, in a certain sense, an element of the globalization of criminality, because «they inform the population about the acts of violence in the country, in par-ticular: terrorism, murders, robberies, etc., thus forming the idea about the criminal situation, which not always coincides with real one». The facts were adduced, when some Russian MPs were financially by criminal organizations.

36

The situation in our country is similar. Viktor Driomin is sure that the connec-tion of mass media with certain «clans» and groups is an element of corruption relations, and the legislative regulation of this problem is needed. On the one hand, the Ukrainian legislation provides many opportunities for the creative work of a journalist, guarantees his rights for the freedom of speech and crea-tive activities (the Laws of Ukraine «On censorship», «On information», «On author’s right», etc.). These normative acts were acknowledged by interna-tional organizations and confirmed by international legal documents. On the other side, it is very difficult today to put these rights into practice. Editors of newspapers and journalists complain that the interference of the power or-gans, officials and people’s deputies of different levels into the creative process becomes more and more noticeable, which, in their opinion, con-tradicts to the very concept of the freedom of the press. So, the modern jour-nalism managed to get rid of the political bondage of the Soviet times. Yet, in-stead, the journalists got to the grip of economic crisis, and this financial pressure has become even stronger that the political one. Some journalists, who took part in the round table, recollected with regret about the «old good times», when the edi-torial boards had to worry neither about paper, nor about the polygraphic base, nor about salaries, but obtained all this as a remuneration for their service to the com-munist power. At the same time, one must understand the difference between the totalitarian and the social-responsible models of journalism. Totalitarianism in-cludes repressions and physical destruction of talented people disloyal to the state. Everybody knows about the scale and consequences of such repressions in the Soviet Union. On the background of these historical events the economic depend-ence of the press on their owners seems to be a problem of quite different level. The social-responsible journalism has begun to develop in Ukraine only recently, and it is senseless to revert to the authoritarian practices. The recession of the eco-nomic crisis stimulates the gradual appearance of solvent buyers, so increasing the number of newspapers and magazines. This will give the chance to mass media to reach the level of freedom that exists in the civilized countries. This opinion was expressed by Valeriy Ivanov, a doctor of philology and the manager of the Academy of the Ukrainian press. The majority of journalists present at the round table agreed with him. Almost all participants supported the idea that the wording «corruption among journalists» was extremely incorrect. The greatest part of the budget of mass media consists of the income from advertising. Yet, the Ukrainian advertising market is rather small: in 2002, for example, its volume was equal to 260 million USD. According to the assessment of experts, the lion’s share, about 100 million USD, is spent for TV advertising. The low profitableness of Ukrain-ian mass media resulted in their purchase by entrepreneurs, who made a profit in other spheres of business, first of all in the sphere of the export of oil and gas. Yet, the new owners did not consider the mass media as a source of profit. The Ukrain-ian mass media turned into the political projects, the tools for exerting pressure on public opinion. In that way mass media assisted the owners in their basic business.

37

Some owners began, in order to increase their influence, to create the media groups, the so-called holdings. So, a common journalist, who works for the em-ployer, cannot be a called «a corrupted journalist», since he is forced to obey the orders of his boss. Such journalist receives his emolument for the work in a con-crete media.

After the heated arguments and discussions the participants of the «round table», both lawyers and journalists, agreed that «corruption in mass media» is a very relative concept, and that the media-market must develop on the basis of the following principles: transparency of work and the profitability at the expense of consumers, but not of sponsors. Besides, the public audit and the protection of the rights of hired workers must be practiced. These measures, jointly with the legislative regulation, would prevent the use of media in the interests of criminal and political structures, would stimulate the competition and turn the Ukrainian mass media into a transparent kind of business.

(«Delovaya Odessa», No. 21, 26 September 2003)

Competition for the vacancy of ombudsperson’s representative in charge of the freedom of speech is going on Ombudsperson Nina Karpacheva communicated in the interview to the

«Ukrainska pravda» that 10 applications for the post of ombudsperson’s repre-sentative in charge of the freedom of speech had been handed. At the same time, «UP» writes, Karpacheva refused to comment the information that Maria Sambur, a former lawyer of the Institute of mass information, had been provi-sionally appointed to this post. In summer 2003 Maria Sambur published, on the site of the IMI, the letters of Igor Goncharov, leaving out, by the informa-tion of «UP», the fragment, where Goncharov accused President Kuchma of the connection with the murder of G. Gongadze. M. Sambur stated in her in-terviews that that the letters of the late «turnskin» contained no information about this. Finally, the lie was revealed, and Ms. Sambur had to leave the IMI. It is rumored that the appointment of Maria Sambur to the post of ombudsper-son’s representative in charge of the freedom of speech is promoted by Presi-dent’s Administration.

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 213, 15 November 2003)

38

OPINIONS

A conclusion of Human Rights Watch: directives of President’s Administration is a concealed formof censorship On the eve of the annual (2003) sitting of the Council of the Cooperation

of the European Union and Ukraine the organization «Human Rights Watch» prepared the Report «Struggle around news: The unofficial state censorship at the Ukrainian TV». In this report the influence of the secret instructive memo-randums upon the mass media activities in Ukraine is confirmed. The sitting in Brussels is one of the most important annual meetings between Ukraine and Europe, and the fact that Human Rights Watch timed its 48th investigation of the political censorship in Ukraine to this event evidences that the world com-munity regards censorship to be extremely dangerous for the Ukrainian de-mocracy.

Elisabeth Andersen, the executive manager of the European and Central Asian department of Human Rights Watch, basing on the analysis conducted by this organization, draws the conclusion that millions of TV watchers in Ukraine have no opportunity to obtain the important information on the politi-cal, economic and social events. «Directives of President’s Administration is a concealed form of censorship», stated Ms. Andersen, «The Administration of the Ukrainian President openly violates the freedom of speech by issuing the detailed instructions how the TV channels must elucidate the events».

In what follows we present an excerpt from the Report. The full text of the Report can be found on the site http://docs.hrw.org/embargo/ukraine0303/; user’s name: «hrwreports», access code: «pub2k2».

UKRAINE: UNOFFICIAL POLITICAL CENSORSHIP The Administration of the Ukrainian President openly violates the freedom

of speech issuing the instructions stipulating which TV channels may elucidate news, stated the Human Rights Watch. The examples of such directives are given in the report. The 48-pages Report «Struggle around news: The unofficial state censorship at the Ukrainian TV» confirms the influence of the secret instruc-tive memorandums upon the mass media activities in Ukraine. The memoran-dums compiled by President’s Administration are distributed among the man-agers and editors of national TV companies and contain the recommendations

39

which topics must be elucidated and in which form. The disobedience results in a wide spectrum of unofficial sanctions, including tax inspections, abolition of licenses, libel claims, dismissals, demotions and decrease of salaries.

The coercive influence of the memorandums on the presentation of news in Ukraine is extremely powerful. The pro-president moods are prevalent in the TV-news features, which are the most popular information source in Ukraine. The activities and opinions of other political figures are distorted or merely ignored. This situation was pronouncedly illustrated with the messages on the opposition demonstrations on 16 September 2002, when the TV channels transmitted absolutely similar video records and comments, from which it was very difficult to understand who were the organizers of the dem-onstrations and what were their demands.

The threat of the juridical and administrative consequences of the disobe-dience forces the editors and journalists to fulfill the orders of President’s Ad-ministration. Even before the appearance of the memorandums, the mass me-dia that supported the opposition parties of did not obey the official demands, underwent the summons to courts, administrative checks and abolition of li-censes. The journalists were dismissed or demoted, their salaries were de-creased and so on. Some journalists left their jobs as a protest against the grow-ing censorship, and many others continue to work under the unbearable condi-tions, practicing self-censorship or presenting the unbiased information on their own risk.

«After the Soviet censorship stopped to exist, a certain level of pluralism in mass media has appeared», Ms. Andersen said, «Yet, the really independent mass media are very rare».

The economic instability made the majority of mass media to accept the financial aid and patronage of the influential industrial circles, which formed various political parties and purchased radio and TV companies. Media mag-nates frequently use their informational property as a mouthpiece of personal or group interests and opinions. Financial and political groups closely con-nected with President Kuchma control now six all-Ukrainian TV channels. This fact, together with the appearance of the memorandums, is undermining the mass media pluralism more and more.

The unofficial censorship and economic dependence are not the only threats to the independence of mass media in Ukraine. The «disappearance» and murder of opposition journalist Georgiy Gongadze in September 2002 ex-cited the wave of protests both inside the country and abroad. The case of Gongadze and other similar cases are still not closed. Kuchma and other top authorities are suspected of the participation in the murder of Gongadze. This suspicion is based on the audio record of the talk, in which the President alleg-edly ordered the security service officers to «solve the problem with Gon-gadze». Taking into account the dangerous situation with Ukrainian mass me-

4 0

dia, Human Rights Watch appealed to the Ukrainian authorities with the propositions:

– to stop immediately the distribution of the memorandums or other forms of coercive written or oral instructions given by President’s administration to mass media;

– to guarantee that the censorship in any form on the side of state power or private persons will be liquidated by means of operating laws and obliga-tions that forbid the censorship;

– to conduct the immediate and thorough investigation of the activities of state officials and other persons involved in the censorship or other misuses against the representatives of mass media, and to bring the guilty to the re-sponsibility;

– to consider the opportunity of adopting the laws, which would guarantee the realistic minimal salary for journalists, to introduce the regulating structure for guaranteeing the juridical protection of journalists, who underwent the punish-ments such as decrease of salaries, demotions or dismissals.

The organization Human Rights Watch appealed to the European Union to give the top priority to the freedom of the press in the relations with Ukraine and to demand to provide the proofs of the improvements in the sphere of hu-man rights in Ukraine as a part of her international obligations. Human Rights Watch also turned to the international community with the request to support the freedom of the press in Ukraine, recommending to such international organi-zation as the Council of Europe and the OSCE to continue to render their aid to the Ukrainian government and their control over the freedom of speech in Ukraine.

18 March 2003 «Prava Ludyny», No. 3, March, 2003

«The Troubled Media Environment in Ukraine» Statement of US Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell April 29, 2003

Mr. President, later this week individuals around the world will mark World Press Freedom Day. The functioning of free and independent media is tied closely to the exercise of many other fundamental freedoms as well as to the future of any democratic society. The Commission on Security and Coop-eration in Europe, which I co-chair, is responsible for monitoring press free-dom in the 55 participating States of the Organization for Security and Coop-eration in Europe (OSCE). Recently, I reported to the Senate on the deplorable conditions for independent media in the Republic of Belarus. Today, I will ad-dress the situation of journalists and media outlets in Ukraine.

Several discouraging reports have come out recently concerning the me-dia environment in Ukraine. These reports merit attention, especially within

4 1

the context of critical presidential elections scheduled to take place in Ukraine next year. The State Department's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices in Ukraine for 2002 summarizes media freedoms as follows: «Authorities in-terfered with the news media by intimidating journalists, issuing written and oral instructions about events to cover and not to cover, and pressuring them into applying self-censorship. Nevertheless a wide range of opinion was avail-able in newspapers, periodicals, and Internet news sources.»

Current negative trends and restrictive practices with respect to media freedom in Ukraine are a source of concern, especially given that country's leadership claims concerning integration into the Euro-Atlantic community. Lack of compliance with international human rights standards, including OSCE commitments, on freedom of expression undermines that process. Moreover, an independent media free from governmental pressure is an essen-tial factor in ensuring a level playing field in the upcoming 2004 presidential elections in Ukraine.

In her April 18, 2003 annual report to the Ukrainian parliament, Om-budsman Nina Karpachova asserted that journalism remains among the most dangerous professions in Ukraine, with 36 media employees having been killed over the past ten years, while beatings, intimidation of media employ-ees, freezing of bank accounts of media outlets, and confiscation of entire print runs of newspapers and other publications have become commonplace in Ukraine.

The murder of prominent journalist Heorhiy Gongadze – who disap-peared in September 2000 – remains unsolved. Ukrainian President Kuchma and a number of high-ranking officials have been implicated in his disappear-ance and the circumstances leading to his murder. The Ukrainian authorities' handling, or more accurately mishandling of this case, has been characterized by obfuscation and stonewalling. Not surprisingly, lack of transparency illus-trated by the Gongadze case has fueled the debilitating problem of widespread corruption reaching the highest levels of the Government of Ukraine.

Audio recordings exist that contain conversations between Kuchma and other senior government officials discussing the desirability of Gongadze's elimination. Some of these have been passed to the U.S. Department of Justice as part of a larger set of recordings of Kuchma's conversations implicating him and his cronies in numerous scandals. Together with Commission Co-Chairman Rep. Chris Smith, I recently wrote to the Department of Justice requesting technical assistance to determine whether the recordings in which the Gon-gadze matter is discussed are genuine. A credible and transparent investigation of this case by Ukrainian authorities is long overdue and the perpetrators – no matter who they may be – need to be brought to justice.

The case of Ihor Alexandrov, a director of a regional television station, who was beaten in July 2001 and subsequently died also remains unsolved.

4 2

Serious questions remain about the way in which that case was handled by the authorities.

A Human Rights Watch report, Negotiating the News: Informal State Censorship of Ukrainian Television, issued in March, details the use of ex-plicit directives, or temnyky (lists of topics), which have been sent to editors from Kuchma's Presidential Administration on what subjects to cover and in that manner. The report correctly notes that these temnyky have eroded free-dom of expression in Ukraine, as «editors and journalists feel obligated to comply with temnyky instructions due to economic and political pressures and fear repercussions for non-cooperation.» To their credit, the independent me-dia are struggling to counter attempts by the central authorities to control their reporting and coverage of issues and events.

Another troubling feature of the media environment has been the control exerted by various oligarchs with close links to the government who own ma-jor media outlets. There is growing evidence that backers of the current Prime Minister and other political figures have been buying out previously independ-ent news sources, including websites, and either firing reporters or telling them to cease criticism of the government or find new jobs.

Last December, Ukraine's parliament held hearings on «Society, Mass Media, Authority: Freedom of Speech and Censorship in Ukraine.» Journalists' testimony confirmed the existence of censorship, including temnyky, as well as various instruments of harassment and intimidation. Tax inspections, vari-ous legal actions or license withdrawals have all been used as mechanisms by the authorities to pressure media outlets that have not towed the line or have supported opposition parties.

As a result of these hearings, the parliament, on April 3rd, voted 252 to one to approve a law defining and banning state censorship in the Ukrainian media. This is a welcome step. However, given the power of the presidential administration, the law's implementation remains an open question at best, par-ticularly in the lead up to the 2004 elections in Ukraine.

Mr. President, I urge our Ukrainian parliamentary colleagues to continue to actively press their government to comply with Ukraine's commitments to fundamental freedoms freely agreed to as a signatory to the Helsinki Final Act. I also urge the Ukrainian authorities, including the constitutional guarantor, to end their campaign to stifle independent reporting and viewpoints in the me-dia. Good news from Ukraine will come not from the spin doctors of the presidential administration, but when independent media and journalists can pursue their responsibilities free of harassment, intimidation, and fear.

Thank you. Mr. President. http://www.imi.org.ua/index2.shtml?/articles/article.shtml?1051714367575

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 16-31 May, 2003

4 3

Ukrainian service of radio «Liberty»: The discussion aboutthe rights of journalists and citizens for obtaining information Nadiya Sherstiuk: Since 1 January 2004 the new Civil Code will become

operable in Ukraine. Lawyer Tetiana Montian reckons that the new Code con-tains a great number of contradictions, which may cause the essential damage to workers of mass media. Our Kyiv correspondent Viktor Miniaylo asked Tetiana Montian to explain her position.

Tetiana Montian: It seems that people, who wrote and adopted the Code, did not adjust the separate articles.

The most surprising is the provision reading that any negative informa-tion spread about a person is regarded as false (article 277, item 3). Sorry, what the negative information is? Firstly, this is an evaluative category, and everybody, who dislikes the information spread about him, may declare that this information is false. The new Code also contains the definition of positive information. So, let us read Article 302 item 3: «The information communi-cated by state officials and published in the official sources is regarded as true». Yet, our state officials are different. They say different (and sometimes absolutely opposite) things. Certainly, it is understandable what the authors wanted to say. They meant that in the first case the negative information must be proved by the person, who spread it. The second provision means that if a person quoted the words of a state official correctly and without changes, this person is not responsible for the contents of these words.

Viktor Miniaylo: Tetiana, the deputies adopted and the President signed the law, which determined the concept of censorship. How do you think, will this law facilitate the work of journalists?

Tetiana Montian: I think that this is a mere declaration and nothing more. It is very good that this law was adopted, but it seems doubtful to me that it will have some practical use, especially after the new Civil Code will come into force. You see, there are too many contradictions. Judges will have the opportunity to use one norm in one case, and another norm – in another case. And all this will be legal. In other words, the ambiguity of the legislation is purposefully created.

Nadiya Sherstiuk: The law on censorship that was mentioned above was signed recently by President Leonid Kuchma. This document introduceschanges into several legal acts of Ukraine: the Administrative Code, the Laws «On information» and «On state support of mass media and social protection of journalists». The changes concern both the rights of journalists and of citi-zens, in particular, the right for information.

Taras Marusik: For the first time the definition of censorship appeared in Ukraine legislation. The article that was added to the Law «On information» reads: «Censorship, as a demand to a mass medium, journalist, editor-in-chief, organization that publishes the mass media, founder (co-founder), publisher or

4 4

distributor to agree the information before the publication… or impediment in any form to the distribution of information on the side of the organs of state power, organs of local self-rule and their officials, is prohibited».

Besides, the Law envisages the criminal responsibility for deliberate im-pediment to the professional activities of journalists and persecutions of journalists for criticism committed by a state official or group of persons.

One of the main provisions of this law is the statement that nobody may be brought to responsibility for expressing the opinions.

The administration of the all-Ukrainian public organization «Association of lawyers of mass media» protested against this legislative innovation. On the eve of the signature of the law they sent the letter to President Kuchma with the demand to veto the law. By the way, this letter was not signed, although it is known that the Association is headed by Viktor Petrenko, a deputy head of the State Committee of radio and TV broadcasting.

I will quote an excerpt from this letter: «It is noteworthy that the Law of Ukraine «On information» was supplemented with new Article 47-1, part 3 of which states that a person must not be responsible for spreading the informa-tion with the restricted access, if the court would establish that this information is socially important». Yet, this norm disagrees with the Criminal-Procedural Code, which envisages the criminal responsibility for divulging secret or con-fidential information. Besides, Article 32 of the Constitution of Ukraine pro-hibits to spread the information about a person without his/her consent».

Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, has another opinion.

Mykola Tomenko: I cannot agree with this statement, since the constitu-tional rights of citizens are indisputable, as well as democratic values, which must dominate over the restrictions in any country. Secret information also may be related to the restrictions. This is a very complicated problem. We are going to declassify a great amount of the information with the restricted access listed in the resolutions of the Cabinet of Ministers. I have already declassified the staff lists of Presidential administration, but the staff lists of tax administra-tion and custom service still remain secret.

If a person spread some socially important information, and it would be proved that it is really socially important, then this person would be regarded as not guilty. A journalist or common citizen, who dares to publish some in-formation, must be protected, if the goal of these actions is to communicate the truth to other people.

Radio «Liberty», 1 May 2003, http://www.radiosvoboda.org «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 May, 2003

4 5

Kuchma again got to the list of enemies of the press The organization «Reporters without frontiers» published their annual re-

port on the state of the freedom of the press in 2002 in 156 countries and the list of 42 main enemies of the press. President Leonid Kuchma was included to this list again. «In 2002», the report reads, «62% of Ukrainian journalists stated that they underwent the political censorship. Actually, more and more TV and radio channels, as well as informational agencies and regional media, are controlled by President Kuchma’s clique, which does not admit any criticism. Since 1991 about 20 journalists were murdered, and the quantity of brutal attacks at journalists in-creases rapidly, especially in the provinces».

Along with Kuchma, the Presidents of five more former USSR republics got into this list: Putin (Russia), Lukashenko (Byelorussia), Nazarbayev (Ka-zakhstan), Niyazov (Turkmenistan), Karimov (Uzbekistan), as well as the leaders of Zimbabwe, Togo, Bangladesh, the Saudi Arabia, Iran, Cuba, Israel, the heads of the Chechen mafia, Spanish ETA and Islamic groups.

«Since these people», the «Reporters» write, «endanger the everyone’s right to inform and to be informed, the public must know their names.»

UP, www.pravda.com.ua «Prava Ludyny», No.5, May, 2003

«Freedom House»: the freedom of speech is absent in Ukraine The organization «Freedom House» published its report on the freedom of

speech in Ukraine. The Ukrainian service of BBC informs that the ratings of Russia, Ukraine and Venezuela has essentially decreased in comparison with the previous report. Among 27 countries of the former USSR, Central and Eastern Europe 9 countries were related to the category of «free» countries, 8 – to «partly free» and 10 – to «not free». Ukraine got to the category of «not free» countries, that is the countries, where the freedom of speech is completely absent, after several criminal cases were started against journalists because of political reasons, and some journalists were persecuted by the tax inspection, «Freedom House» writes. The organization also points out that Ukrainian and Russian journalists, who investigate the corruption in their countries, are perse-cuted and sometimes undergo violence. The evaluation scale looks as follows: 0-30 points – «free» country, 31-60 – «partly free», 61-100 – «not free». The rating of Ukraine is 67 points. The commentary to the report reads that the state censors TV features, persecutes independent mass media and impedes their work, the crimes against journalists are not investigated properly. «Free-dom House» declares that the freedom of speech in Ukraine is permanently di-minishing because of the political pressure and state censorship. Article 34 of the Ukrainian Constitution and the law on printed mass media adopted in 1991 guarantee the freedom of speech, the report reads, but this right is not realized practically. According to the information of the European Institute of mass media, the state TV company popularized the ruling party during the last Parliament election. Although electronic and printed mass media in Ukraine

4 6

liament election. Although electronic and printed mass media in Ukraine are not owned by the state, the state controls main printing and distribution cen-ters. The authors of the reports also refer to the report of the organization «Re-porters without frontiers», which states that ten journalists perished during re-cent four years under the suspicious circumstances and 41 journalists more se-riously suffered from the attacks.

UNIAN, 2 May «Prava Ludyny», No.5, May, 2003

4 7

German ambassador in Ukraine: «People, who organized the scandal with the purpose of discredit of V. Mostovoy, discred-ited themselves and damaged the reputation of the state» From the interview of Ditmar Schtudemann, the Ambassador Extraordi-

nary and Plenipotentiary of the Federal Republic of Germany in Ukraine to the weekly «Dzerkalo tyzhnia» (7-13 June 2003)

During the years of independence Ukraine made a number of very impor-tant steps and achieved many positive results.

Yet, it would be dishonest to ignore the negative tendencies that worry us very much. Germany never concealed its interest in the democratic and stable Ukraine. So, it is obvious that every election campaign in Ukraine is inter-preted as a prelude to the future Presidential election. From this viewpoint we were alarmed with the course of the election of Sumy mayor. In my opinion, it should be expedient, if the Ukrainian top authorities scrupulously analyzed this election campaign and published the materials of the investigation.

The state of the freedom of speech in Ukraine is also rather disturbing. Your journalists and mass media still come across serious difficulties. This problem gained the special importance again in the connection with the scan-dal around the premium «For freedom and future of mass media», which was adjudged to Vladimir Mostovoy, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Dzer-kalo tyzhnia». I am not going to protect Mr. Mostovoy – he does not need this, he is an honest, strong and courageous man. And, undoubtedly, he deserved this premium. That is why I am surprised, when somebody demands from the editor-in-chief of «Dzerkalo tyzhnia» to return the premium. There are no reasons to do that.

Mr. Mostovoy got the premium not because he was threatened. This award is the symbol of the acknowledgement of his professional merits and the professional merits of the collective headed by him. Besides, Mostovoy never affirmed that he was threatened. The statements about the threats were com-municated by representatives of German mass media, and I want to explain what these statements meant. They did not say about the intimidation of con-crete person. The matter concerned the current situation in Ukraine, when the existing conditions sometimes impede journalists to fulfill their professional duties. We know that the work of representatives of mass media in your coun-try is not easy. This work is connected with overcoming many difficulties, it is not always safe. Everybody knows that during the recent years several journal-ists were murdered in Ukraine, and the criminals are not found until now.

I want to draw the attention to one more important detail. The work of German public organizations is one of most essential elements of the life of our society: their role is very significant and their authority is very high. And the attempt to involve a German non-governmental foundation into a scandal artificially created around Mostovoy worries me, an official representative of

4 8

the state. I have no doubts: this conflict is unable to cause damage to the repu-tation of the foundation or the reputation of V. Mostovoy. Yet, the conflict may inflict damage to the image of your country and, finally, to have a nega-tive influence on the Ukrainian-German relations, which are positive now.

In this situation I am especially disturbed by the fact that the top official of the state is also involved (by his own will or by somebody’s else intrigues) in this scandal. You see, I have the impression that the people, who organized this scandal with the purpose to discredit Mostovoy, discredited themselves and inflicted damage to the reputation of the state. Mind you don't fall into your own trap, a proverb says. It seems to me that the people, who organized this campaign, had to care about the pluralism of information and the creation of equal conditions for journalists’ work, but not to try to worsen the relations between two friendly countries.

«Dzerkalo tyzhnia» http://www.zn.kiev.ua/ie/show/446/38770/

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Does the freedom of speech exist in the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast? Such Internet-poll was conducted by the press service of the oblast state

administration on the official site www.gov.if.ua. The results of the poll were the following.

Up to 12 June 47% of respondents, who took part in the interactive vot-ing, answered this question affirmatively; 27% answered that the freedom of speech was absent in the region; 27% could not answer the question. Yet, I be-lieve that the results of the voting on the official site of a power organ could not have any other results.

However, I am surprised with another thing: only 15 respondents took part in the poll. If the heads of district administrations and their deputies voted, the number of the participants would be greater, as well as the number of posi-tive answers. Yet, maybe the Internet is still the eighth world miracle for them?

Igor Mudrik, a journalist «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 May, 2003

Association of mass media workers. The appeal on the violation of the norms of diplomatic etiquette by the US Ambassador in Ukraine, spreading of dirty insinuations and fanningof anti-American moods We have accustomed already that some representatives of diplomatic

corps of Western countries are not ashamed of the double standards in the as-sessment of similar phenomena, which are regarded as progress in their coun-tries and as crime in our country! Yet, some statements of US Ambassador John Herbst at his first press conference conducted on 18 September in Kyiv

4 9

not only surpassed the bounds of usual cynical and insolent accusations, but also exceeded the generally accepted limits of human, not to mention the dip-lomatic, norms.

John Herbst repeated the statements of his predecessor about the «tem-niks», which, by the way, had been inspired by the latter. However, he told nothing about the bombardments of civil buildings of TV and radio stations in Iraq and Yugoslavia, as well as about the recent introduction of total censor-ship for American and foreign journalists in the USA and in the zone of mili-tary conflict in Iraq, about the regular beatings of correspondents, about the groundless murder by Americans of the Ukrainian and Spanish journalists in Beirut and about the cynical refusal to conduct at least formal investigation of this crime…

The newly appointed «messiah» with the USA diplomatic passport demon-strated his contempt for the fundamental democratic principles and to our people; he demagogically appealed to struggle for the freedom of speech and human rights everywhere except his native country.

The Association of mass media workers of Ukraine officially turns to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine with the demand to lodge the protest against the violation of diplomatic norms by Ambassador John Herbst and to reject his credentials, since the Ambassador fans the anti-American moods in Ukraine with his ambiguous and provocative statements.

For the umpteenth time we, Ukrainian journalists, appeal to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to protect the national interests, rights and dignity of Ukrainian citizens. The new Minister of Foreign Affairs must immediately confirm the demand of the government about the unbiased investigation by Washington of the murder of Ukrainian citizen Taras Protsiuk, a cameraman of the agency «Reuter».

We appeal to all Ukrainian patriots, independently of their political views, to take part in the protest actions in front of the USA Embassy. We will protest against boorish and insolent behavior of some American diplomats on the territory of our sovereign state, the diplomats, who try to sow the seeds of discord between our peoples and to impede the rapprochement of Ukraine and the USA.

(«Dosye», No. 41, 2 October 2003)

Kost Bondarenko: Why the freedom of speech is permanently violated in Ukraine? Kost Bondarenko, a political scientist, candidate of historical sciences, Kyiv: Why the words «freedom of speech» is an oxymoron in Ukraine? Why

our journalists cannot fulfill the main task of social democracy: liberation of labor from the yoke of capital?

50

These numerous why’s make me to think that there is no freedom inside us. And there is no need for freedom. The freedom as the realized necessity. There is no fear of the Word (which is the God, according to the Gospel), and there is no respect for the People of the Word. Our society does not understand that journalists are the ministers of the Religion of the Word. And the journal-ists also do not realize their function.

It is most easy to reduce everything to the moral-ethical norms, to put several rhetorical questions and to lead the readers into the casuistic labyrinth. Yet, I will try to discourse on more material problems.

Several years ago, when the journalists of Lviv «Express» conducted the action for the protection of the freedom of speech, they had a reliable and effi-cient ally – Aleksandr Zinchenko. In fact, the man from the pro-power camp defended the newspaper against the arbitrary actions of the power. Yet, the situa-tion is different now.

The society is polarized now, and the newspaper «Lvivska gazeta», which reflects the opinions of the opposition, can hope only for the support by the repre-sentatives of opposition. I should be happy to hear some kindly words about this newspaper from the MPs from the Lviv oblast, for example, the members of the SDPU (u). No, I do not want them to denounce Medvedchuk-junior, but they may express their attitude to the freedom of speech, to support the journalists morally. That would be a politically correct and humane act.

I also want to listen to the position of representatives of the pro-presidential political parties, and I will have respect to any position. If a representative of the Party of Regions would say: «They deserved that! «Lvivska gazeta» is a mob of fools, untalented people and tax dodgers!», I would esteem him for straightfor-wardness and boldness. Yet, I do not see any people, who have their own opinion. It seems that the conflict between the newspaper and the State Tax administration does not exist at all. However, let us recollect how many parties promised in their election programs to protect the freedom of speech!

I like the standpoint of Viktor Medvedchuk, who actively asserts his views, although his views contradict to mine.

I want to clear up the attitude of the official power to this conflict, since I be-lieve that the power must control any conflicts between the tax administration and the press. How many commissions were created for the investigation of the situa-tion? What was done for informing the President and the Cabinet of Ministers about this case?

I also want to know what was the reaction of representatives of «Lviv dias-pora» in Kyiv to the events around «Lvivska gazeta»? Where are their protests? Where are their concrete actions? I will not mention the concrete names, but I want to say that my personal appeals to several Lviv representatives were futile. My interlocutors nodded and turned to other topics.

I am guilty too, because I could not persuade some political figures of the top level to support the newspaper. By the way, one of the arguments adduced by me during the talks with these politicians was the following: on 3 December 2002, at

51

the Parliamentary hearings on the questions of the freedom of speech, vice-Prime-Minister Dmytro Tabachnik proposed to prohibit (for the term of one year) the checks of mass media by fiscal organs.

Did somebody cancel this initiative? Does the mechanism exist for the con-trol over the fulfillment of the initiatives of the government? Maybe, tax admini-stration has the right to ignore the propositions of the government? Or D. Tabach-nik was joking? Well, somebody must be responsible: either the vice-Prime-Minister for his words, or Lviv tax administration for their actions.

However, the politicians ignored my arguments too... The freedom of speech is not only the right to publish one’s opinions or the

right to swear at the President and power. The freedom of speech is also the right, even the duty, to have own position. The position, which concerns not only the conflict between the tax administration and the newspaper, but the position con-cerning the life as a whole. The situation in our society confirms that the freedom of speech is absent in Ukraine.

Let us stop to look for a censor! The censor stays inside us, and we must de-stroy this internal censor. Then, and only then, we would have the right to respect ourselves. It is very simple to overcome the fear and to say: «I agree» or «I do not agree».

If we want to become real Ukrainians, we must do that. We must get rid of our fear, envy, irresponsibility, hypertrophied egotism, peacockery and greediness. We must understand that living in the country called Ukraine is not enough for be-ing real Ukrainians. We must learn to have our own position and to uphold this position, independently of political views, race or religion.

The situation around «Lvivska gazeta» became an evidence of absolute pas-sivity of our people.

(«Lvivska gazeta», 22 September 2003)

52

MASS MEDIA AND ELECTION

During the election of Zaporozhye mayor the town TV channels gave preference to one candidate Every hour during the day of election the radio stations «Nostalzhi» (FM

107.5) and «Velikiy Lug» (FM 101.8) transmitted the information about the course of voting with the comments of the Voters’ Committee of Ukraine. All in all, 16 messages from the Zaporozhye VCU were transmitted by these radio stations during the day.

On the day of election Denis Piatigorets, the press secretary of the Zaporoz-hye VCU, and Oleksiy Koshel, a deputy head of the administration of the VCU, gave the interviews to the TV channel «Novy kanal», to informational agencies UNIAN and «Interfax», and to the newspaper «Region-Ekspress».

On 9 June the representatives of the Zaporozhye VCU gave the inter-views, in which they commented the results of the election and the independ-ent observation, to the following mass media:

TV companies: «Novy kanal», «1+1», «Inter», «STB», Zaporozhye oblast state TV company.

Radio companies: «Nostalzhi», «Velikiy Lug» + the 15-minute interview for «Gromadske radio» and «Radio tri».

Internet-editions: «Forum», «UNIAN», «Interfax», «Internews», «Politichna Ukraina».

Newspapers: «Segodnia». The results of the observation by the VCU representatives of the prepara-

tion and course of the election campaign and the voting confirmed that the campaign for the election of the Zaporozhye mayor did not give to candidates the equal opportunities of the access to mass media and the conduction of pre-election struggle; it was accompanied with the pressure on the voters and sub-jects of the election process, mass and cynical use of «administrative re-source». Here the appeal of Evhen Kartashov, the candidate to the mayor’s post, should be noted: he stated that the complete democracy and the freedom of speech existed in Zaporozhye and said: «Why the TV channel «TV-5» shows only me? Maybe, this is their style of work».

According to the results of the election of the Zaporozhye mayor, which took place on 8 June 2003, the mayor’s post was occupied by Zaporozhye governor E. Kartashov.

53

During the election campaign the TV channels «TV-5» and «Zaporizhzhia» elucidated the activities of E. Kartashov only. The materials were issued for several times in every block of news. No other candidates were shown. More-over, «TV-5» officially refused to candidate Volodymir Kaltsev, who even proposed to pay money for the broadcasting of his speech at this channel. The only TV company, which elucidated the activities of other candidates, was the TRC «Aleks». Yet, five days before the election «Aleks» began to refuse the air to all other subjects of the election process except governor Kartashov.

The above-mentioned phrase of E. Kartashov, which was pronounced on the eve of the election, looks rather cynical on this background.

The mayor’s election in Zaporozhye proved once more than the freedom of speech in the oblast is a very relative concept, which may be explained only by the power!

11 June 2003, the Zaporozhye oblast branch of the Voters’ Committee of Ukraine «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

On the objectivity of mass media Every election campaign demonstrates the terrible state of the Ukrainian

journalism. Representatives of mass media almost do not fulfill their mission, they simply play somebody else’s game, and they do not know either the rules of this game or their role in it. One half of journalists are the servants of the power, and other – of the opposition. Such approach dulls and deadens journalists’ reflexes and they are not able to elucidate the real events objectively. That is why people do not trust to mass media. Unfortunately, during the years of independence jour-nalism did not become not only the fourth power, but even the team of associates united with the corporative solidarity. Media space is controlled by anybody ex-cept journalists. Now not a single central or regional TV channel exists in Ukraine, which elucidates the events without taking somebody’s part. As to newspapers, there the state is somewhat better. Such editions as, for example, «Dzerkalo tyzhnia» and «Vysokiy zamok» give the opportunity to express the opinions to everybody. And it is well that the people are different and their opin-ions are also different.

Yet, the main function of mass media is to write and tell the truth to their readers and viewers. And the people, who obtain the unbiased information, will interpret it by themselves and will draw the proper conclusions. Frankly speaking, the society does not need at all the journalists, which serve to the power or opposi-tion. The society needs journalists, who call a spade a spade. Of course, not all de-cisions taken by the President of government are erroneous, and not all deeds of opposition are correct. Journalists must say the truth. Only in that way they will be able to win back the trust of public and will become the real fourth power in the state.

54

So, the Ukrainian journalists must take the decision. Maybe, it is the time to begin the active struggle for media space.

(«Politichna Ukraina», 6 August 2003)

55

Kharkov met Yushchenko with a «temnik» The press service of the bloc «Our Ukraine» communicated to «Liga-

BusinessInform» that last week the editorial boards of regional mass media had received the list of ten questions, which the journalists had to put to the leader of «Our Ukraine». Four of these questions were asked to Viktor Yu-shchenko during his visit to the Kharkov oblast. One of these questions was put by a journalist of the newspaper «Moloda Galytchina».

(Ukrainian network of business information, October 2003)

* * *

Some Kharkovites found the leaflets in their postboxes. The leaflets were titled: «Mortal weapons for Ukraine. Publicity action-2004». In particular, the text was connected with the «American topic», which had been popular during the past parliamentary election.

We learned about these leaflets from local dweller Maksim Kovalik, who had seen a postman in his house, who was throwing the nominal letters to the postboxes. By the words of Mr. Kovalik, the majority of people do not sub-scribe to newspapers, so one can see the postman very rarely.

Besides, representatives of «Our Ukraine» learned that other leaflets were distributed in Kharkov, in which the leader of the bloc was accused of the ag-ricultural crisis of this year and the increase of the prices for bread.

It became known to the MPs that, on the eve of the visit of Viktor Yu-shchenko to Kharkov, the managers of the Kharkov oblast mass media had got the «temniks» from Kyiv, which had to be used at Yushchenko’s press confer-ence. These documents consisted of 10 questions, four of which were put at the press conference for Kharkov journalists. These questions concerned the represen-tatives of the parliamentary fraction «Our Ukraine», representatives of business, reasons of the increase of the prices for bread, etc.

Besides, the press service informs that the broadcast with the participation of Yushchenko at the oblast radio was cancelled, allegedly because of the strike of the oblast TV and radio company. This strike was caused by the recurrent warning, got from the local power, about the cessation of heat and water sup-ply of the TV company because of debts.

At the same time, the administration of the oblast TV and radio company did not present the protocol with proper signatures, which had to approve the decision on the strike, but showed only a draft of this document.

Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Parliamentary Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, commented the strike of the oblast TV and radio company and said that he was extremely worried with this problem. «I am anxious about this debt: it is very great and long-standing», pointed out

56

the MP. At the same time, he believes that the beginning the strike just before the visit of V. Yushchenko was not accidental.

M. Tomenko appeals to the journalists with the entreaty not to take part in political games. He says that it is not nice, when strikes are started on the eve of some concrete date or event. In the opinion of the MP, after the end of the strike the Kharkov oblast TV and radio company ought to recollect about the Law on the status of an MP and to give the floor to the leader of the largest parliamen-tary fraction. «We do not want the TV and radio company to violate the laws», remarked Mykola Tomenko.

(«Ukrainska Pravda», 27 October 2003)

* * *

24 October 2003. The Kharkov oblast state TV and radio company went on strike.

This step was caused by the recurrent warning about the cessation of heat and water supply of the TV company by the enterprise «Derzhprom» (the oblast TV company is located in the building owned by this enterprise). The administration of «Derzhprom» motivates this decision by the fact that the TV company owed the enterprise more that 1 million hryvnas for communal ser-vices. Marina Vashchurina, the consultant of the manager of the TV company, informed that the company did not agree with this debt and that court consid-eration of the conflict lasted for two years. In May 2002 the economic court of the Kharkov oblast issued the decision in favor of the TV company. «Derzh-prom» turned to the Appeal court, and the decision was changed in favor of the enterprise. The TV company brought the appeal to the Supreme economic court, but the latter rejected the appeal under the pretext of the insufficient leg-islative base. Manager of the TV company Viacheslav Novikov stated that he would appeal against the actions of «Derzhprom» in all supreme instances.

On 30 October the collective of the TV company resumed the work. Ana-toliy Baginets, the first deputy of the general manager, told that this had hap-pened owing to the interference of governor Evhen Kushnariov. The supply of heating and water were recommenced on 29 October. «So, the first step to the rapport was done», said Baginets.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

Political censorship is not the only problem Sergiy Guz, the head of the Kyiv independent media trade union: «Political censorship is not the only problem in Ukraine. There are other

problems that are not solved in our country, such as the access to information and the safety of journalists. Another main moment is how the journalists assert their rights.

57

Naturally, the active position and protests lower our rating in the list of the international human rights protecting organization «Reporters without frontiers». Yet, this happens only because the state does not listen to journalists and does not try to improve the situation.

Perhaps, this rating will decrease even more next year because of the Presi-dential election. The existing system does not give journalists the free access to in-formation and the freedom from self-censorship. Not every edition can afford to publish, for example, an article about the sources of capital of this or that candi-date or about his economic relations with some enterprises. Such actions, which are regarded as normal in any democratic state, are still impossible in Ukraine.

(«Ukraina i svit siogodni», No. 41, 25-31 October 2003)

Participants of the Second Forum of journalists «For election without censorship» demanded from top officials to guarantee the unhampered work of journalists during the election cam-paign-2004The Forum was held on 10 November in Kyiv. Journalists from all regions

of Ukraine and from abroad, MPs, representatives of foreign diplomatic mis-sions, lawyers and law-enforcers, as well as representatives of power organs, took part in the Forum. The action was organized by the Public Council in charge of the freedom of speech and information, National Union of journalists of Ukraine, Kyiv independent media trade union, Independent Association of TV and radio broadcasters jointly with the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information. The financial support was rendered by the International Foundation «Vidrodjennia».

Resolution of the Second Forum of journalists «For election without cen-sorship»

We, participants of the Second Forum of journalists «For election without censorship», emphasize the necessity of guaranteeing the independent and un-hampered work of mass media and journalists during the pre-election period, elimination of all legal, administrative, economic and organizational obstacles concerning the elucidation of the Presidential election campaign-2004. We are aware of the precarious situation connected with the protection of journalists from violence, intimidation and other forms of impediment to their professional activities, so we want to draw the attention of the organs of state power and local self-government to the necessity of observance of the constitutional principles of the freedom of speech and information. We corroborate the conclusions and propositions stated in the Resolution of the Forum of journalists of Ukraine «Le-gal self-protection» of 10 June 2003, in particular, concerning the violation by the state organs of the Ukrainian laws in the sphere of the protection of journalists from pressure, persecutions, ungrounded court cases, censorship and other forms

58

of impediment to their professional activities. Thus, we RESOLVED to turn to state agencies with the following propositions:

1) To the Supreme Rada of Ukraine: – to consider and adopt, before 1 January 2004 (the date, when the new

Civil Code of Ukraine will come into force), the draft of the Law of Ukraine «On introduction of changes into the Civil and Civil-Procedural Codes of Ukraine (concerning the right for information)» (registration No. 3547), which would be directed to the elimination of drawbacks of the adopted Code;

– to reject the drafts of the Laws of Ukraine «On introduction of changes into some legal acts of Ukraine» (in the sphere of state secrets) (registration No. 2663), «On monitoring of telecommunications» (registration No. 4042) and «On the activities in the sphere of informatization» (registration No. 3038), since these laws endanger the activities of journalists, as well as free circulation and use of electronic information;

– to regulate more clearly and completely the activities of mass media during the Presidential election campaigns by introduction of changes into the Law of Ukraine «On election of the President of Ukraine»;

– to regulate legislatively the status and authorities of ombudsperson’s representative in charge of the freedom of speech and mass media.

2) To the President of Ukraine: – to put an end to the application by President’s Administration of the il-

legal methods of influence on mass media and journalists, in particular, distri-bution among the leaders of mass media of oral and written instruction con-cerning the representation of information, contents of informational messages and comments concerning the current events and problems.

3) To the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine: – to take the appropriate measures for the unhampered access to informa-

tion needed by journalists for the fulfillment of their professional duty connected with the thorough elucidation of the election campaign-2004;

– to take the appropriate measures for termination of checks conducted by the proper state organs and agencies for the period from 1 January 2004 to 1 January 2005;

– to take the appropriate measures for prevention of the illegal closure of mass media or impediment to their activities, in particular in the sphere of pub-lication and distribution of printed mass media.

4) To the Supreme Court of Ukraine: – to generalize the practices of consideration by courts of the claims on

the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation handed against mass media and/or journalists, taking into account the last amendments to the Ukrainian legislation and the corresponding practices of the European Court of human rights.

5) To the ombudsperson:

59

– to guarantee the transparency and openness of the process of the ap-pointment of candidates to the post of Representative in charge of the freedom of speech and mass media, to take into account the position of public organiza-tions and mass media regarding the candidates to this post.

6) To the Ministry of Interior and General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine: – to inform the public, at the Plenary sitting of the Supreme Rada, about

the results of investigation of the cases of using violence against journalists, in particular, the cases of Georgiy Gongadze and Igor Aleksandrov;

– to take measures for prevention of the cases of applying violence against journalists, to carry out the efficient and thorough investigation of such facts, to bring the guilty to responsibility.

7) To the State Tax Administration of Ukraine: – to introduce the moratorium for the conduction of any tax checks of

mass media for the period from 1 January 2004 to 1 January 2005. Principles of the activities of mass media during the pre-election periodWe, owners, managers, editors and journalists of Ukrainian mass media,

are realizing the important role of mass media in guaranteeing of free and con-scious expression of the will of citizens, understanding our responsibility for the unbiased elucidation of the Presidential election campaign-2004, confirm-ing our devotion to the provisions of the Declaration of the principles of be-havior of journalists adopted in 1954 by the International Federation of journal-ists and to the Ethic Code of Ukrainian journalists adopted on 14 April 2002 by the Congress of journalists. So, we voluntarily assume the obligation to adhere the following principles of work during the election campaign-2004. We un-dertake:

1. Owners and managers of mass media: – to guarantee the creation and distribution of the programs providing the

discussions of participants of the election process in the regime of direct broadcasting;

– not to interfere into the editorial policy and not to restrict the creative freedom of journalists;

– to abstain from the actions, which would result in the violation of the rules mentioned below.

2. Editors and journalists of mass media: – to have respect for private life of the participants of election campaign

and to distribute the information about the private life of these persons only if this information is of the considerable public interest and is necessary for forming the opinion about the candidate to President’s post;

– not to publish the groundless accusations and inauthentic statements, which discredit the honor and dignity of the participants of election campaign;

– to separate the informational and analytical materials concerning the pre-election events from the political advertising, and the evaluative judgments and assumptions – from facts;

60

– not to ignore the facts of violation of legal rights of other journalists and mass media, to express actively the solidarity with them.

Participants of the Second Forum of journalists «For election without censorship», 10 November 2003.

(«Svoboda slova. Poltavshchina», electronic bulletin of the Poltava oblast media club, No. 54, 12 November 2003, slmclub@kot.poltava.ua)

Lutsk TV company «Avers» did not give the live broadcastto Viktor Yushchenko On Thursday the Volyn oblast representation of «Our Ukraine» got the

information that the Lutsk TV company «Avers» would not be able to give the live broadcast to Viktor Yushchenko. This live broadcast with the participation of the leader of the bloc was planned to be conducted on 15 November, during the oblast forum of democratic forces, informs the press service of «OurUkraine». «All organizational and technical aspects were coordinated before-hand with the administration of the TV company, and there were no grounds for the refusal», stated the press service. «Ukrainska Pravda» informs that Oleg Velichko, the president of the corporation «Avers» that owns the TV company, explained, in the talk with representatives of «Our Ukraine», the causes of the breach of the agreement: sudden illness of an engineer, technical unavailability of the studio, uncertainty about the place and regime of trans-mission, etc.

«Members of «Our Ukraine» expressed their sincere regret to OlegVelichko and wished him to solve all sudden problems as soon as possible. Representatives of the Volyn oblast organization are absolutely sure that the problems of the TV company «Avers» and other mass media will be solved in autumn of 2004. We hope that the professional creative collective of the TV company will also do their best for the improvement of situation», stated the press service.

(«ForUm», 13.11.2003, www.for-ua.com)

Electric energy was switched off at the TV company «Krym» Yesterday the forum of the bloc «Our Ukraine» with the participation of

Viktor Yushchenko and other MPs was carried out in Simferopol. On the same day Yushchenko appeared in the live broadcast of the Cri-

mean private TV company «Zhisa», where the MP answered the questions of TV viewers. He also had to appear at the state TV company «Krym», but, at the moment when he entered the building of the TV company, the electric en-ergy was switched off in the entire micro-district, where the company was situated. While the trouble was liquidated, Viktor Yushchenko left the studio and the transmission was cancelled.

61

The administration of the TV company «Krym» refused to meet with journalists and to give any comments. Valentin Kozubskiy, the general man-ager of the company, said to the representatives of «Telekritika»: «We are forming now our viewpoint on this event, and today I will explain everything on the air».

(Nikolay Semena, «Telekritika», 17 November 2003)

Illegal detention of the participants of the collection of signa-tures for the all-national election of Ukrainian President On 5 December 2003 the officers of the Magdalinovskiy district militia

precinct (the Dnepropetrovsk oblast) illegally detained the participants of the action organized by Viktor Yushchenko’s bloc «Our Ukraine». The aim of the action was the collection of signatures for the all-national election of the Presi-dent of Ukraine. The law-enforcers were headed by O. Ivkevich, a deputy head of the Magdalinovskiy district precinct.

The militiamen motivated their actions with the fact that the leaflets with-out the dateline were spread during the collection of signatures. The militia called «leaflets» the xerocopies of the informational messages of the Ukrainian Internet editions «Ukrainska Pravda», «Razom.org.ua» and «Maydan» about stealing by the officials of the money from state budget-2004.

The members of «Our Ukraine» stayed in the district precinct for more than 3 hours. They were released after the interference of Viktor Achimov, the head of the district organization of the UNP. The militiamen neither compiled the protocol nor apologized to the activists.

(razom.org.ua, 2003-12-08)

The main purpose of the work of Media center «Candidate» is the truth-ful, timely and exact delivery of information from its sources to the public. The media center is going to do its best for rendering to the society the full and unbiased information about the candidates to President’s post necessary for taking the conscious and thoughtful decision in the day of voting, for preven-tion of the manipulations with public opinion on the side of both pro-power and opposition forces.

Visitors of the site of Media center «Candidate» will have the opportu-nity:

– to learn what the Ukrainian people expect from candidates; – to analyze the strategies and tactics of candidates; – to see the tools and methods of the power and opposition; – to understand the principles of behavior of the power and opposition. The project «Media center «Candidate»« was initiated by the public or-

ganization «Internews-Ukraine». The center will collect and spread video, au-

62

dio and textual information connected with the election process. The informa-tion will be rendered free of charge to regional TV companies and other mass media.

There is a TV studio in the media center, which makes the so-called «crude» news (that is video and text separately), ready news, archive materials (for instance, «video dossiers» of candidates, «history» of a problem, legisla-tion), informational-analytical weekly, etc.

The special web-page www.kandydat.com.ua presents: monitoring of elucidation of the basic political problems by the all-Ukrainian TV channels; results of sociological researches; description of the political position of every candidate; databases with the advanced search tools.

Press conferences of the potential candidates, politicians, state officials and experts will be conducted on the site.

(Oleg Zadoyanchuk, the chief editor of the Media center «Candidate») («The Poltava oblast media club», No. 58, 1 December 2003)

63

ACCESS TO INFORMATION

The fund «Opened society» intends to turn to the Supreme Rada in the connection with making secret the information about the attendance of MPs at their working place The fund «Opened society», which conducted the analysis of the work of

MPs in 2002, could not obtain the information how the people’s representa-tives attend their working place – the session hall.

Oksana Griaznova, the president of the fund, told at the press conference in Kyiv that this information had been blocked since December 2002 and re-moved from the official site of the Supreme Rada.

The correspondent of the center «LIGA» communicates that the admini-stration of the fund are going to turn to the Parliament with the request about the reasons of making this information secret.

28 January 2003 LIGA ONLINE

«Prava Ludyny», No.1, January, 2003

Severodonetsk prosecutor drove journalists out from the press conferenceEvgeniy Bayramov, a correspondent of «Politichna Ukraina»: The press conference of the coordination council of the law-enforcing or-

gans hold in the prosecutor’s office lasted for 5 minutes. This may be regarded as a new record of the duration of such meetings in Ukraine. The press confer-ence was conducted after the end of the meeting of the heads of the town law-enforcing organs, which was conducted in the prosecutor’s office. Town mayor V. Gritsyshin, town prosecutor V. Glagovskiy and the heads of all law-enforcing organs took part in the meeting. The journalists stood in the cor-ridor for 45 minutes before they were let in. However, in the room they also had no places to sit down, they were lined along the wall, and the officials asked them to introduce themselves. The third journalist, who introduced him-self, was a journalist of the editions of the Voters’ committee of Ukraine «Tochka zoru» and «Politichna Ukraina», which fact arose the interests of V. Gritsyshin. «Whom did you invited?», he asked the prosecutor strictly, and

64

the introduction of the journalists ended. «Write that we met. And if somebody needs information, phone to me and we will give you the information». After this the journalists were proposed to leave the office.

According to our data, the journalists were invited to the press conference in pursuance of the President’s Decree «On the additional measures for guaran-teeing the transparency of the activities of the organs of state power», which reads: «… heads of central and local organs of the executive power must conduct regular press conferences with the schedule made public beforehand,… as well as answer regularly the questions of citizens in mass media».

«Prava Ludyny», No. 2, February, 2003

The statement of the prosecutor’s office on the violationof Ukrainian laws by Severodonetsk mayor V. Gritsychin Evhen Bayramov, «Politichna Ukraina»: The adoption by the Severodonetsk town council of the budget was secret

for the town dwellers since 24 January 2003, when the budget was adopted, and it has not been published until now.

On 27 February the Lugansk oblast organization of the Voters’ Commit-tee of Ukraine sent a letter to V. Glagovskiy, the town prosecutor. The letter stated that «being a public organization, the main mission of which is the pro-motion of democratic values in Ukraine, the Lugansk branch of the VCU is displeased with such not-transparent actions of the organ of local self-rule».

According to the results of the conducted inspection, the town prosecu-tor’s office submitted the statement to the town mayor Gritsyshin about the liquidation of the violation of item 5 Article 59 of the Law of Ukraine «On lo-cal self-rule in Ukraine». Thus, the town dwellers may now hope to learn the «secret» of the local authorities in a month, of course if the mayor would take the appropriate measures for eliminating the violations of the law.

«Prava Ludyny», No. 4, April, 2003

Public hearings «Access to information. Use of the classifica-tions restricting the access» Today, on 2 June, the public hearings «Access to information. Use of the

classifications restricting the access» are conducted in Kyiv. The hearings were organized jointly by the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of the free-dom of speech and information, the Public Council in charge of the freedom of speech and information and the Kharkov group for human rights protection. MPs, representatives of the Cabinet of Ministers, Supreme Court, Constitu-tional Court, General Prosecutor’s office, USS, President’s Administration and other organs of state power, a representative of the secretariat of the ombuds-person, representatives of public organizations, experts and others were in-vited for the participation in the hearings.

65

According to the monitoring conducted by the Kharkov group for human rights protection (KhG), 100 out of 2672 resolutions and decrees issued by the Cabinet of Ministers in 2002 were classified as «not for publishing». The President of Ukraine issued 1479 edicts and decrees during 2002, 74 out of them also were classified as «not for publishing». Among other agencies the traditional leader in secrecy is the USS (6 out of 14 orders were «for service use only»). The similarly classified orders were also issued in 2002 by the Ministry of Justice (2 out of 410), State penitentiary department (2 out of 13), Ministry of Interior (1 out of 30), State directorate of frontiers (1 out of 16) and State custom service (1 out of 1003).

According to the statistics, in 2003 the Cabinet of Ministers issued 14 documents «not for printing» and 5 «for service use only». The President of Ukraine signed 23 edicts classified as «not for publishing».

The experts of the KhG turned to the organs of state power with the demand to give them the right for the access to some documents connected with the prob-lems of personal identification in Ukraine, but the access was denied. This, in par-ticular, concerned President’s Edict No. 709/94 «On the information and analytic provision of the President of Ukraine» (the last version of 27 January 1999). The appeal was handed to the President’s administration and the Cabinet of Ministers with the request to explain the grounds of using the classifications «not for pub-lishing» and «not for printing».

According to the answer of the juridical department of the Secretariat of the Cabinet of Ministers, the access to the documents issued by the power or-gans is denied on the basis of Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 1893 of 27 November 1998 «On the approval of the instruction on the procedure of the registration, storage and use of the documents, files, editions and other ma-terial carriers containing confidential information owned by the state».

Item 1 of this Instruction reads: «The lists of the information, which is owned by the state and is classified as the information with the restricted ac-cess «for service use only», are compiled and brought into effect by ministries, other central organs of the executive power, the Council of Ministers of the Crimea, oblast state administrations, Kyiv and Sevastopol city administra-tions, which compile, own, use or handle these pieces of information».

The KhG also got the refusal to their request to publish the secret Presi-dent’s acts. The refusal was based on the argument that these acts with the re-stricted access, not always concerned the rights and freedoms of citizens (Arti-cle 57 of the Constitution stipulates the obligatory publication of such docu-ments), but «contain the information directly connected with the question of guaranteeing the state security, defense of Ukraine and other similar informa-tion, which, according to the law, is owned by state».

E. Gerasimenko, the head of the state-legal directorate of the President’s Administration, affirms that all information defined as state property is brought to notice of the interested persons, organs of state power and local self-

66

rule in the accordance with Article 7 of President’s Decree No. 503 «On the pro-cedure of the official publication of normative legal acts and bringing them into effect». Coming into effect of such documents, in the interpretation of President’s administration, begins from the moment of familiarization with them. Yet, the question appears: how to determine this moment, if several persons are familiar-ized with the documents in different time? Is this moment individual for different persons or groups?

Considering the existing procedure of classifying the official documents, human rights protecting organizations want to attract the attention to the fact that more often the practical application of this procedure is illegal. The use of the classification «not for printing» is not envisaged by any normative acts, so it is ap-plied by President’s administration and the Cabinet of Ministers on their own ini-tiative, the procedures of the recall of such documents and the access to them are also not stipulated by legal acts. The Constitution contains the exhaustive list of the reasons for restricting the access to information: in the interests of national se-curity, territorial integrity and public order, for preventing the disturbances or crimes, for preventing the divulgence of confidential information or for the sup-port of the authority and impartiality of justice.

According to Article 34 of the Constitution, any restrictions of the access to information must be determined by laws. But now the legally stipulated restric-tions concern only state secrets and nothing more.

The KhG reckons that the organs of state power have no right to restrict the access to information only on the basis of their property rights, on the conditions that this information does not inflict damage to the interests mentioned in Arti-cle 34 of the Ukrainian Constitution.

The law «On information» (Article 21) relates the sublegal acts to the infor-mation on the activities of the organs of state power and local self-rule and estab-lishes the procedure of passing this information to the interested persons (orally, in writing or in other ways), but the state has no right to determine the circle of per-sons, who are considered as interested. Moreover, it is known from the experience that the organs of state power apply the secret classifications on their own initia-tive, and frequently to the information having the social importance.

So, last year President’s Edict No. 1180/2002 of 17 December 2002 classi-fied as «not for publishing», which approved the new version of «The resolution on the state administration», was published, as well as the Decree «On the addi-tional measures for the material provision of the officers of the Supreme Council of Justice», which concerned not the national security, but the material welfare of the authorities.

«The national program of the development of power engineering until 2010» still has the classification «for service use only», the same classification of the plan of the joint Ukraine-NATO work was cancelled only in last October. The agree-ment between «Naftogaz-Ukraina» (the oil and gas state company of Ukraine) and «Gazprom» (the similar Russian company) on the creation of the gas consortium

67

still has this classification. The agreement is also closed for the members of the surveillance council of «Naftogaz-Ukraina». So, in the opinion of the KhG ex-perts, the illegal application of the classifications by the state organs must at-tract the attention of public.

The participants of the public hearings believe that, in the context of the realization of the measures envisaged by President’s Edict No. 683 of 1 Au-gust 2002 «On the additional measures for guaranteeing the transparency of the activities of the organs of state power», the changes must be introduced to the law-applying practices. The state must not be the primary recipient of in-formation, pointed out Vsevolod Rechitskiy, the KhG expert.

Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, said that the Committee was ready to render the legal aid for the disclosure and termination of the illegal practices of the denial of the access to information and for the development of the corre-sponding legislative changes.

«Telekritika», 02 June 2003, http://www.telekritika.kiev.ua/comments/?id=8985«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

The request of Cherkassy journalists on the meeting with UNA-UNSO member Ruslan Zaychenko condemned after the «case of 9 March» was rejected On 5 June several Cherkassy journalists failed to visit the village of

Khutory near Cherkassy, where the penitentiary establishment No. 62 is situ-ated, to which Ruslan Zaychenko, the UNA-UNSO member condemned after the «case of 9 March», had been transferred.

The correspondent of «ForUm» communicates that on Monday the edito-rial board of the weekly «Antenna» turned to Sergiy Mironenko, the head of the Cherkassy oblast penitentiary department, with the request to permit them the meeting and the interview with the convict.

«Yet, the editorial board did not obtain the official answer», informed Valeriy Vorotnik, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper. «Today several journal-ists wanted to visit the penitentiary, to meet Ruslan and to learn about the con-ditions of his upkeep. Before the departure we phoned to Sergiy Mironenko and learned that there was no need to go there. The head of the penitentiary department said that he had no wish to cooperate with the newspaper «An-tenna». The reason, according to his words, was the critical materials that had been published in our newspaper».

By the words of V. Vorotnik, the department head said that, according to the operating laws, a condemned had to express his own wish to communicate with the press. S. Mironenko rejected the proposition to deliver to R. Zay-chenko the request about the meeting and «gave no advice how the journalists could inform the condemned about their intention to meet him».

68

The editorial collective of «Antenna» states that they are not going to re-sign the idea to interview the «famous modern prisoner of consciousness». The journalists placed on the newspaper site the note about the prohibition of the meeting with Ruslan Zaychenko. They ask to consider this note as one more appeal to the penitentiary department, under the jurisdiction of which R. Zaychenko stays now. We want to remind that Cherkassy dweller Ruslan Zay-chenko, one of the leaders of the UNA-UNSO, was condemned by the Pecher-skiy district court of Kyiv to four years of incarceration for the organization of mass disorders during the protest actions of 9 March 2001. The appeal court decreased the term of incarceration to three years and two months. Zaychenko did not plead guilty.

Andriy Lubenskiy, Cherkassy, «ForUm», http://ukr.for-ua.com/news/2003/06/05/123835.html

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Sumy newspapers are protesting against the restrictionsof the access to information on the side of city administration The greatest private Sumy newspapers, «Dankor», «Panorama» and

«Vash shans», were issued with lacunas symbolizing the protest against the decision of Sumy town executive committee to restrict the access to the meet-ings in the mayor’s office. Since the middle of June the correspondents of these newspapers cannot be present at these meetings. Editors of the newspa-pers signed the open letter to town mayor Vladimir Omelchenko.

««Dankor», «Panorama» and «Vash shans» are the most influential town newspapers that are read by every second Sumy dweller. So, the events that took place on 14 and 21 July, when militia did not let the correspondents of our newspapers to the building of the town executive committee and to the meetings, are regarded by us as an infringement of citizens’ right for obtaining reliable information about the work of town power», the letter states. «We also reckon that the division of journalist into «needed» and «needless» ones (rep-resentatives of the newspaper «Sumy i sumchane» and the TV company «Vidicon» were admitted to the same meetings) does not agree with the prin-ciples of open and democratic society, which are declared by the Ukrainian government».

«Svoboda slova: Poltavshchina», No. 38, 28 July 2003

Press release instead of the session of the town council! Valentina Krivda, a correspondent of the all-Ukrainian weekly «Shliakh

Peremogi», learned that the session of the Krivoy Rog town council would be held on 28 May 2003 two days before the event. She got this information from the workers of the town executive committee.

69

This principal and meticulous journalist takes part in almost all briefings of local authorities. The situation with visiting the sessions was not so good in spite all efforts of V. Krivda. She handed the accreditation requests and ap-peals to the officials of the executive committee. Yet, as V. Krivda points out in her appeal to town mayor Yuri Lubonenko, during 12 years of the Ukrain-ian independence she managed to be present only at one session of the town council.

Thus, the journalist decided to fight for her professional rights and to struggle with the discrimination. In the appeal of 26 May 2003 she referred to the European Convention on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, to the Ukrainian Constitution, to the Laws of Ukraine «On informa-tion» and «On printed mass media (the press) in Ukraine», demanded put an end to the creation of artificial obstacles and to render her the right to be pre-sent at the session.

Since V. Krivda knew how the mayor and his apparatus reacted to citi-zens’ initiatives, the next day she handed the appeal to town prosecutor Vasyl Kravets. The complete text of this appeal is quoted below.

«On 26 May 2003 I turned to town mayor Yu. Lubonenko with the appeal about my constitutional right for information. I asked to give me the opportu-nity to be present at the session of the town council, which would be held on 28 May 2003. I registered the appeal at 14:00 in the office of the town execu-tive committee.

On the same day I orally familiarized with the text of the appeal the offi-cials of the deputies’ room, organizational department and press service of the executive committee. From this talk I understood that I would not be permitted to the session of 28 May (I also was not admitted to the previous session that was conducted on 23 April 2003).

On 26 May 2003 I turned to S. Dzhabbarov, the prosecutor of the Dzerz-inski district of Krivoy Rog, who explained me my rights and advised to turn to the town prosecutor’s office, as the organ competent in such cases.

Thus, on the basis of Article 10 of the European Convention on the pro-tection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, Article 34 of the Constitu-tion of Ukraine, Article 9 of the Law of Ukraine «On information», Article 26 of the Law of Ukraine «On printed mass media (the press) in Ukraine», the Law of Ukraine «On the introduction of changes to some legal acts of Ukraine concerning the questions of guaranteeing and unhampered realization of citi-zens’ right for the freedom of speech», I am asking you to take the appropriate measures for the realization of my professional journalist’s right to obtain the information freely at the sessions of the town council, in particular, at the ses-sion of 28 May 2003».

The appeal was supplemented with 10 materials, including the copies of the article «Who needs the journalists of the opposition mass media to be per-

70

sonas non grata at the sessions of the Krivoy Rog town council?» published by the newspaper «Krivoy Rog vecherniy».

On the day of the beginning of the session the journalist handed another appeal to the town prosecutor, from which one can learn about the further course of events:

«I have to inform you that, in spite of my appeals to the prosecutor’s of-fice of 26 and 27 May 2003 with the request to prevent the arbitrary actions of the town power impeding my professional journalist’s activities, on 28 May 2003 the law-enforcing organs of the town executive committee did not admit me to session of the town council (at which the town prosecutor was present). I did not receive any written refusals to my written appeal to the mayor of 26 May 2003.

In the connection with the illegal restriction of my right to obtain the in-formation freely at the sessions of the town council of 23 April 2003 and 28 May 2003, I am forced to send the phoned telegram to General Prosecutor of Ukraine S. Piskun and Prime-Minister of Ukraine V. Yanukovich. The text of the telegram is the following:

«As a result of the passivity of the town prosecutor’s office, Krivoy Rog mayor Yu. Lubonenko and M. Shvets, the head of the Dnepropetrovsk oblast state administration, on 28 May 2003 I, a correspondent of the all-Ukrainian weekly «Shliakh Peremogi», was not admitted to the session of the town council. I am asking to direct the special commission of the General Prosecu-tor’s office, which commission will include the representatives of the interna-tional organization «Reporters without frontiers», for studying the problem and for fighting with the violations of the freedom of speech in the Krivoy Rog region».

The responses to the V. Krivda’s appeals clearly demonstrate the attitude of the local authorities to the role and rights of independent mass media.

Here are several responses by V. Petrovnin, the executive officer of the town executive committee:

1. 30 April 2003 – To V. Krivda. In response to your letter No. 2205/13 of 22 April 2003 we are informing

that more than 100 editions of town and regional level are registered in Krivoy Rog, several tens of printed mass media are published. The representatives of the majority of Krivoy Rog mass media want to be present at the sessions of the town council, at the sittings of the executive committee and the meetings of various levels. It is rather difficult to satisfy these demands. So, the system is developed, when the representatives of electronic mass media, state and municipal editions are invited first of all. Every journalist has the opportunity to familiarize with the adopted decisions and to obtain the exhaustive information about the course of the sittings or sessions (including the audio version) in the press service of the executive committee. You also may use this opportunity.

2. 20 May 2003 – To V. Krivda.

71

In response to the appeals of 22 April 2003 and 23 April 2003. According to Article 2 of the Law of Ukraine «On the procedure of the

elucidation of the activities of the organs of state power and organs of local self-rule in Ukraine by mass media», «organs of state power and organs of local self-rule are obliged to give to mass media the complete information about their activi-ties through the corresponding informational services of the organs of state power and local self-rule, and to guarantee the free access to this information». The cor-responding informational services of the Krivoy Rog town council and executive committee are represented by the town newspaper «Chervony girnyk» and the TV and radio company «Rudana». You can obtain the exhaustive information about the sessions and sittings of the executive committee of the town council and to familiarize with the adopted decisions in the press service of the town council and the executive committee.

3. 20 May 2003 – To V. Krivda. Copy: to the executive committee of the Krivoy Rog town council In response to the appeal of 23 April 2003. Respected Ms. Krivda! The procedure of the convocation of the sessions of the council, prepara-

tion and consideration of questions, adoption of the decisions concerning the agenda of the sessions and other procedural questions, as well as the order of the work are stipulated by the regulations of the council, which is approved by the deputies of the council and is a normative act of local self-rule.

According to the mentioned regulations, representatives of the press are invited to the sittings of the town council only if necessary. According to the Law of Ukraine «On organs of local self-rule in Ukraine» and the regulations of the Krivoy Rog town council, the propositions on the questions considered by the council may be presented only by the mayor, permanent commissions, deputies, executive committee of the council and the gatherings of citizens.

So, it is clear that Article 19 of the Constitution of Ukraine does not operate in Krivoy Rog: only the actions of the town council are regarded as legal there.

So, the question put by Valentina Krivda in her telegram to Mykola Shvets, the head of the Dnepropetrovsk oblast state administration, seems to be absolutely logical: «… by which motives I did not get the agenda of the day session, was not registered by the press service of informational requests and did get the journal-ist’s accreditation? Who will be responsible, in the accordance with Article 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, for the premeditated impediment to my profes-sional activities?»

M. Korobko, Krivoy Rog («Prava ludyny» (English version), July 2003)

72

Yalta court obliged the officials to render the requested infor-mation to journalists On 13 June 2003 the town court of Yalta considered the civil case on the

complaint of Ragim Gumbatov, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Alu-bika», against the illegal actions of local officials. Gumbatov appealed against the refusal of the officials of the Alupka town council, in particular Alupka mayor Valeriy Andyk, to render information to journalists.

In December 2002 the Yalta court took the similar decision, but defen-dant V. Andyk appealed this decision in the second court instance, and the Appeal court of the Crimea directed the case to the court of first instance for another consideration.

The decision the Yalta town court obliged Alupka mayor Valeriy Andyk to render the needed information to journalist Ragim Gumbatov. The court de-cision will come into effect in a month. The editor was represented in court by Arsen Osmanov, a lawyer of the Committee on the monitoring of the freedom of speech in the Crimea.

The Committee on the monitoring of the freedom of speech in the Crimea, kommon@home.cris.net

(«Prava ludyny», 7, 2003, July)

A court prohibited video and audio recording (Kirovograd) The editorial board of the Kirovograd newspaper «Prosto gazeta» re-

ceived a very interesting document from one of its readers. A Kirovograd dweller, which was a plaintiff at one of court sittings, invited representatives of mass media to the trial. Yet, the audio recording and photography in the courtroom were prohibited. The claimant turned to the court with the petition about journalists’ rights and got the resolution concerning the rights for pho-tography, audio and video recording during the court sitting.

The resolution reads: «The court decided that there were no grounds for the satisfaction of this petition, since the claimant had no concern with the journalists, who wanted to carry out the recording and whose rights were alleg-edly violated. This case is not interesting for public».

Well, this is a rather peculiar approach to the freedom of speech! Is it possible that mass media may publish the materials about some events

only after the court resolution about the public interest of these events? Is not it clear that the prohibition of photography, audio and video recording violates the operating laws and impedes the work of the representatives of mass media? (http://maidan.org.ua/n/news/1061987521, «Prava ludyny» (English version), August 2003)

73

Krivoy Rog town council does not want to recognize journalists Valentina Krivda and Natalya Sokurenko 7 August 2003. The IMI got the appeal from the Initiative Group of in-

dependent journalists of Krivoy Rog, who complained against the illegal actions of local authorities. According to the words of journalists Valentina Krivda and Natalya Sokurenko, they are not admitted to the sessions of the town council and have no real access to documents. «This is a direct impediment to the pro-fessional activities of journalists», the appeal reads. Three journalists handed the claims to the town prosecutor’s office about the institution of criminal cases in the accordance with Article 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine after the fact that on 9 July 2003 they had not been admitted to the session of the Krivoy Rog town council.

(Barometr)

74

* * * Mykola Korobko, Krivoy Rog:The Krivoy Rog town authorities began the reluctant and muddled retreat

before the unexpectedly massive public support of the demands presented by journalist Valentina Krivda. The initiator of this just indignation stubbornly strives for the cancellation of Article 13 of the Regulations on the work of the town council and for the free access to the sessions of the town council for the rep-resentatives of mass media independently of their political orientation and their proximity to the power. Valentina Krivda, being a victim of such dis-crimination of journalists, during five months turned to all agencies connected with the work of mass media. This campaign attracted the attention of public to the case.

More than ten publications appeared in local mass media, bulletin «Prava ludyny» published by the Kharkov group for human rights protection also com-mented on this case, the collection of signatures began under the motto «Render the freedom of speech to Krivoy Rog!»

Almost 500 signatures of Krivoy Rog dwellers were presented to town mayor Yuri Lubonenko. The responses of various officials to the informational requests of V. Krivda confirmed the groundlessness of the attempts of the town power to prevent her presence at the sessions of the town council.

Besides, in the beginning of June of the current year O. Kovalkova, a deputy of the head of the Dnepropetrovsk oblast directorate of justice, communicated the following (letter No. 04-5/1840 of 1 July 2003): «After the juridical analysis of the above-mentioned laws and other operating normative-legal acts, which con-cern your question, we came to the conclusion that there existed no operating normative-legal acts containing the norm, according to which any physical or ju-ridical person had the authority «to establish the necessity of the presence of the representatives of state organs, district councils, political parties, other public or-ganizations, labor collectives, press and TV at the sittings of the town council or permanently working commissions…»«

Yet, the Regulations on the work of the town council are just the act, which prevents the appearance of independent journalists in the session hall!

So, under the pressure of the irrefutable proofs of the absence of any le-gal grounds for ousting the journalists from the important social mission, the town power began to manipulate with the accreditation of journalist V. Krivda. Despite the numerous attempts of the all-Ukrainian weekly «Shliakh Peremogi» to achieve the accreditation of its correspondent, V. Petrovnin, the executive officer of the executive committee, continues to «explain» that «the accreditation of a journalist in the organs of local self-rule is realized on the basis of the official ap-peal handed by the mass medium to the corresponding organ or on the basis of the appeal of the journalist, who must present the proper documents confirming their professional status or the recommendations of the professional journalists’ union»

75

(V. Petrovnin’s words). Then V. Petrovnin continued the demonstration of his «legal knowledge». He pointed out: «Your letter reads about the accreditation of your freelance worker V. Krivda, but not a journalist». In this connection M. Makar, the manager of the company «Ukrainska Vydavnicha Spilka» («Ukrainian Union of Publishers»), the founder of the weekly, had to turn to the executive committee of the Krivoy Rog town council, which, without the open participation of the mayor, inflexibly defends the non-transparency of the work of the council. The motives and arguments quoted in the appeal are worthy of note: «… The offi-cial response (outgoing No. 7/31-1528 of 25 July 2003) of V. Petrovnin, the ex-ecutive officer of the executive committee, motivates the refusal in the accredita-tion of our freelance correspondent by the absence of the confirmation of her pro-fessional status. At that, the official interprets the above-mentioned law incorrectly and distorts the provisions of this law».

We want to remind that the Law reads: «… on the basis of the official ap-peal handed by the mass medium» OR «… on the basis of the appeal of the jour-nalist with the confirmation of his professional status». So, these two kinds of the appeals on accreditation are not connected with each other, and a mass medium has the right to accredit in the organs of local self-rule any worker of this media, even a freelance one. Besides, V. Petrovnin’s demonstrates his dense incompe-tence considering the concepts «correspondent» and «journalist» to be absolutely different and stating that the Law concerns only the latter ones… So, taking into account the above-mentioned arguments, we are forced to regard the unmotivated refusal in the accreditation of our correspondent V. Krivda as a brutal violation of the Law of Ukraine «On the procedure of elucidation of the activities of the or-gans of state power and organs of local self-rule in Ukraine by mass media» and impediment to the professional activities of the journalist and mass media by the officials of the organ of state power, in particular, by executive officer V. Petrov-nin».

However, only several journalists were invited by the officials to the July session of the town council (the third one after the beginning of the protest campaign): representatives of the newspaper «Chervony girnyk» (the organ of the town council), municipal TV and radio company «Rudana» and state TV and radio company «Krivorizhzhia». Valentina Krivda, a correspondent of the all-Ukrainian weekly «Shliakh Peremogi», Olena Kostadinova, a deputy of the editor-in-chief of the civil-political newspaper «Pravo», and Natalya Soku-renko, the editor-in-chief of the oblast independent social-political newspaper «Tochka zreniya» and the assistant-consultant of MP Grigoriy Omelchenko, the head of the deputies’ union «Antimafia», were not admitted to the session.

The reaction of the prosecutor’s office to the facts of the impediment to the professional activities of journalists was aimed at the support of the illegal actions of the power and must be investigated additionally. Ivan Chizh, the head of the State committee in charge of TV and radio broadcasting, confirmed in his letter of 1 August 2003 the propriety of V. Krivda’s demands and expressed the

76

gratitude «for the allegiance to principles in the fulfillment of journalist’s profes-sional duties». Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, directed the letter of 11 July 2003 to the Krivoy Rog town council and to the journalists of the editions «Tochka zreniya», «Shliakh Peremogi» and «Pravo». In this letter he refers to the proper laws and reminds that «The accreditation is given according to the administrative procedure, so the provisions on accreditation, issued by the cor-responding power organs, must not introduce any grounds for the refusal in accreditation to the journalists, who presented the needed documents (under-lined by M. Tomenko). The journalists must be accredited. It should be noted that the Law does not envisage any limitations of the number of journalists, who may get the accreditation».

Finally, after several fruitless checks conducted by the demand of V. Krivda, even the prosecutor’s office understood what was the matter of the case. In the letter of 13 June 2003 Krivoy Rog prosecutor V. Kravets, a juridi-cal counselor of the 3rd class, wrote that the subject of V. Krivda’s complaint – the Regulations on the work of the Krivoy Rog town council – agreed with the operating laws. However, two months later the prosecutor’s office had to change its opinion. The above-mentioned letter reads: «According to the Regulations on the work of the Krivoy Rog town council, representatives of state organs, district councils, political parties, other public organizations, la-bor collectives, printed mass media and TV are invited to the sittings of the town council only if necessary. The transparency of the work of the town council is provided by the way of elucidation by TV, radio, printed mass me-dia, in particular, the informational organs of the Krivoy Rog town council and executive committee: the town newspaper «Chervony girnyk» and the TV and radio company «Rudana». The check did not uncover any brutal violations (maybe the prosecutor’s office does not deal with not-brutal violations? – Au-thor’s note) of the laws concerning your right for obtaining the information about the work of the sessions of the town council; so, there no grounds for taking some measures». The letter of the prosecutor’s office of 22 August 2003 signed by the acting prosecutor of Krivoy Rog runs: «According to the results of the check, Ar-ticle 13 of the Regulations on the work of the town council contradicts to the norms of the operating laws. On the recommendations of the Krivoy Rog prosecutor’s office, Article 13 of the Regulations will be brought to accordance with the legal norms. Besides, the working deputies’ group was created at the Krivoy Rog town council. The group prepared the propositions on the proce-dure of the accreditation of representatives of mass media in the town council and the Regulations on the procedure of elucidating the work of the town council and its executive organs. The mentioned documents will be presented for the consideration to the deputies of the town council in August 2003». The last paragraph of the letter promises another iteration of the exhaustive red tape, since the town authorities will do their best to dodge from the transpar-

77

ency, one of the main principles, on which, according to the Law of Ukraine «On local self-rule in Ukraine», the local self-rule is based. We are sure that the drafts of the changes, which are inaccessible for the public, will be directed to-wards the preservation of the opacity of the existing local normative base con-nected with the accreditation of journalists.

(«Prava ludyny» (English version), August 2003)

Official correspondence with militia Tatiana Kolisnychenko, Khmelnitskiy: The official correspondence seems to be a tedious affair. Yet, our correspon-

dence was very interesting. Since it is extremely difficult to obtain any informa-tion from some state organizations and agencies, our newspaper decided to resort to the epistolary method.

However, the officials did not want to give us the information, although they had to do that within a month. Some answers filled us with indignation. For in-stance, we put an innocent question to the oblast directorate of interior. The matter is that the tenth session of the Khmelnitskiy oblast council permitted this director-ate to reconstruct the building, where the special squad «Berkut» was located, and to make there the flats for militiamen. We wanted to learn how much this recon-struction would cost, who would get the flats in the building, how many militia-men were waiting for flats and to where «Berkut» would be moved. We hoped that the state structure, which is financed from budget (that is at the expense of taxpayers), would not conceal this information. Yet, our hopes were not justified.

Either the militia directorate decided to brush aside our «journalistic games», or this agency is not interested in the transparency of its activities, but we got the following answer: «The building of apartment houses (what houses they meant?) and their reconstruction by the directorate of interior is carried out in compliance with the operating laws…» And that is all. Well, the answer is rather indistinct.

Yet, everything is correct from juridical viewpoint. The militia authorities dispatched this letter within the term stipulated by law, a month after our request. Everything is correct, but it looks that we were crudely swindled.

We have the right to appeal against this response to a higher instance, and later – to a court. And we will use this right. Maybe then the directorate will let us into its secrets?

(Social-political weekly «E!», No. 27, 2003; «Prava ludyny» (Ukrainian version), No. 25, 1-15 September 2003)

Radio «Roks» is jammed 3 October 2003. «The transmissions of the sessions of the Supreme Rada

of Ukraine by the radio company «Roks» are jammed», declared MP Viktor Teren during the discussion by the Supreme Rada of the questions of elucida-tion of the fourth session of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine.

78

Vitaliy Shevchenko, the technical manager of the radio company, con-firmed that really, beginning from Tuesday, there had been some problems during the transmission of the sessions, but the reasons of these problems were not ascertained yet. «We obtain the high-quality signal from the Supreme Rada, and our equipment is good. We will try to clear up the reasons».

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

Lilia Budjurova – Olena Gromnytska: the informational conflict 7 October 2003. The Crimean Association of independent journalists

published the appeal, in which the journalists expressed «the categorical protest against the actions of the press service of the President of Ukraine and his sec-retary Olena Gromnytska, who impede the professional activities of journal-ists». The appeal was caused by the annulment of the accreditation to the confer-ence «Ukraine-EC» of Crimean journalist Lilia Budjurova.

In particular, the appeal reads: «On 6 October, in Simferopol, in thecourse of the official action with the participation of Leonid Kuchma, the pres-sure was exerted on journalist Lilia Budjurova on the side of the workers of President’s press service and secretary Gromnytska». According to the infor-mation given by the authors of the appeal, the press secretary of the President «emphatically advised to the journalist to refrain from the questions about the situation around the one-sided actions of Russia in the Kerch Bay».

The Crimean Association of independent journalists also stated that «the restriction of the freedom of the press on the side of President’s press service has become a common practice lately». «Such methods of work of the press service is not only an inadmissible precedent for the country, which calls itself European, but also an encroachment on the constitutional right of citizens for obtaining the information», reads the appeal.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

Newspaper «Kremenchugskiy telegraf» published the appeal on the impediment to the professional activities of journalists 16 October 2003. The newspaper «Kremenchugskiy telegraf» pub-

lished the appeal on the impediment to the professional activities of journal-ists. The authors of the appeal insist that on 15 October 2003 Kremenchug MP Vasyl Gavriliuk (the group «Narodovladdia») held the meeting with voters in the 4th town hospital of Kremenchug. Journalists of the newspaper «Kremenchugskiy telegraf», TV company «Alliur» and radio «Europe plus Kremenchug» were not admitted to the meeting. By the initiative of MP Gavriliuk and Bereza, a deputy head of the town health department, the in-dependent journalists got the order to leave the room. Only the workers of state mass media were let to the meeting», inform the journalists.

79

MP Vasyl Gavriliuk refuted the appeal of «Kremenchugskiy telegraf». According to his words, «The schedule of the meeting did not envisage any press conference, and nobody informed that the MP planned to meet with the representatives of mass media. After the meeting with the collective of the hospital V. Gavriliuk was invited to the office of the head physician. Journalists followed him, since the representative of «Kremenchugskiy tele-graf» demanded to conduct the press conference. The journalists were driven away from the office. The information that representatives of state mass media remained in the room is not true, since I did not plan to communi-cate with journalists at all… In our opinion, the journalist of the newspaper «Kremenchugskiy telegraf» incorrectly informed his editor that the press conference was planned and he was not admitted there», reads the letter sent by MP Gavriliuk to the IMI.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

* * * Sergiy Kuliasov, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Kremenchugskiy

telegraf»: Respected colleagues! On 15 October 2003 MP Vasyl Gavriliuk (the group «Narodovladdia»)

held the meeting with voters in the 4th town hospital of Kremenchug. The meeting was timed to the rendering of medical equipment to the hospital. The organizers of the meeting informed about the action only the state mass media: newspaper of the town council «Visnyk Kremenchuga», oblast TV and radio company «Ltava», town radio company and the regional radio company «Era».

Representatives of independent mass media (newspaper «Kremenchugskiy telegraf», TV and radio company «Allur», radio company «Europe plus Kremen-chug»), who came to the official action, had no opportunity to communi-cate with MP Gavriliuk. By the initiative of MP Gavriliuk and Bereza, a deputy head of the town health department, the independent journalists were driven out from the room. Only the workers of state mass media got the permission to be present at the meeting.

We reckon that, as a result of this politics, the readers of independent mass media lost the chance to get the needed information, although the voters have the right to know about the work and plans of their MPs. Thus, we believe that the right for information was violated.

The letter of the press service of MP Vasyl Gavriliuk: On 16 October of the current year the appeal of the editor-in-chief of the

newspaper «Kremenchugskiy telegraf» concerning the violation of the right for information was published on the Internet-site of the Institute of mass in-formation. We deeply respect, observe and realize the right of citizens for infor-

80

mation, so we consider necessary to communicate that the information given in the appeal by Mr. Kuliasov, do not represent the facts.

Really, on 15 October, at 16:00 the meeting of MP Vasyl Gavriliuk with the collective of the 4th town hospital of Kremenchug was held. The MP planned to pass the medical equipment to the hospital and to inform the voters-medics about the peculiarities of the draft of the State budget of Ukraine-2004 concerning, in particular, the financing of medical sphere.

The statement of Mr. Kuliasov that only state mass media were invited to the meting is not true. Along with the mentioned state mass media, representatives of PRIVATE TV company «Visit» and magazine «AVtograf» (also privately owned) were invited. Andrey Voytenko, the head physician of the 4th hospital, told us that he had informed about the meeting all mass media, to which he had time to phone. We know that the journalists of the radio company «Europe plus Kremenchug» got the information about the meeting from their colleagues from the TRC «Ltava». Representatives of «Europe plus Kremenchug» came to the meeting, as well as a journalist of the independent newspaper «Kremenchugskiy telegraf». They were present there until the end of the meeting, and nobody hampered the fulfillment of their professional duties. As a result, the information about the rendering of the medical equipment to the hospital was made public by «Europe plus Kremenchug» on 16 and 17 October.

In our opinion, the journalist of the newspaper «Kremenchugskiy tele-graf» incorrectly informed his editor that the press conference was planned and he was not admitted there. We are surprised with the fact that Mr. Ku-liasov, who calls himself the representative of the Supreme Rada Commit-tee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, published the subjec-tive information, based only on the words of his journalist. In general, we have the reasons to believe that this was not a simple journalistic mistake, but a part of the political struggle carried out by some political forces against MP V. Gavriliuk, the struggle that has essentially intensified lately. The IMI is known and a source of unbiased and true information, so we are asking you to spread the statement of the press service of MP Gavriliuk, which should be regarded as a refutation of the information given by S. Kuliasov.

Larisa Artemenko, a correspondent of the newspaper «Kremenchugskiy telegraf»:

On 15 October 2003 I got the task from the editorial board to elucidate the meeting of MP Vasyl Gavriliuk with the collective of the 4th town hospital of Kremenchug, which was conducted on the same day. As far as I know, the editorial board of «Telegraf» did not receive either the official notifica-tion about the meeting or the invitation to this action. We learned about the meeting from our colleagues.

81

During the official part of the action the MP delivered a traditional speech, which contained nothing new or interesting. Rendering of medical equipment to the hospital is a significant event in the life of the town. So, we wanted to learn how the MP managed to do that, as well as to get the answers to other questions concerning the activities of the deputy. After the end of the official part the MP, administration of the hospital, representa-tives of the town health department and journalists went to the office of the head physician. However, I and my colleagues from radio company «Europe plus Kremenchug» were proposed to leave the office. Representa-tives of the newspaper of the town council, town radio and oblast TV com-pany remained in the room.

It seems to me that the politician did not want the press to publish any information except his official statements. So, the readers obtained the in-complete information, which characterized the MP only positively. I be-lieve, that the right of voters for thorough and unbiased information was violated.

Oleg Bulashev, the TRC «Allur», radio company «Europe plus Kremen-chug»:

I learned about the meeting of MP Vasyl Gavriliuk with his voters from my colleagues from the oblast TV and radio company «Ltava». Naturally, the informational service of the TRC «Allur» and radio «Europe plus Kremen-chug» could not ignore this action, so they sent me, their correspondent, to the meeting. In the course of the meeting a number of questions emerged, and I wanted to get the answers from Mr. Gavriliuk. Yet, I could not do that. Imme-diately after the meeting he, together with the head physician of the 4th hospi-tal and a deputy head of the town health department, went to the office of the head physician and invited there the journalists from the oblast state TV com-pany. The journalists from the newspaper «Visnyk Kremenchuga» (published by the town council) and the town radio company also followed them. I went there too, but was forced to leave the office, unlike the representatives of state mass media.

(«The Poltava oblast media bulletin», No. 51. 18 October 2003)

Mykhaylo Bublik. On «temniks» The Ukrainian power lost the «humane face» long ago, but all the same

our state officials want to look civilized in the opinion of the West. For that they must permanently demonstrate the devotion to the Western standards, in particular, in the sphere of informational policy, where our authorities are do-ing their best to be the worthy stalwarts of their precursors: they do their best to prove that censorship does not exist in our country.

In my opinion, the «intellectuals» from Leonid Kuchma’s Administration should better invent some reasons for the existence of censorship than to deny the obvious facts. Yet, they must take into account the opinion of Europe. So the authorities found the clever move. When they were blamed for distribution

82

«temniks», they took this occasion. Now, every time when the power is accused of the application of censorship, the top officials begin to speak about «temniks»: that they has not sign any «temniks» and these documents do not exist at all –this is an invention of the guileful opposition. All this is very interesting, but I cannot understand – whom they want to fool in such primitive way, especially in the country, where laws are almost officially replaced by corruption and the «phone right»?

It is very easy to prove the existence of the concealed censorship, for exam-ple, by analyzing the contents of the Ukrainian TV channels.

Thanks God (or Europe?), sometimes we can see the opposition politicians on our TV screens, and sometimes they are permitted to say several words (care-fully isolated from the context). So, the TV officials have the grounds to say now and then that they show the opposition frequently, maybe even more frequently than the President. In the provinces the power do not allow even such small de-gree of freedom. Everybody, whose attitude to the power is negative, has no op-portunity at all to appear in the air or in the state editions.

In what follows I want to describe one of the last examples of the provincial freedom of the press.

Several days ago Oleksiy Danilov, the head of the oblast election headquar-ters of «Our Ukraine», conducted his first press conference in Lugansk. The very fact that the patriotic force, which won the last election, shows itself in the «red» East Ukraine should draw the attention of journalists and local population. Be-sides, Danilov is a very popular person in Lugansk: in 1994-98 he was a mayor; in October 1997 he lost his post as a result of the first Ukrainian «putsch» organized by the oblast power. Today the serious sociologists assert that he had to gain the absolute victory at the last election of the Lugansk mayor. The authorities under-stood that too, so they disposed of Danilov using the controlled court.

Journalists were very interested in the meeting. According to the estimate of press secretary of the headquarters Tatiana Kovtun, representatives of 26 news-papers, radio stations and TV channels came to the press conference, not to mention the representatives of the political parties and public organizations. The questions put to Danilov also did not evidence the indifference of the audience, al-though some of these questions seemed to be strange, such as: «How Yu-shchenko, who declares himself to be an enemy of Russia, feels in the pro-Russian region?» It should be noted that the majority of the participants, even those, who represented the social-democratic editions, showed no hostility either to «Our Ukraine» or to its representative. However, their bosses evinced such hostility in full measure. Neither on this day nor on the next one any TV channel mentioned the press conference. Most of the local newspapers are issued on Wednesdays, but only one of them dared to elucidate the meeting of the press with the former mayor. I believe that everybody understands that this edition does not maintain friendly relations with the power. By the moment of our talk Tatiana Kovtun look through almost all newspapers, except one or two.

83

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 187, 8 October 2003)

Ukraine can lose many central daily newspapers at the height of the presidential election campaign. «Ukrpochta» cannot guarantee the everyday delivery of periodicals According to the statistics, ten years ago every Ukrainian family was sub-

scribed to 3-5 editions. Now this number is about 0.5. Yet, even this negligible figure is tending to zero. This is a real index of the freedom of speech in the country.

This situation is caused not by «temniks», about which the journalists com-plain, not by editorial or internal censorship, which exists in any creative collec-tive, and not the dictatorship of financial-political groups, which sponsor most of editions and have the opportunity to influence them. Even the coming presidential election has no connection with this.

Everything is very simple and, unfortunately, inevitable. The readers in prov-inces cannot subscribe to the editions published in Kyiv, although these editions are sometimes sold in newsstands. The main reason of the reduction of the sub-scription is that the prepaid editions are delivered to the readers with the catastro-phic delay. As a result, the readers refuse to prolong the contract for the delivery, and the editorial boards bear enormous losses, since they get a profit (which al-lows to publish the mass media) at the expense of the permanent subscribers. Yet, the readers do not want to waste the considerable sums for receiving the out-of-date information. The only way out is to refuse from the subscription. And the re-gional readers of the newspapers published in Kyiv are doing so, regardless of whether the edition supports the opposition or the power: the readers of the edi-tions of both directions are equally disappointed. Almost all central newspapers got under these heavy conditions. They are forced to shorten the runs in order to prevent the tremendous losses. The circle of readers of the all-Ukrainian newspa-pers is steadily reducing to the Kyiv dwellers. As a result, the chance of the newspapers to survive without the financial aid of their subscribers is decreasing too.

The only guilty of the situation, when the daily newspapers are close to bankruptcy, and the society is on the verge of informational blockade, is the state enterprise «Ukrpochta». This enterprise is the monopolist in the sphere of snail-mail services and distribution of periodicals. So, irrespectively of the wish of jour-nalistic collectives, the lot of all-Ukrainian daily newspapers and weeklies de-pends of this enterprise, that is on the prices for delivery established by «Ukrpochta» and on the quality of the fulfillment of the main task of post distribu-tors: to deliver the correspondence as fast as possible.

The enterprise is reorganized now. The essence of this reorganization is the reduction of structural departments delivering the periodicals.

Six months ago the insignificant reduction of post delivery centers resulted in the loss of tens thousands of subscribers. And the experiment of «Ukrpochta»,

84

which will begin on 1 November, can cause the decrease of the number of all-Ukrainian periodicals for 80%! Regional readers will not receive these editions, at best they will be delivered only to Kyiv dwellers. Maybe, this is the main goal: to destroy the state system of distribution of periodicals, which will finally result in the natural death of independent press? And this goal will be achieved without any censorship, court proceedings, political and administrative pressure. All editions will get under this press: oppositional, pro-President, Russian and party newspapers, as well as the printed organs of the Supreme Rada and the Cabinet of Ministers. All of them are dependent of «Ukrpochta». This enter-prise equalized all editions in the chance to be ignored. Certainly, it is advanta-geous for somebody on the eve of the coming presidential election.

Probably, when it would be already impossible to improve the situation, the clamor would be raised about the absence of the freedom of speech in Ukraine, and our valiant MPs would tell in Europe about the terrible conditions, under which our journalists work.

Maybe somebody would fight for the rights of readers? After all they have the right to know what happens in the country…

Aleksandr Shvets, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Fakty»: «The freedom of speech is suffocated in Ukraine. And I do not think that

this statement is too harsh. The reorganization of the structure of «Ukrpochta» softly pushes the regional readers away from the central newspapers and maga-zines, which are mostly more professional and well-informed than the local press.»

Igor Lubchenko, the Chairman of the National union of journalists of Ukraine:

«This is a very actual and acute problem for the printed mass media and, first of all, for the subscribers and readers of newspapers and magazines.

The experiments of «Ukrpochta» can result in the liquidation of central newspapers. Naturally, it is inexpedient to pay money for the edition, which is is-sued five times per week, but is delivered only one or two times per week. Yet, the statements about the newsstands are somewhat optimistic. I know from my own experience that the newsstands in many district centers sell only weeklies and monthlies – this is more convenient, because a daily newspaper MUST BE SOLD ON THE DAY OF PUBLICATION.

The check of the activities of «Ukrpochta» is conducted now by the de-mand of the National union of journalists of Ukraine. Let us wait for the results of this check. Yet, I can say even today that we have the categorical objections to any experiments, which will impede the everyday delivery of the press to the sub-scribers».

(«Fakty», No. 201, 31 October 2003)

85

Absence of information is information too. Viktor Medvedchuk, whose name associates with the word «temnik», disappeared from «temniks» and TV screens This conclusion was made by the experts of the Academy of the Ukrain-

ian press and the Institute of sociology of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences. Every first week of every month the experts monitor the contents of six basic all-Ukrainian TV channels: «YT-1», «1+1», «Inter», «Novy kanal», «ICTV» and «STB».

Yet, this conclusion is the only «sensation» of the monitoring. Everything else is quite usual:

– all TV channels have the similar «agenda»; – there are very few references to the sources of information; – the alternative viewpoints are absent in the majority of news; – the news are biased. This opinion was expressed by Valeriy Ivanov, the president of the Acad-

emy of the Ukrainian press, after the November monitoring of TV channels. A month ago Makeev wrote that news of the Ukrainian TV channels were

the news «about state officials and organizations of officials» got from the same officials.

Naturally, the situation has not changed during the month: the «great poli-tics» demonstrated on the TV screens is rather the politics of state institutions and persons than the politics of parties and fractions.

There is only one change: in November the center of attention shifted from the President (18.5%) to the Supreme Rada (21.2%). At that the fre-quency of mentions of the latter increased almost twice (in October this num-ber was 11.8%).

The second place in the rating of mentioning is occupied by the force structures (20.9% of messages). Maybe that happened because of the replace-ment of the General Prosecutor and the attempt at Kisel, and maybe the USS and militia are active newsmakers.

As to the mentioning of individual political figures, the current situation in Ukraine changed this proportion very much in November.

It is known that the active resistance to the conduction of the forums of «Our Ukraine» was observed in the beginning of the past month, and this fact caused the corresponding response of the opposition in the Supreme Rada. There were also some troubles connected with the appointments of new Gen-eral Prosecutor and vice-speaker; scandal in the Union of writers; release from custody of Pukach, the witness in Gongadze’s case, and the explosion of the car of gangster Kisel.

So, the political pattern of the news may be described as follows: 1) Ukrainian-Russian relations/ Tuzla Peninsula – 6% (the main event);

86

2) Current events in the Supreme Rada/crisis in the Supreme Rada –5.2%;

3) Explosion of Kisel’s car – 3.7%; 4) Political reform – 3.5%; 5) Conflict in the Union of writers – 2.7%; 6) Appointment of new General Prosecutor – 2.5%; 7) Events in Donetsk – 2.2%; 8) Actions of 7 November – 2.2%; 9) Gongadze’s case – 0.5%. These events, in the opinion of experts, are the basic ones and make from

22% to 40% of all news about Ukraine. Thus, in spite of the attempts of opposition to stress on the importance of

the Donetsk events for democracy in our country, all six TV channels repre-sented these events as something local and insignificant, connected only with «Our Ukraine».

Speaker Volodymir Litvin became the leader of the personal rating in the beginning of the month (13.7%). One of his remarks was: «Continue to block, if you want!». This remark was addressed to the members of opposition, who blocked the rostrum in Parliament.

The second place was given to Raisa Bogatyriova with her ardent speech: «Donetsk oblast is a hospitable land. When people come to us with open heart, we are always happy. But if the intentions are bad – the Donetsk is severe».

Yushchenko got only 3.1%. His propositions: «The first step – to listen to the information of the ministers of force structures and of education. The sec-ond step – to form a special investigating commission. The third step – to con-duct the closed sitting of the Supreme Rada on the political situation».

As always, journalists were interested in the opinions of coordinator of the majority Stepan Gavrish – 5.6%; leader of communists Petro Simonenko – 5.2%; communist Sergiy Kriuchkov – 4.6%; member of the social-democratic party Nestor Shufrich – 4.4%; Oleksandr Volkov – 3.5% and President’s rep-resentative Oleksandr Zadorozhny – 2.8%. The floor was also given to some other representatives of the opposition: leader of socialists Oleksandr Moroz (2.7%); members of «Our Ukraine» Yuri Kostenko and Igor Ostash (2.7% each) and socialist Valentina Semeniuk (2.6%).

All in all, the opposition managed, for the first time during many months, to run the informational blockade. The share of the attention to the opposition increased up to one third on all TV channels except «YT-1». Yet, such «in-formational progress» is not so good as it seems: almost all information about the opposition was negative.

The greatest amount of ironical or negative information concerned «Our Ukraine» (7.2%).

Along with Yushchenko’s block, the TV channels also mentioned the fol-lowing political parties:

87

CPU – 6.2% positive or neutral mentioning and 1.3% ironical-negative; PPU-TU – 1.3% and 0%, respectively; SDPU (u) – 4.5% and 0.8%; Regions of Ukraine – 5.5% and 0%; SPU – 5.0% and 1.5%; Yulia Timoshenko’s Bloc – 2.0% and 0.5%; PNP – 1% and 0%. As to the political figures, Bogatyriova and Grishchenko were repre-

sented neutrally; Yanukovich, Simonenko, Gavrish and Litvin – almost neu-trally; Vasylyev, Yushchenko and Moroz – negatively.

In general, the news are biased. In comparison with October, in Novem-ber the part of such «one-sided» news has become greater – 84%. 93% of news on «YT-1» reflect only one point of view. The corresponding numbers for other channels are: «Inter» – 88%, «ICTV» – 83%, «1+1» – 81%, «Novy kanal» – 79% and «STB» – 73%.

And last but not least. Now the topic of coming Presidential election be-comes more and more popular. At the same time, the proportion of «good» news also increases, especially on «YT-1» and «Inter» – more than 40%.

Maybe, this is a coincidence? Or we will copy the situation that formed in Russia before the election, when it seemed that all criminals were caught and the ruling party was doing its best to improve the life of people?

(«Ukrainska Pravda», 9 December 2003)

Coercive subscription to the state and communal editionsin the Vinnitsa oblast Our governor Viktor Kotsemir knows only two types of newspapers:

«correct» and «opposition». In his letter No. 01-1-43-5903 of 14 November 2003 the governor wrote:

«I ask to guarantee the subscription for state and communal oblast editions at your enterprise…» This looks as an entreaty, is not it? But the phrase «I ask to report about the fulfillment of this errand to the control department of the oblast state administration before 1 December 2003» does not looks so.

The newspaper «Podoliya» is at the top of the list of the «correct» news-papers, which are vitally important for a state employee. It is followed by «Vinnichina», «Panorama», «Uriadovy kuryer» and «Golos Ukrainy».

The report must include: the number of copies of all newspapers, to which the organization subscribed, and the number of people working in this organization. Besides, it must be specified how many workers subscribed for these editions individually. The same information must be given about every department of the organization.

(«33 kanal», Vinnitsa, No. 50, 10 December 2003)

88

* * *

Our readers and our colleagues from the districts communicate to us their stories about the coercive subscription. The workers of a post office are forced to subscribe for the communal newspaper «Podoliya». A nurse from Oratov phoned to us and told that the administration of her hospital made the medics to subscribe to the medical newspaper «Medicina Vinnichiny».

The collective of the newspaper of the Barska district administration got the order to subscribe for 15 copies of the newspaper «Podilskiy kray». Well, this is not the end of the joke. The matter is that only 10 persons work in the newspaper.

All these demands are illegal. Do not be afraid to say «no» and to bring a suit against the officials, who abuse their power. We will support you.

Let us struggle together for our only freedom – the freedom in choosing. The newspaper «33 kanal» turns to the directorate in charge of the press and information and to the health directorate of the oblast state administration with the demand to give explanations about this situation.

(«33 kanal», Vinnitsa, No. 43, 22 October 2003)

Journalists were not admitted to the conferenceof the collegium of the oblast administration (Sumy) Oleksiy Zakharchenko: The conference of the collegium of the oblast state administration on the

results of the complex check of the work of town executive committee was held in the town of Konotop, the Sumy oblast. However, journalists of the ma-jority of local editions had the opportunity to observe this conference only from outdoors, since they were not admitted to the building. Only representatives of the newspaper «Konotopskiy kray» and the TRC «Konotop», which are financed from the town budget, were let in.

The Internet edition «Dankor online» states that the officials violated Articles 26 and 34 of the Law of Ukraine «On printed mass media (the press) in Ukraine» and Article 47 of the Law of Ukraine «On information».

(«Politichna Ukraina», 11 December 2003, www.polit.com.ua)

89

VIOLATIONS OF THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION.

POLITICAL PERSECUTION

Editor of the newspaper «Svoboda» was recognized as guilty of the crime of medium gravity Andrey Lubenskiy, Cherkassy: On 5 February judge of the Sosnovskiy district court of Cherkassy Alla

Chechot proclaimed the verdict on the case of Oleg Liashko, the editor of the newspaper «Svoboda».

Oleg Liashko was accused of the resistance to the militiamen committed in the spring of last year during the search in the Cherkassy printing shop «Re-spublika», when the prosecutor’s office of the Cherkassy oblast seized the en-tire run (100,000 copies) of the newly printed newspaper.

The court recognized Liashko as guilty of crime of «medium gravity» – resistance to law-enforcers – and obliged him to pay a fine of 255 UAH. Yet, taking into account the fact that Oleg Liashko has positive characteristics, has permanent place of residence and work, conducts public activities and «lost the social danger», the court decided to free him from the responsibility.

According to the information of mass media, on the eve of the mentioned incident in «Respublika», the run of «Svoboda» devoted to the parliamentary election and containing the compromising materials about General Prosecutor Mikhail Potebenko was sunk in the river by the unknown criminals, who at-tacked the truck belonging to the printing shop. The next day Liashko went to Cherkassy to control the repeated printing of the run. The criminals were not found, and O. Lishko, who tried to prevent the illegal seizure of the run, was brought at first to the preliminary prison, where he spent nine days, and then to the court.

During the trial the witnesses for the prosecution were interrogated – of-ficers of the prosecutor’s office and militia, who alleged that Lishko inflicted to them the moral, material and physical damage. Workers of the printing shop and journalists were interrogated as witnesses for the defense. They asserted that Liashko did not commit any unlawful actions.

The judges viewed the militia video record from the place of the incident twice. The record also did not confirm the evidence of the militiamen, who al-legedly suffered from Liashko. Yet, judge Chechot reckoned the record as confirming the theses of the prosecution.

90

The verdict also reads that Oleg Liashko’s guilt is corroborated by the numerous reports of state officials and by prosecutor’s resolution, and the evi-dences of the witnesses for the defense «are biased».

After the trial Oleg Liashko expressed his categorical disagreement with the «unlawful», in his opinion» verdict. «I was acknowledged guilty of com-mitting the crime, which I did not commit», he declared.

Bogdan Fernts, the advocate of O. Lishko stated that the verdict was «ab-solutely illegal», «contained logical contradictions» and would be appealed in the Appeal court in the nearest future.

«Prava Ludyny», No. 2, February, 2003

The Appeal court of the Cherkassy oblast did not changethe verdict on Oleg Liashko’s case The Appeal court of the Cherkassy oblast considered the appeal handed

by Oleg Liashko, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Svoboda», and his ad-vocate Bogdan Ferents. The court did not change the verdict issued in Febru-ary 2003 by the Sosnovskiy district court of Cherkassy. LIGABiznesInform got this information from the all-Ukrainian youth organization «Molod – nadiya Ukrainy» («Youth is a hope of Ukraine»).

On 5 February 2003 the Sosnovskiy district court of Cherkassy brought in a verdict of guilty against Oleg Liashko. Liashko was accused of the physi-cal resistance to the officers of militia and prosecutor’s office during the search in the printing shop «Respublika» (part 2 Article 342 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).

On the eve of this search the truck of the printing shop, which transported the 107-thousand run of the newspaper «Svoboda» to Kyiv», was robbed by strangers, who drowned the run in the river. The next day the run was printed again, but it was confiscated by prosecutor’s officers. This run, in particular, contained the materials that concerned General Prosecutor Mykhaylo Pote-benko.

Ukrainian Network of business information, http://www.liga.net «Prava Ludyny», No.5, May, 2003

Who dares to protest against the Iraq war? Irina Chornobay, «Politichna Ukraina»: A lecturer of the university expected that she would have the problems as

a result of public expression of her opinions. And she was not mistaking. On 26 March Lugansk dweller N. Prishchepa, a lecturer of the West-

Ukrainian national university, published in the newspaper «Novy rakurs» her open letter to the President and MPs. In this letter she protested against the war in Iraq and against sending the Ukrainian battalion of radiochemical protection to Kuwait. In particular, Prishchepa stated in the letter: «I clearly understand that this step will entail the negative consequences, taking into account the modern state of human rights and the freedom of expression in our country».

91

Really, in the very day of the publication of the newspaper she understood that her phone was wiretapped. She turned to the militia precinct and wrote the ap-peal to general-mayor Vykhodets, the head of the town militia directorate. The law-enforcers promised to check her complaint. The university administration hinted that they would «examine» whether she deserved to teach students.

N. Prishchepa told about this at the protest meeting against the Iraq war. MP Sergiy Gmyria, who was present at the meeting, believes that such meet-ings are attended, as a rule, by pensioners or unemployed, which is a feature of non-democratic society, since those, who have jobs, are afraid to be fired be-cause of their participation in protest actions.

This situation, which qualitatively characterizes the state of the freedom of speech in the Lugansk oblast, was described by two oblast newspapers.

«Prava Ludyny», No. 4, April, 2003

The publications on President’s connection with the murderof G. Gongadze are interpreted as meddling into President’s activitiesOn 31 March an official from the prosecutor’s office of Kremenchug

came to the editorial board of the newspaper «Informbulleten». The official explained his visit in the following way: since the newspaper had published many materials about Gongadze’s case, Tamara Prosianik, the editor-in-chief, had to be interrogated as a witness in accordance with the order of the General Prosecutor’s office. In particular, in the connection with the article «Million dollars for the head of Georgiy Gongadze!» by T. Prosianik published on 5 December 2002. The material describes the press conference of Shokhin, a deputy of the General Prosecutor, at which he, among all, uttered the follow-ing version of Gongadze’s death: he went, fell and broke his head. Besides, Mr. Shokhin asserted that the case of Gongadze was invented to frame the President. The article also reminded that General Prosecutor of Ukraine Svia-toslav Piskun promised the reward of 1 million USD for the aid in the disclo-sure of this murder. Editor of «Informbulleten» T. Prosianik interprets the situation as an attempt to gag an independent journalist by starting a criminal case against her, although there was nothing new in the publication of 5 De-cember.

T. Prosianik answered the question of a Kremenchug prosecutor’s officer, who asked, why the newspaper had mentioned about the connection between L. Kuchma and Gongadze’s murder. She wrote in her explanation: «The accu-sation of President Kuchma of the disappearance of Gongadze and the order for his murder may be proved by the audio records of major Melnichenko, which were made public by O. Moroz on 28 November 2000 in the Supreme Rada and the integrity and authenticity of which were confirmed by the con-clusion of expert Brus Kenig (USA)».

Ludmila Kucherenko

92

In what follows we present the text of Errand No. 06/2-30016-03/544 of the General Prosecutor’s office of 20 March 2003

THE GENERAL PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE OF UKRAINE 13/15 Riznitska St., Kyiv, 01601 20 March 2003 No. 06/2-30016-03/544

To prosecutor of the Poltava oblast, the state councilor of justice of the 2nd grade M. Gavriliuk

ERRAND(on the basis of Article 118 of the CPC of Ukraine) The General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine investigates criminal case

No. 49-1120 started by the fact of publishing in mass media, brochures and other editions the materials directed at the illegal influence on the President of Ukraine with the purpose to impede the fulfillment by him of his service du-ties, according to part 1 Article 334 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.

It was established that on 5 December 2002 the Kremenchug newspaper «Informatsiyny bulleten» having the run of 4000 copies published the article «Million dollars for the head of Georgiy Gongadze!» written by an unknown author. The article contains the following statement: «Now it is widely known that the murder was ordered, consciously or not, by President Kuchma».

On the basis of the above-said, I ask to recommend to the subordinate of-ficers to ascertain urgently the juridical address of the edition, its heads and founders, as well as the place of their permanent residence, the identity of the author of this article, his/her place of permanent residence and whether the au-thor publishes articles under a pen-name.

Besides, I ask to seize one copy of the newspaper, as well as the manu-scripts of the article and the documents, on which the article was based.

In the course of the fulfillment of this errand I ask to interrogate the edi-tor-in-chief and the executive editor of the newspaper in the connection with the following questions: on the base of which documents the article was pub-lished, who was the initiator, whether the reliability of the information stated in the article was checked and who ordered the publication of the article. To interrogate the authors of the article about obtaining the materials and printing the article.

To conduct other actions, the need of which will appear during the ful-fillment of this errand.

I ask you to send the obtained information to the General Prosecutor’s of-fice of Ukraine.

The additional information may be got by the telephone: (8-044) 290-05-80. Enclosure: decision on 1 page.

93

Sincerely yours, Head of the department of the main investigation directorate, the General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine state councilor of justice of the 3rd grade V. Zherbitsky

94

DECISIONon seizure

Kyiv 17 March 2003

Head of the department in charge of the crimes in the service sphere of the main investigation directorate, General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine, state councilor of justice of the 3rd grade V. Zherbitsky, having considered the materials of criminal case No. 49-1120,

DECIDED:In the course of the investigation of this case the need appeared of seizure

of the documents, which were received by the editorial board and were the base for publishing on 5 December 2002 the article «Million dollars for the head of Georgiy Gongadze!» by an unknown author in the Kremenchug news-paper «Informatsiyny bulleten» with the run of 4000 copies.

The mentioned documents are stored in the editorial board of the newspaper. On the basis of the above-stated, according to Articles 130 and 78 of the

CPC of Ukraine The DECISION was issued: To conduct the seizure from the editorial board of the newspaper «Infor-

matsiyny bulleten» of all documents connected with the publication in this newspaper on 5 December the article by an unknown author «Million dollars for the head of Georgiy Gongadze!» and a copy of the newspaper containing this article.

To send the copy of the decision to the General Prosecutor of Ukraine. V. Zherbitsky The head of the department in charge of the crimes in the service sphere

of the main investigation directorate, General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine, state councilor of justice of the 3rd grade.

«Prava ludyny» commentary: If to interpret Article 344 in the same way, as it is interpreted by the General Prosecutor’s office, then any discussion of any acute question concerning the top state officials may be regarded as a crime. Thus, the interpretation of Article 344 by the General Prosecutor’s of-fice creates a new, very dangerous, precedent, which is a direct attack at the freedom of speech. It seems that our authorities do not want to listen to the strict critics on the side of the world community about the violations of the freedom of speech in Ukraine.

Moreover, the persecutions of Tamara Prosianik, the editor of the news-paper «Informatsiyny bulleten», evidence that the situation with the independ-ent mass media has deteriorated so much that we have almost reached the level of the former USSR.

95

We hope that the Parliamentary Committee in charge of the questions of the freedom of speech and information, as well as the Committee in charge of human rights, national minorities and interethnic relations will consider this case and evaluate it properly.

«Prava Ludyny», No. 3, March, 2003

The prosecutor’s office interrogated editor of «Antenna»Valeriy Vorotnik on the case of anti-President publications Last week the prosecutor’s office of the Cherkassy oblast seized the is-

sues of the Cherkassy newspaper «Antenna» for November and December 2002. The issues contained the publications mentioned in the special order of the General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine. These were several articles re-printed from the newspaper «Grani-plus» written by Tetiana Korobova and one article by a journalist of «Antenna».

Editor-in-chief of «Antenna» Valeriy Vorotnik also informed that on 31 March he was summoned to the oblast prosecutor’s office. He was interro-gated as a witness on the case started by the General Prosecutor’s office after the facts of publication in mass media, brochures and other editions of the ma-terials aimed to impede the fulfillment of service duties and the detriment to the authority of the Ukrainian President and having the insulting and slander-ous character.

Vorotnik turned the attention to the fact that the prosecutor’s office seized the publications of «Antenna», which were mentioned in the «monitoring» of the Ukrainian press. The «monitoring» was sent by Sergey Vasilyev, the head of the main directorate of the informational policy of the Presidential Admini-stration, to Hanna Severinsen, the speaker of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, «as a confirmation that the wide pluralism of opinions exists in the Ukrainian mass media».

The Institute of mass information, 8 April 2003 «Prava Ludyny», No. 4, April, 2003

* * * Our Cherkassy correspondent Petro Sushko informs that the investigation

activities were carried out in Cherkassy in the connection with the criminal case on the publications in the weekly «Antenna» (the article «The President is disturbed by Jews only») and the newspaper «Cherkasska Pravda» (the organ of the oblast organization of the Communist Party of Ukraine). The law-enforcing organs did not conduct searches in the editorial boards of these edi-tions, but the oblast prosecutor’s office expressed the wish to possess the ma-terials concerned with the case. On 31 March the prosecutor’s office of the Cherkassy oblast seized the issues of the newspaper «Antenna» for November and December 2002 containing the publications mentioned in the special er-rand of the General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine. These were several articles re-

96

printed from the newspaper «Grani-plus» and one article by a journalist of «An-tenna». Editor of «Antenna» Valeriy Vorotnik was also interrogated.

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 April, 2003

Five editorial boards are already involved in «Kuchma’s case»: lawyers’ comments The IMI, Kyiv

The General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine started the criminal case after Article 344 part 1 of the CC of Ukraine «Meddling into the activities of the President of Ukraine» on the basis of the publications in mass media. Accord-ing to the IMI data, heads of the editorial boards of five newspapers have been already interrogated in this case. The prosecutor’s officers also seized those is-sues of these newspapers, where the articles devoted to «Kuchma’s case» were printed. Here is the complete list of these editions:

«Informatsiyny bulleten» (Kremenchug) «Cherkasska Pravda» (Cherkassy) «Rivnenskiy Dialog» (Rivne) «Pozitsiya» (Sumy) «Antenna» (Cherkassy) The IMI turns to everybody, who was interrogated in this case or

from whom the printed editions were seized, with the request to inform us about this by the phone 212-19-66 or by e-mail address imi@imi.org.ua

This case may be interpreted as another unprecedented attack at the free-dom of speech and as an attempt to «recompense» the exclusion of the article about libel from the new Criminal Code. This situation excited disturbance and heated debates not only among journalists. In what follows we present the opinions of lawyers about this case.

Maria Sambur, the IMI lawyer: The activities of mass media must be assessed according to the demands

of the Ukrainian Laws «On information» and «On printed mass media (press)». Publications in printed mass media must agree with the demands of Article 46 «Inadmissibility of misuse of the right for information» (Law of Ukraine «On information»), which reads: «Information may not be used for the appeals to overthrow the Constitutional order, breach of the territorial integ-rity of Ukraine, propaganda of war, violence, cruelty, fanning race, national or religious enmity, infringement on rights and freedoms of people».

The information being a state secret or other secret information stipulated by laws may not be divulged. The second group of secret information in-cludes: medical secrets, secrets of money deposits, incomes from entrepreneu-rial activities, adoption of children, correspondence, telephone talks and tele-grams, except the cases envisaged by laws.

This list is exhaustive, and editorial boards, founders, publishers and dis-tributors of mass media must be brought to disciplinary, civil, administrative or criminal responsibility for the concerned violations according to Article 41.

97

Article 344. «M eddling into activities of a state official»: The illegal in-fluence in any form on the President of Ukraine, the Head of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine, an MP of Ukraine, the Prime Minister of Ukraine, a member of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, the ombudsperson or his/her represen-tatives, the Head or a member of the Counting Chamber, the Head or a mem-ber of the Central Voting Commission, the Head of the National Bank of Ukraine, a member of the National Council of Ukraine in charge of TV and radio broadcasting, the Head of the anti-Monopoly Committee of Ukraine, the Head of the Fund of State Property of Ukraine, the Head of the State Commit-tee of TV and radio broadcasting of Ukraine with the aim to prevent the ful-fillment of their service duties or to make them to adopt illegal decisions imply the concrete actions directed at the impediment to the fulfillment of service du-ties by the state official or to the adoption of illegal decisions.

Thus, the publications criticizing the activities of the President of Ukraine may not be interpreted as criminal actions, since the editorial boards and jour-nalists have no goals to influence the adoption of illegal decisions. On the con-trary, mass media accent the attention of the society at the obedience by the state officials to the operating laws and disclose the violations of the legisla-tion. So, the accusation of the journalists of the actions stipulated by Arti-cle 344 may be assessed as an encroachment on the freedom of speech, since the publications in the press are not illegal.

Bogdan Ferents, the manager of the Ukrainian-American juridical com-pany «Ralin Consulting»:

I believe that the institution of this criminal case on the facts of the publi-cations in mass media is absurd. Journalists criticize the activities of the au-thorities, and they have this right, since they are the reflection of the society. Journalists fulfill an important role in the society – they spread information.

As far as I know, editors of printed mass media are interrogated and is-sues of newspapers, in which the articles by Tetiana Korobova were printed, are seized. Yes, Korobova expresses her opinion about the President very harshly, but this is not a crime. If these publications abused honor and dignity of the President, he has the right to turn to court according to the civil proce-dure, and everybody would understand him.

Viktor Boyarov, an assistant professor of the Lawyer Academy of Ukraine, a candidate of law:

In our opinion, Article 344 of the CC of Ukraine envisages the activities (for instance, blackmail) directed at the impediment to the President of Ukraine (in this case) to fulfill his service duties or at adoption by him of ille-gal decisions. The quotation from the article printed in «Informatsiyny bul-leten»: «Now it is widely known that the murder was ordered, consciously or not, by President Kuchma» does not satisfy these conditions. This article was not aimed to impede to the President to fulfill his service duties or to make him to adopt illegal decisions. The author merely expressed the opinion that the President had some connection with the murder of the journalist. These words may be considered by the President only as an insult of his honor and dignity.

98

Well, these actions may hinder the President in the fulfillment of his du-ties to a certain extent, but it may happen only if, for example, he would be of-fended so that he would not be able to work. So, this depends only on his sub-jective attitude both to these publications and to his duties.

Yet, the publication itself does not contain any attempts of illegal influ-ence on the activities of state officials and does not infringe upon the normal work of state organs.

On the other hand, the journalists did not abuse the demands of Article 46 of the Law «On information», which envisages the misuses of the right for in-formation, since until now nobody have refuted the assumption on the authen-ticity of the so-called «Melnichenko’s records», which allegedly contained the talks of the President with other persons about G. Gongadze and which could be interpreted as the order to fulfill the illegal actions against the journalist.

Under such conditions we reckon that the criminal case started by the General Prosecutor’s office must be closed because of the absence of corpus delicti.

«Prava Ludyny», No. 4, April, 2003

«Absurd is real and reality is absurd …» Evhen Zakharov, the Kharkov group for human rights protection: The criminal case started by the General Prosecutor’s office after Arti-

cle 344 means the new phase of the brutal advance against the freedom of the press. Maybe, it is only the first stage: they began from the provincial newspapers and now are waiting for the reaction. If there would not be any reaction, then the authorities would move their activities to the capital, where the unbearable articles by Tetiana Korobova are printed, and to the Internet-editions… It has appeared that the publications about the connection of the President with the disappearance of Gongadze impede his work to such an extent that is interpreted as a crime! So the officials decided to gag in such a manner those, who express their opinions openly!

I think that this criminal case will demonstrate whether the President’s clique and the agencies loyal to him are really neglecting the permanent reproaches of the international institutions about the freedom of speech in Ukraine.

This criminal case is absurd from every aspect. We have already said about its «validity» from the point of view of the operating laws, and from the viewpoint of international legal standards the situation seems to be even clearer. Collection and distribution of any information that is not defined as secret is legal, independ-ently of the motives of its collection and distribution. It is widely known that it is impossible to achieve democracy and the superiority of right without the freedom of collection, possession and distribution of information about everything con-cerning public life on the territory of the state or local communities. The freedom of expression is the foundation of democracy, since only well-informed citizens can hand the power to those, who would realize the power honestly and wisely. At the same time, the freedom of expression is the foundation of the superiority of

99

right, since it is the best method to prevent the violations of right by the corrupted state officials. Every question concerning the domestic or foreign policy must be opened for public discussion, especially in the printed and electronic mass media. The freedom of discussing the controversial and complicated problems is the best stimulus for the government to adopt rational decisions that would be endorsed by the society.

These concepts were more than once confirmed by the practices of the European Court of human rights. The Court frequently quoted in its resolu-tions the fragment of the verdict of 1976 in the Handyside case, which stated that this freedom «may be applied to the «information» or «ideas», which of-fend, shock or annoy the state organs or some part of public. These are the demands of pluralism, tolerance and breadth of views, without which no «de-mocratic society» may exist» [§ 49].

The Court also declared for several times, in particular in the Belgium case Heis and Heisels, which concerned the admissibility of publishing ex-tremely critical opinions about functioning of courts, that «it is necessary to keep in mind that Article 10 protects not only the contents of the ideas and in-formation, but also methods of their expression» [§ 48].

Even if to assume that this meddling into the freedom of expression had the legal aim of «protecting public order and preventing crime» (one of the reasons of restricting the freedom of expression envisaged by law), all the same it is impossible to admit that this brutal influence was a pressing social need and that it was proportional. National power may not determine the balance of proportionality of any of these items and the freedom of expression without the assessment of the Court. This assertion can be illustrated, for example, by the case Klas and others: «Countries-members may not… apply every measures consid-ered as proper by them» [§ 49].

The Spanish case Castells is also very interesting. The case was started after the claim of a senator, who was condemned for endangering the security of the state with the attempts of discrediting democratic institutions. In 1979 he published the article, in which he accused the government of the attacks of the right-wing armed groups and murders of Basques (20 years later it ap-peared that he was true). Spanish courts were not sure whether they had proper grounds for starting the criminal case. In one of its verdicts the Court pointed out that it appeared that the goal of these activities was not the protection of public order and national security, but the defense of the honor of the govern-ment. The appeals of Castells, in which he demanded to begin the considera-tion of the proofs of the veracity of the facts presented by him, were rejected by courts, since such consideration was inadmissible because of the accusation of insulting state institutions.

The European Court acknowledged that in this case the Spanish power violated the demands of Article 10. The arguments of the Court were the fol-lowing: «Mr. Castells did not express his opinion from the senate rostrum (and he could do this without any risk), but decided to do this in the press. Yet,

10 0

this does not mention that he lost his right to criticize the government. One must not forget about the main task of the press in a jural state… The freedom of the press gives to the political figures the right to criticize and comment every-thing that forms the public opinion, enabling everyone to take part in free de-mocratic discussion, which is the essence of a democratic society…» [§ 43].

In the decision concerning this case the Court also remarked that, accord-ing to Article 10, «… the limits of the permitted criticism of the government are wider than of… a political figure. Activity or passivity of the government in a democratic society must be controlled not only by the legislative and court power, but also by the press and public. Besides, the dominating status of the government is a reason for introducing the restrictions of applying the crimi-nal process, especially in the spheres, where other reactions are possible…» [§ 46].

Here are many other examples confirmed by the practices of the Euro-pean Court. Let us hope that the quotation used in the title of this article will lose its actuality and the absurd will end.

«Prava Ludyny», No. 4, April, 2003

President Kuchma asked the General Prosecutor to closethe criminal cases against five regional newspapers [24 April 2003 2:53 p.m.] President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma asked General Prosecutor Svia-

toslav Piskun to close all criminal cases started against the mass media for im-peding the activities of the head of the state.

The UNIAN correspondent communicates that today L. Kuchma said at the press conference: «I asked the General Prosecutor to close all criminal cases concerning mass media, which published critical articles about theUkrainian President». He pointed out that «he did not need this» and could protect himself without somebody’s help.

The President told that he had no connection with the cases started by the prosecutor’s office. He also said: «I do not know which mass media are in-volved in this case, maybe those, which I do not read». At that, L. Kuchma pointed out that he disagreed with the situation with mass media in Ukraine and interpreted the freedom of speech as responsibility for one’s words.

The UNIAN reference. The General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine insti-tuted the criminal case in the connection with the facts of publishing in mass media, brochures and other editions the materials, directed at exerting influ-ence on President Kuchma with the aim to impede the fulfillment of his pro-fessional duties.

Case No. 49-1120 was started in accordance with part 1 Article 334 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine «Meddling into activities of a state official».

The criminal cases were started against the newspapers «Informatsiyny bulleten» (Kremenchug), «Cherkasska Pravda» (Cherkassy), «Rivnenskiy dia-log» (Rivne), «Pozitsiya» (Sumy) and «Antenna» (Cherkassy).

10 1

UNIAN«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 16-30 April, 2003

10 2

The General Prosecutor’s office continues to interrogatejournalists in the framework of «Kuchma’s case» On 5 May the Dnepropetrovsk prosecutor’s office interrogated Olena Ga-

raguts, the editor of the local newspaper «Litsa». On 6 May the city prosecutor’s officers conducted search in the newspa-

per office and seized three issues of the newspaper containing three reprinted articles by Tatiana Korobova.

According to the information of «UP», the prosecutor’s office fulfilled the order of the General Prosecutor’s office, which investigates case No. 49-1120 started after «the facts of publishing in mass media, brochures and other editions the materials directed at the illegal influence on the President of Ukraine with the purpose to impede the fulfillment by him of his service du-ties, according to part 1 Article 334 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine».

Ms. Garaguts told that the investigating officers put standard questions: From where they got the articles by Korobova? Whether they have the manu-scripts? Who initiated the publication? Who ordered to publish the articles?

We want to remind that on 24 April President Kuchma turned to the Gen-eral Prosecutor’s office with the request to stop the investigation on the publi-cations that undermine his authority in mass media.

The Institute of mass information, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of expression in Ukraine», 1-15 M ay, 2003

MPs asked the General Prosecutor to publish the information about the investigation of the cases against mass media that undermined the authority of President Kuchma 14 May 2003 Today the Supreme Rada of Ukraine supported the request of MP Mykola

Tomenko to the General Prosecutor about the promulgation of the informationabout criminal cases against mass media, which published the materials di-rected at the illegal influence on the President of Ukraine. 171 deputies en-dorsed the request, «Interfax-Ukraina» informs.

As it is known, the General Prosecutor’s office conducts the investigation of criminal case No. 49-1120 «the facts of publishing in mass media, bro-chures and other editions the materials directed at the illegal influence on the President of Ukraine with the purpose to impede the fulfillment by him of his service duties». According to the order of the General Prosecutor’s office, re-gional law-enforcing organs interrogate journalists and seize the runs of printed mass media.

Earlier M. Tomenko turned to the General Prosecutor asking to inform whether they fulfilled the request of the President to stop all criminal cases against the mass media, which printed the materials discrediting his honor and dignity.

10 3

The Parliament also supported Tomenko’s request to the head of the anti-monopoly committee about the check of the information concerning the viola-tion by MP Viktor Pinchuk of the anti-monopoly laws. V. Pinchuk is a foun-der of several newspapers and TV channels.

The IMI communicates that on 8 April Olena Gromnitska, the press sec-retary of the President of Ukraine, confirmed that the General Prosecutor’s of-fice instituted the criminal case according to Article 334 item 1 (illegal influ-ence on the President) after the fact of publishing the materials directed at the detriment of the authority of the head of the state.

Today it is known that the investigation activities (such as interrogations and confiscations of the newspapers) were applied to at least 7 printed mass media: «Informatsiyny bulleten» (Kremenchug), «Cherkasska pravda» (Cher-kassy), «Rivnenskiy dialog» (Rivne), «Pozitsiya» (Sumy), «Antenna» (Cher-kassy), «Volyn» (Rivne) and «Populiarna gazeta» (Dnepropetrovsk).

The Institute of mass information, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of expression in Ukraine», 1-15 May, 2003

The criminal case against journalists after «the facts of illegal influence on the President» was closed Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of

the freedom of speech and information, communicates that the «absurd crimi-nal case against journalists after «the facts of illegal influence on the President»« was closed owing to public solidarity.

The comment of Tomenko passed to the agency UNIAN reads that he re-ceived the response to his deputy’s request. The letter was sent by Viktor Shokhin, a deputy of the General Prosecutor. Shokhin informs that «no criminal deeds en-visaged by the Criminal Code of Ukraine» were found in the actions of the work-ers of the editions from the Kherson, Dnepropetrovsk, Cherkassy, Kharkov and other oblasts, against whom the investigation activities were conducted in the framework of criminal case No. 149-1120.

The deputy’s request of Mykola Tomenko concerning this case was sup-ported on 14 May by the Supreme Rada (172 votes «for»).

The deputy of the General Prosecutor points out in his letter that «the inves-tigation did not found any suspected or accused in this case» and that «the crimi-nal case was closed on 13 May 2003 on the basis of the demands of item 2 Arti-cle 6 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine». According to this provision, «a criminal case may not be started, and the already started criminal case must be closed if corpus delicti is absent».

M. Tomenko reminded that the present case was started «according to part 1 Article 334 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, after the facts of publica-tions in mass media, brochures and other editions of materials directed at the illegal influence on the President of Ukraine with the purpose to impede the fulfillment by him of his service duties».

10 4

«Thus», the deputy stated, «at last the General Prosecutor’s office ac-knowledged the absurdity of this case. Interpreting the journalists’ materials as «the attempts to impede President’s activities» could result only in the increase of the disrespect of the Ukrainian society and other countries for the Ukrainian legal system, in the further discredit of prosecutor’s and other organs, which, according to the law, must control the observance of laws in Ukraine».

M. Tomenko is sure that the solidarity of the public, politicians, mass media and journalists influenced very much on the decision to close the case. «At last», he said, «the power stopped to discredit itself and Ukraine as a whole».

30 May 2003 http/www.imi.org.ua

«Prava Ludyny», No.5, May, 2003

The press service of the militia directorate of the Vinnitsa oblast illegally deprived a journalist of accreditation The press service of the militia directorate of the Vinnitsa oblast deprived

of accreditation Oksana Pustovit, a journalist of the newspaper «33 kanal», be-cause of her manner of elucidating the course of investigation of the case on the explosions in town route taxis.

The Khmilnyk human rights protection groupof the Podilsk center of human rights (Khmilnyk)

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Journalists and editor-in-chief left the newspaper«Krymskie novosti» The collective of the weekly «Krymskie novosti» left the edition. The ap-

peal of the collective of the informational-analytical weekly «Krymskie no-vosti» was published on the first page of the last issue of this influential Cri-mean edition. The journalists stated that they, together with their editor-in-chief Natalya Panasenko, left the newspaper because of the pressure exerted on them by the owners of the newspaper. The weekly is published since 2001, now its run is 8500 thousand copies, it is very popular and influential in the political and power circles of the autonomous republic. By the unof-ficial information, the newspaper is owned by the persons close to Crimean prime-minister Sergey Kunitsyn. Along with the comparatively unbiased analysis of the political situation in the region and throughout the country, «Krymskie no-vosti» conducted journalists’ investigations. The materials about the misuses connected with the land at the Southern coast of the Crimea were very reso-nant. After the publication of these materials the journalists were threatened more than once, and one of them, Oleksey Ermolin, was even attacked by strangers.

2 July 2003, Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

10 5

IMI request about the case of Yaroslav Tkachivskiy The Institute of Mass Information (IMI) sent an informational request to

the militia directorate of the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast. The request concerned the case of Yaroslav Tkachivskiy, the IMI representative in the oblast. In May and July 2003 the Ivano-Frankivsk town militia directorate, referring to the Laws of Ukraine «On the ODA» and «On militia», directed to the Tysmenitsa district court the requests about the information concerning the consideration of Tkachivskiy’s criminal case. This is confirmed by letters No. 2117 of 05 May 03 and No. 3673 of 17 July 03, which are contained in the materials of the case. The IMI regards this fact as intimidation of its representative and asks the militia directorate to inform whether the law-enforcing organs of the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast conduct the investigating activities connected with Yaroslav Tkachivskiy, and for what and on the basis of which normative acts the town militia directorate needs the information about this case.

29 July 2003,Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

Unusual tax check in «Lvivska gazeta» 1. Leaders of «Lvivska gazeta» conducted a press conference, at which

they declared that the pressure had been exerted on their newspaper by the State tax administration (STA) of the Lviv oblast during a plan tax check of the edition. «Unfortunately, the methods applied by the tax officers testified that they had some other goals except the routine check of documents. It seems that this was a part of the total pressure on the newspaper, which, in our opin-ion, has the political reasons», the newspaper collective states. According to the words of editor-in-chief Oleg Onisko, the plan check has been carried out since 6 June. The editor insists that the tax inspection makes its best to destroy the newspaper. In particular, he tells, the representatives of the tax inspec-tion checked all companies, which have the agreement with the newspaper, and the firms, which were merely mentioned in the edition. Yuri Nazaruk, the commercial manager of «Lvivska gazeta», informed the IMI that the rep-resentatives of tax inspection exerted pressure also on the private distribu-tors of the newspaper. «80% of these people have not and never had the li-cense for selling newspapers, but the tax inspection notices that only when the distributors start to sell our newspaper», he pointed out. O. Onisko ex-plains the political motives of this situation: association «Dzyga», thefounder of the newspaper, is loyal to the fraction «Nasha Ukraina».

Sergiy Medvedchuk, the head of tax administration of the Lviv oblast, stated at the press conference that «Lvivska gazetra» underwent «a usual plan check», and that all appeals and articles concerning the newspaper were, in his opinion, «an advertising trick for increasing the run».

The IMI directed a request to Yuri Kravchenko, the head of the STA of Ukraine. Unfortunately, the editorial board did not turn to the IMI in time with the request to take part in the check. So, the IMI cannot apply the Memoran-dum signed by the IMI and the STA of Ukraine, since this document envisages

10 6

the participation of the IMI in the plan checks, if the editorial board agrees this question with both the IMI and STAU in 10 days.

18 July 2003,Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

10 7

Open appeal of the newspaper «Lvivska gazeta» Dear colleagues! The editorial board of the Lviv newspaper «Lvivska gazeta» must make

public the appeal concerning the situation that was observed during the regular tax check of our newspaper. Unfortunately, the methods used by the tax offi-cers testified that they had some other goals, not only the routine check of documents. This is a part of the total pressure on the newspaper, which, in our opinion, has the political reasons.

During the tax check the inspectors phoned to the advertisers and partners of our newspaper. Later we learned that it was caused by the mentioning of various firms not only in the advertisements, but also in common articles. These people were summoned for talk, the tax officers demanded from them to present the documents on the cooperation with our edition. At the same time, similar documents of the newspaper were not examined. Service cars of «Lvivska gazeta» are permanently escorted by the representatives of tax in-spection. The private salesmen of newspapers are questioned about the num-ber of copies that they get and sell. At that, only those salesmen are checked, who sell the newspaper «Lvivska gazeta». The inspectors explain honestly that the sale of this newspaper is the reason for the checks.

There is another interesting fact: the illegal tax checks of the cultural-creative center «Dzyga», a founder of «Lvivska gazeta». The tax officers work without proper documents, and this, according to the operating laws, may be a reason for starting a criminal case. They orally demand to show them the in-ternal documents of the firm and refuse to prove the legality of their demands. They even refuse to introduce themselves. The local officials of the State Tax Administration do not respond to the written requests from «Lvivska gazeta» and «Dzyga».

Several days ago a significant incident occurred in Kolomyia (the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast), which demonstrated «the professionalism and objectivity» of the tax officers. A small trader, who, among other editions, sells the news-paper «Lvivska gazeta» was accused of the cooperation with our edition since March 2000. The absurdity of the situation lay in the fact that the first issue of our newspaper was published on 16 September 2001, and the newspaper be-gan to be sold in the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast only in spring of 2003.

We suppose that the current situation is a consequence of the principal position of «Lvivska gazeta» and the publication of the series of the materials containing the unbiased information concerning some representatives of tax inspection and people close to them. We also think that the actions of tax offi-cers are a part of the campaign directed at «settling the order» in the informa-tional space of Lviv and the Western Ukraine on the eve of Presidential elec-tion.

It is extremely difficult to work and to publish a daily newspaper under the conditions of permanent tension and mental stress.

10 8

The editorial board of «Lvivska gazeta» has already turned to the Na-tional Union of journalists of Ukraine (Igor Lubchenko), Monitoring Commit-tee of the PACE (Hanne Severinsen) and profile committee of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine (Mykola Tomenko) asking to help the newspaper in this situation.

(«Prava ludyny» (English version), July 2003)

Collective of the newspaper «Ukraina moloda» turned to the IMI On 6 October 2003 the collective of the newspaper «Ukraina moloda»

turned to the IMI. The journalists are worried with the situation that has formed around the advertising of the newspaper in the air of the state radio company.

«The collective of the newspaper «Ukraina moloda» was surprised by the sudden refusal of the National radio company of Ukraine to broadcast our ad-vertisement. The most astonishing was the fact that we got the oral refusal af-ter the conclusion of the corresponding treaty and after two broadcasts of the advertisement.

The editorial board of the newspaper has the grounds to think that this decision was based not on the commercial motives, but on the political order of top authorities. We regard this situation as the open pressure on the news-paper famous for its statements opposed to the politics of President Leonid Kuchma and his team. The officials are doing their best for strangling the free-dom of speech by various administrative means. This method was more than once applied to the Ukrainian mass media that have the alternative positions».

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

Manager of the radio station «Kontinent» turnedto the President with an open letter 30 October 2003. Sergiy Sholokh, the Manager of the radio station

«Kontinent», turned to the President with an open letter, in which he asks Leonid Kuchma to prevent the closure of the radio station.

According to Sergiy Sholokh, he learned from the reliable sources that the Administration of the President of Ukraine had issued the unofficial order to law-enforcing organs, structures of the State committee of communications and tax organs to take the immediate measures for ceasing the work of the ra-dio station «Kontinent». Taking into account the fact that the radio station transmits the foreign informational agencies, such as «The Voice of America», «BBC», «Deutsche Welle» and «Polske radio», S. Sholokh reckons that any actions directed against his radio station may be considered as the actions against the presence of the above-mentioned foreign agencies in the Ukrainian informational space. «Taking into consideration the situation with Tuzla Is-land, any pressure on mass media will evoke the negative reaction of the Western countries and will be, first of all, advantageous to Russia», reads the letter.

10 9

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

«Lvivska gazeta» was checked and fined according to the plan On 1 October 2003 Sergiy Medvedchuk, the head of tax administration of

the Lviv oblast, informed that the tax organs had no claims to the newspaper «Lvivska gazeta». According to his words, the check of the newspaper, which was completed 10 days ago, was conducted according to the plan. «Six months ago, at a press conference, I made public the list compiled in the accordance with the plan of the checks. This list contained the names of mass media, which we were going to check during this year, including «Lvivska gazeta». In the course of the check of the newspaper we disclosed some understatements of incomes and imposed the fine equal to 16 thou-sand hryvnas. So, the disclosed violations were not very serious», told S. Medvedchuk.

Medvedchuk also pointed out that the tax inspection had some preten-sions to the founders of the newspaper. «As to the founders, there the situa-tion is quite different. We found serious violations, and the criminal case was started. Yet, this does not concern the newspaper».

We want to remind that on 9 September 2003 «Lvivska gazeta» handedthe claim to the Galitskiy district court of Lviv against the oblast tax ad-ministration and its head Sergiy Medvedchuk. By the words of Oleg Bazar, a deputy of the editor-in-chief of the newspaper, the newspaper demanded in the claim to acknowledge the information about the unprofitableness of the edition, which information had been spread by Medvedchuk, as incor-rect, undermining the business reputation of the newspaper and inflicting moral damage. The claimants demanded to recompense them the moral damage equivalent to 25 hryvnas. Besides, they demanded 20 thousand hryvnas of the compensation from the tax administration. Some time later, on 18 September, the State Tax Administration of the Lviv oblast initiated the criminal case against the company «Trottola» for dodging from taxes on the especially great scale. By the way, Yaroslav Rushchishin, the gen-eral manager of «Trottola», together with the artistic association «Dzyga», are the founders if «Lvivska gazeta».

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

* * * «The statements that the check of «Lvivska gazeta» by the tax inspection

was carried out by the order of the authorities are groundless», declared the representatives of the State Tax Administration (STA) of the Lviv oblast.

The press center of the STA of the Lviv oblast informs: «From 10 June to 23 July 2003, according to the National plan of checks, the workers of the STA of the Lichakovskiy district of the Lviv oblast conducted the check of the financial activities of «Lvivska gazeta». The check resulted in the imposition of a small fine». By the information of the tax inspection, now the Lviv STA con-

110

siders the complaint concerning the results of the check. The tax inspection prom-ises to give the answer in the accordance with the «legally stipulated procedure».

The STA communicates that «Lvivska gazeta» complained «against the conclusions of only one check; the tax organs did not conduct the checks of other firms that belonged to the founders of the newspaper».

The commentary of «Lvivska gazeta» reads that this information «looks like, mildly speaking, oblivion or, what is more probable, a purposeful lie».

The authors want to remind to Mr. Zuevskiy, the head of the press center of the Lviv oblast STA, that the official information was also given about the checks of the company «Dzyga» and about the institution of the criminal case against the administration of the joint-stock company «Trottola», the co-owners of «Lvivska gazeta».

«Representatives of informational agencies, newspapers, radio and TV companies elucidated the situation against «Lvivska gazeta» using your press releases», states the edition. «The extraordinary check of «Dzyga» was fin-ished on 27 July, but no official documents have been presented until now. In-stead of this, three tax officers are sitting in all cafes and galleries of «Dzyga»: they carry out the so-called «time-study». Nobody knows what that means. DJ’s, musicians, artists, poets, writers, barmen and security guards are sum-moned for interrogations… If it is not a check, then what your workers are do-ing?», asks the newspaper. «The investigation activities are carried out in the company «Trottola» every day. These activities are connected with the criminal case on the non-payment of taxes at the especially large amount». «Lvivska ga-zeta» also commented the words «a small fine»: they insisted that the fine was equal to 23.5 thousand hryvnas.

«We want to remind to our respected tax inspection that a criminal case may be instituted on the basis of imposing the fine more than 17 thousand hryvnas, so such «small fine» can be rather dangerous for all businessmen», the representatives of the newspaper say. «There are many proofs that the Lviv tax officers had the order to impose a fine more than 17 thousand on every enterprise they checked».

««Lvivska gazeta» was fined because the tax officers reckoned that the use of telephones and the Internet might not be regarded as industrial expendi-tures», the newspaper workers wrote.

In the end of the comment the authors turned to Mr. Zuevskiy with the question: «Why you, the head of the press center of the Lviv oblast STA, did not express until now your opinion about the illegal order of MyroslavKhomiak, the head of the State tax inspection of the Lviv oblast?»

«On 11 September he issued the order «to destroy in five days the busi-ness of the founders of the newspaper». After this the criminal case against «Trottola» was started, and after this the tax officers began to interrogate the poets and musicians of «Dzyga», «Lvivska gazeta» states.

(http://lviv.vlasti.net/?Screen=news id=30868®ion=lvov) («Prava ludyny» (English version), Kharkov, October 2003)

111

Poltava oblast media club published the White Bookof the Poltava journalism (1997-2003) The White Book was published with the support of the International

Foundation «Vidrodjennia». Its presentation was held on 19 November in the National Union of journalists of Ukraine.

The publication of the White Book of the Poltava journalism is the first attempt to represent the generalized picture of the situation with mass media in the Poltava oblast, first of all, the pressure on journalists and violations of the freedom of speech. This is a collection of various official documents, mass media materials, letters of readers, listeners and viewers.

According to the data of public expertise of the level of the freedom of speech conducted by the Center «Suspilstvo», the Poltava oblast occupies the 22nd

place out 26 (25 oblasts and Kyiv). The situation has not improved during several last years, on the contrary, today the Poltava oblast is far from democracy as never before. The oppression of the freedom of speech in the oblast became a common phenomenon. And it is known that the violation of journalists’ right for free col-lection and distribution of information results in the violation of the right of citi-zens for obtaining the objective and unbiased information. It seems that the Pol-tava oblast authorities has already used all methods of pressure on mass media. In what follows we adduce the list of such methods:

– dismissal of journalists and editors, who dare to criticize the power; – closure of disobedient mass media with the help of tax inspection, sani-

tary inspection, fire inspection, etc.; – seizure of property and bank accounts of the mass media disagreeable

to the power; – unofficial prohibition to printing-houses to publish the opposition mass

media; – prohibition to businessmen to publish their advertising in such mass me-

dia; – prohibition to sellers of periodicals to distribute the opposition mass

media; – thefts, organized by special services, of the runs of opposition mass

media from printing-houses; – publication of falsified issues of opposition mass media; – impediment to the mass media during the subscription campaigns; – preventing the delivery of the mass media to the subscribers; – restriction of the access to information of the disloyal mass media (non-

admission to the meetings, sessions and press conferences, ignoring of infor-mational requests, etc.);

– organization of the campaigns in the pro-power mass media for discred-iting the disobedient journalists (the so-called «informational killing»);

– enormous sums of claims handed against the opposition mass media and journalists, as well as satisfaction of these claims by the corrupted courts;

– jamming of foreign radio stations with transmissions of the local stations;

112

– jamming of the TV companies conflicting with the authorities by the mili-tary radio-relay stations;

– illegal switching off the opposition TV companies from cable networks; – intimidation and beating of disobedient journalists; – organization of the attempts at journalists and their physical extermination. Yes, the physical extermination! The first journalist, who perished in the in-

dependent Ukraine (1992) was MP from Kremenchug Vadim Boyko, a young TV journalist of the popular TV studio «Gart». In 2002 the Poltava media club organ-ized the premium for journalist’s bravery named after V. Boyko.

(«The Poltava oblast media club», No. 57, 24 November 2003)

Appeal of Oleksiy Svetikov, the editor of the newspaper «Tretiy sektor», to mass media Respected colleagues! I want to inform you about the actions of the Lugansk oblast USS and the

oblast prosecutor's office. I regard these actions as inadmissible, violating the Ukrainian laws and international obligations of Ukraine.

This opinion is grounded on the following facts. On 7 June 2003 citizen R. turned to me. He warned me that some persons, who were displeased with the publications in the newspaper «Tretiy sektor», proposed to pay him 500 USD, if he would beat me inflicting the injuries sufficient for getting to a hospital. According to him, he did not know, who gave the order, since he dealt only with the intermediary. On the same day I phoned to MP Yu. Ioffe and in-formed him about this incident, and the MP turned to the USS. In the evening of that day the investigating officers of the Lugansk oblast USS met with me. The officers proposed me to meet with R. and to persuade him to cooperate with the USS in order to disclose the crime. The USS officers did not provide either the escort or the technical support, thus violating the de-mands of the Law «On the ODA». My colleagues E. Bayramov and S. Kamyshan escorted me and observed our meeting with R. from the distance of 20–30meters.

The next day, on 8 June 2003, I met with R., but he refused to turn to the USS, and proposed to imitate the fulfillment of the order.

On 9 June 2003 I was summoned to the Severodonetsk town USS direc-torate again. There I wrote the application and orally agreed to take part in the ODA for finding the organizers of the attack and, if it would be needed,to participate in the imitation of the fulfillment of the order. I told to the USS officers that my safety in future could be guaranteed only if the organizers of the crime would be found and brought to responsibility. The officers pro-posed to meet with R. one time more and to do the audio record of our talk. I am sure that thelaw-enforcersknew that this record would not have any legal effect and any practical significance for accusation of the persons, who pre-pared the crime. Yet, they did not take any measures envisaged by the Law of Ukraine «On the ODA».

113

However, I met with R. again and recorded our talk using the dictaphone, which was hidden in my bag. According to R.'s words, he had been already invited to the USS and refused to help them. In the course of the talk I managed to persuade him to cooperate with the USS, he again confirmed the fact of the order and was afraid that his family would suffer from this incident. I made the copy of the cassette, and passed the original record to the USS.

On 12 June 2003 I received a copy of the letter of 10 June 2003 sentby the USS of the Lugansk oblast to the Lugansk oblast prosecutor. The letter informed about the delivery of the materials to the proper prosecutor's office. The materials included: my application of 9 June 2003, R.'s explanations, re-port on two pages, act of the transcript of the audio record on four pages and the cassette. On 13 June 2003 Grachev, the head of the Severodonetsk regional USS directorate, phoned to me and advised not to leave my flat without escort during three days. I took this advice: my colleague S. Kamyshan accompanied me.

On 16 June Grachev phoned me again and informed that I did not need the escort any more, since the organizers of the attack had been found, and the prophylactic talk had been held with them. He did not mention the names of these people, but said that they were former and actual militiamen.

On 2 July 2003 G. Svistun, an investigator of the prosecutor's officeof Severodonetsk, refused to institute the criminal case because of the impos-sibility to establish the persons, who, possibly, had been preparing the crime.

On 7 August 2003 this decision was reversed by the oblast prosecu-tor's office. The prosecutor's office conducted the check that was headed by investigator of Severodonetsk prosecutor's office Fedotov, who, in particular, questioned S. Kamyshan and E. Bayramov.

On 5 September 2003 the oblast prosecutor's office also refused to start the criminal case.

I regard the actions of the Lugansk oblast USS directorate and the prose-cutor's office of the Lugansk oblast as illegal and violating the international obligations of Ukraine in the sphere of the freedom of speech. If the informa-tion about the imminent crime was true, and the USS find the organizers of this crime, then the unwillingness of thelaw-enforcingorgans to bring the guilty to responsibility looks very strange. I cannot feel myself safe under such circumstances.

Oleksiy Svetikov, 6 December 2003 («Prava ludyny» No.12, 2003, Desember)

CRIMINAL ATTACKS AT THE PRESS AND JOURNALISTS

Correspondent of the newspaper «Krymskie novosti» was bru-tally beaten by strangers In the evening of 11 April in Simferopol two strangers brutally beat Aleksey

Ermolin, a correspondent of the Crimean informational-analytical weekly «Krym-skie novosti». The editorial board of the weekly informs that the attackers de-

114

livered several blows on his head, but the journalist managed to run away. The journalist turned to the nearest hospital, from where he was transported by mo-tor ambulance to the Republican clinical hospital. The doctors find the wound on the left eyebrow, rendered him the urgent aid and put in the stitches.

«The blows were rather strong, it seemed that one of the attackers had brass-knuckles», A. Ermolin believes.

A. Ermolin deals with a number of acute topics, such as the misuses con-nected with the lands of the South Crimean Coast, in particular, the conflict between the dwellers of the settlement Gurzuf and the company «Artek», and the problems of the markets in the capital of the republic. Earlier the journalist was threatened for many times, about what he communicated to the Committee of the monitoring of the freedom of speech in the Crimea. The collective of the editorial board does not exclude the version that the attack was provoked by Ermolin’s professional activities. Thus, they turn to all law-enforcing organs with the demand to guarantee the safety of the work of journalists of «Krym-skie novosti» and other mass media.

The press release was prepared by the Committee of the monitoring of the freedom of speech in the Crimea, Simferopol.

«Prava Ludyny», No. 4, April, 2003

Commentaries: «The blows were rather strong, it seemed that one of the attackers had

brass-knuckles», A. Ermolin believes. Both the journalist and the collective of «Krymskie novosti» believe that this attack could be provoked by his profes-sional activities. A. Ermolin deals with a number of acute topics, such as the misuses connected with the lands of the South Crimean Coast, in particular, the conflict between the dwellers of the settlement Gurzuf and the company«Artek», and the problems of the markets in the capital of the republic. «I got no threats by phone», Ermolin said, «I got only the warning and the proposi-tion to think. Yet, this phrase may be assessed in different ways». The journal-ist did not say from whom he got the warning.

The officers of the main militia directorate of the Crimea do not connect the beating of Ermolin with his professional activities. Aleksandr Dom-brovskiy, the head of the center of public relations of the Crimean militia di-rectorate, believes that «this was a mere hooliganism». According to his words, Ermolin did not turn to militia with the official complaint about the at-tack. The law-enforcing organs are conducting the investigation after the in-formation obtained from the hospital, where the journalist turned. As A. Dom-brovskiy pointed out, Ermolin got no serious injuries and there is no danger for his health. Now the journalist went to a business trip to Odessa. The depar-ture of the journalist from the Crimea «impeded the investigation actions», told the head of the PR-center.

115

The Black Sea TV and radio company «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 16-30 April, 2003

The lawyer of local TV channel was beaten in Odessa MP Yuri Karmazin communicated at the sitting of the Parliament that on

15 May about 11 p.m. Aleksandr Midin, the lawyer of the TV company «Odessa+», was beaten. According to the words of the MP, the attack had the political motives, since the attackers took away the documents of the company. Now Aleksandr Midin stays in a hospital, his state is rather grave. Yuri Kar-mazin also said that the TV channel was «persecuted by the people of Odessa mayor Ruslan Bodelian».

«Forum», www.for-ua.com «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Tetiana Goriachova: this crime is connected with my profes-sional activities Maryana Drach, Radio «Liberty», 12 May 2003, It is dangerous for life to be an independent journalist in Ukraine – this

thesis was more than once stated in the reports of the Council of Europe and other human rights protecting organizations. One of the examples is the story of Tetiana Goriachova. She became a laureate of the International women’s media-foundation, which had been created in the USA. This premium is given to women-journalists, who demonstrated the extraordinary strong character in spite of censorship, attacks and threats. This year the premium was given also to Marielos Monson from Guatemala, Anne Garels from the USA and Magda-lena Ruiz Ginazu from Argentina.

Tetiana Goriachova is the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Berdiansk delovoy», she is 36 years old. She conducted journalist’s investigation of cor-ruption, when, in January 2002, some stranger splashed the dilute hydrochloric acid in her face.

– Tetiana, what you felt, when you learned that you became a laureate of the international premium?

– This was a surprise for me. I am shocked, since I understand clearly that there many journalists in Ukraine, including women, who are more experi-enced and talented, who work under extreme conditions, and deserved this premium.

– How is your health now? I heard that you were treated in the USA? – Really, last October I visited the USA. The visit was sponsored by the

Washington branch of IREX-Promedia and IREX-Promedia-Kyiv headed by Tim O’Connor. I am very grateful to these people. Hal Forter, a professor of journalism and the former editor of «The Los-Angeles Times», and another very influential sponsor paid for the consultations and diagnostics in the clinic in Dallas. Now my sight is more or less normal, my right eye is healthy for 100%, and left eye – for 60%. The doctor from the Dallas clinic said that the state of the left eye would not deteriorate, but it would not improve too.

116

– How the investigation of your case is going? Is it known what were the reasons of the attack?

– The case is not closed, and the investigation lasts. The man, who is sus-pected of the attack, disappeared, and law-enforcing organs are looking for him. He is a young, 30-years-old, drug addict. Yet, I believe: this crime is con-nected with my professional activities. The attack was committed during the election campaign.

– You dealt with the problem of corruption? – Yes, I wrote about the corruption in the local power organs in Berdi-

ansk. According to the decisions of Zaporozhye court, of the district court and Berdiansk court, four officials of the town executive committee were ac-knowledged to be guilty of corruption, and I wrote four articles about this.

– It is a prevalent opinion abroad that there is no real freedom of speech in Ukraine. What do you think about this?

– I reckon that the freedom of speech exists in Ukraine, but it is cruelly persecuted. The story, which happened with me, is a glaring example of this persecution.

http://www.radiosvoboda.org«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Attack on the house of the editor-in-chief of the district news-paper «Chorna gora» (Vinogradov, the Zakarpatska oblast) In the town of Vinogradov, the Zakarpatska oblast, the attack was com-

mitted on the house of Volodymir Mocharnik, the editor-in-chief of the district newspaper «Chorna gora».

In the early hours of the morning the criminals broke the window by a stone and threw a jar with gas and a strange cardboard box into the room. The jar did not explode by a miracle: it was not damaged.

The special squad of the Vinogradov militia precinct started the investiga-tion of this incident. Now the militiamen consider several versions of the rea-sons of the attack. One of the versions is the reaction to the recent publications in the district newspaper of the critical materials about the officials of the district state administration and the top officers of law-enforcing structures.

Yaroslav Frindak, after the materials of the Zakarpatska oblast branchof the Voters’ Committee of Ukraine

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Attempt of arson of the car of editor-in-chiefof «Novyny Zakarpattia» On 4 June in Uzhgorod, near the building of the Zakarpatska oblast state

administration, some volatile flammable liquid was poured over the car of Vasyl Nitka, the editor-in-chief of the oblast newspaper «Novyny Zakarpat-tia».

117

According to the unchecked data, somebody prevented the attempt of ar-son and did not allow to the criminal to finish his work. Now the incident is investigated by the 6th department of the oblast militia directorate and byUzhgorod militia precinct.

Yaroslav Frindak, Uzhgorod «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Appeal of G. Omelchenko, the head of the temporary special commission of the Supreme Rada for the investigation of mur-ders of journalists Georgiy Gongadze and Igor Aleksandrov G. Omelchenko, the head of the temporary special commission of the Su-

preme Rada for the investigation of murders of journalists Georgiy Gongadze and Igor Aleksandrov, stated in the Parliament that General Prosecutor of Ukraine Sviatoslav Piskun had the information about the participants of kid-napping and murder of Gongadze. Omelchenko communicated with Piskun on 24 June, and the latter told that that the participants of kidnapping and murder of G. Gongadze were found. On 28 June the newspaper «Segodnia» published the article «The murderer of Gongadze is, probably, arrested». The author of the article referred to the data got by the newspaper from the confidential sources and informed that «an officer of one of the force structures of Ukraine is suspected of G. Gongadze’s murder» and that «this man is either arrested or is going to be arrested in the nearest future». Besides, the publication reads: «militiamen transported two men from Lviv, who are suspected of the murder of Igor Aleksandrov. These men were members of an organized criminal group, so, more people will be detained in the connection with this case». On 4 July, in his interview to the Kyiv correspondent of the newspaper «Vremia novostey», G. Omelchenko declared: «The special commission, which inves-tigates the case of Gongadze along with the General Prosecutor’s office, estab-lished that the kidnapping had been organized by President Leonid Kuchma, former head of President’s administration Volodymir Litvin, ex-head of the USS Leonid Derkach and former Minister of Interior Yuri Kravchenko».

«The kidnapping and murder were committed by militia officers. This is confirmed by the audio records made by major Nikolay Melnochenko, an offi-cer of Kuchma’s guard. These materials will be passed to the General Prosecu-tor’s office for the legal assessment», told G. Omelchenko. He also pointed out: «The day, when the President ordered to kidnap Gongadze was recon-structed in details. We know who visited the President that day. The talks of the visitors of President’s office are fixed on Melnichenko’s records in the chronological order. These persons listened to the records and confirmed eve-rything. Now the President cannot deny that he talked with Kravchenko and Derkach about the kidnapping of Gongadze. The authenticity of this fragment of the record was confirmed by the American experts».

118

On 14 July, at the press conference, General Prosecutor S. Piskun told that the law-enforcing organs were still trying to learn whether the so-called «gang of turnskins» had been involved in Gongadze’s murder. He also in-formed that the General Prosecutor’s office disclosed 14 murders committed by this gang, which was headed by militia officers. The members of this criminal group are also suspected of the disappearance of many people. The General Prosecutor pointed out that the case of this gang would be passed to court within 2-3 months. Last year the Kyiv militia disclosed the criminal group, which had been acting since 1997 and included several former militia-men. Now the accusations have been brought against 13 members of this gang, among them – six ex-militiamen. The criminals mainly «specialized» in kid-napping. Yet, most often, the criminals murdered their victims before obtain-ing the ransom.

1 July 2003, Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

119

Investigation of the death of V. Efremov, the editor-in-chiefof the newspaper «Sobor» Vladimir Efremov, a representative of the Institute of mass information in

Dnepropetrovsk and the editor-in-chief of the Dnepropetrovsk newspaper«Sobor», perished in a road accident. He was driving to Kyiv, when his car bumped into a truck and burnt down. This happened on 14 July 2003. On 13 October 2001 V. Efermov wrote in the newspaper «Golos Ukrainy»: «For the first time during thirty years of my work as a journalist I am writ-ing because I am afraid. I am afraid of a senseless death. Yet, I am afraid even more that my death will be presented as an accidental one: «murder by drug addicts», «murder for robbery» or «a tragic road accident»».

His daughter Yulia Efremova affirms that recently her father has been very nervous because of some strange phone calls. About a month ago the in-vestigating officers from the USA came to him in the connection with Laza-renko’s case. The officers interrogated him, and he gave the consent to appear in court. On 17 July advocate Marina Dovgopola confirmed in her interview to the agency «Interfax-Ukraine» that P. Lazarenko’s advocates really met Vladimir Efremov on the case of the ex-prime-minister. According to her in-formation, this meeting took place during the first visit of the advocate to Ukraine in March-April of the current year. American advocate Harold Rosen-thal also confirmed the information about the plans of Efremov to appear in court. In the comment prepared for «Ukrainska Pravda» he called Efremov «one of the central witnesses in this case». At the request of the IMI, the USA Embassy checked this information through its sources in the American gov-ernment. According to the information of the embassy, the advocates actually proposed Efremov as a witness, but the court did not agree. The IMI workers conduct the journalists’ investigation of the death of their colleague. Owing to our efforts the criminal case was started, and the family of the journalist was acknowledged to be victims. The IMI helped to organize the expertise of the remnants of the burnt car, but the results of the expertise are not ready yet. The IMI lawyer Maria Sambur meet a number of people, among them: the me-chanic, who examined the car three days before the tragedy, the driver of the truck, in which journalist’s car bumped, and eye-witnesses of the accident. It appeared that there existed a professional video record of the accident. Now the IMI has this video record, which will be officially passed to the investiga-tion.

Vladimir Efremov worked as a journalist of the Institute of mass informa-tion in Dnepropetrovsk for last three years. Before this he was the editor-in-chief of the Dnepropetrovsk newspaper «Sobor» owned by the Dnepropet-rovsk oblast council, headed the 11th TV channel, informational agency «Sobor» and the newspaper «Dnepropetrovsk». In 1999, most probably be-cause of the conflict with some influential political figures, he stayed in cus-tody for several days under the pretext of the allegedly incorrectly registered

120

bank credit, and, little by little, he lost the control over the media business. In May 2001 the newspaper «Sobor» was driven out from the rented building, and in September 2001 the Dnepropetrovsk oblast council took the decision about the liquidation of the newspaper. According to this decision, editor-in-chief V. Efremov had to be dismissed after the liquidation. The procedure of liquidation is not finished yet. In November 2002 Efremov turned to court with the claim against the Dnepropetrovsk oblast council on the payment of wages for the liquidation period. The trial was assigned on 1 September, and, in the opinion of specialists, Efremov had good chances to win the case.

14 July 2003, Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

Vladimir Efremov was the founder and owner of one of the most popular Dnepropetrovsk TV channels «11 kanal», which was loyal to Pavlo Laza-renko, who was the head of the oblast state administration at that time. During the conflict of Mr. Lazarenko with President Kuchma the TV channel openly took the part of Lazarenko. Yet, when P. Lazarenko escaped to the USA, Vik-tor Pinchuk, the son-in-law of the President, became interested in this media resource. The TV channel was taken away from Efremov: there was a great scandal accompanied with court proceedings. It is known that the journalist and the oligarch have not come to the agreement until now.

On 14 July the car of Vladimir Efremov collided with a truck, which was driven by Pavlo Pinchuk.

The place of the accident seems to be accursed. People, who worked for Pavlo Lazarenko used to get into accidents there. For example, the car of Myk-haylo Golyshev, the experienced head of Lazarenko’s press service both in the oblast and in the Cabinet of Ministers, fall there into ditch for unknown rea-sons.

As it became known, details of the tragedy will be investigated by An-drey Zinchuk, an officer of the Verkhnedneprovskiy district militia precinct.

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 126, 16 July 2003)

Third attempt at the life of the editor of the newspaper «Tikhiy uzhas» (Lubny) The General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine, according to the order of

President Leonid Kuchma, realized a number of actions for the investigation of the attack on the house of Vasiliy Koriaka, the editor of the newspaper «Tikhiy uzhas» and a former mayor of Lubny (the Poltava oblast). The attack took place on 17 June 2003. Lubny militia department instituted the criminal case after Article 296 part 4 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (hooliganism with application of firearms). Besides, last week the prosecutor’s office of the Poltava oblast started two more criminal cases, in particular after the article «Premeditated destruction or damage of property that inflicted serious material losses». The investigation considers several versions, among them the crime committed because of the professional activities of the journalist. Vasiliy Kori-

121

aka is sure that the attack was caused by his critical articles against the Poltava governor.

This was the third attempt at the life of V. Koriaka. In 1996 a grenade ex-ploded near his house, and in 1998 a stranger fired a riffle at his car. Neither of these attempts was disclosed.

The General Prosecutor’s office controls the investigation of the latter crime and the ODA conducted by law-enforcing organs.

(«Fakty», No. 124, 15 July 2003)

Attack on Anatoliy Naumov (Zaporozhye) Anatoliy Naumov, the acting general manager of the Zaporozhye oblast

weekly «Dosye», was attacked in Zaporozhye. According to the words of Va-leriy Poliushko, the chief-editor of the newspaper, the attack was committed about 20:30 in the doorway of the apartment house where Naumov lived. Poliushko told: «That evening Naumov went to a shop. When he returned to the house, the door of the house was unlocked, and the light was switched off. The journalist entered the house and was hit on the head». The criminal (or criminals) disappeared immediately after the attack; they did not try to rob the journalist. The same evening Naumov was taken to the 5th city hospital, where 9 stitches were put on his face and head. The chief-editor of «Dosye» believes that the attack was connected with Naumov’s work as a journalist and as the acting general manager of the newspaper. The weekly is well known in the oblast for the acute materials on socially important topics.

«Almost a year ago a criminal case was started in the connection with the burglary of my flat, some time later the office of the newspaper was also robbed. We reckon that these crimes are linked», communicated V. Poliushko. This case is investigated by Margarita Kolesnikova, an investigating officer of the Ordzhonikidze district militia directorate of Zaporozhye. In the opinion of Anatoliy Naumov, the law-enforcers are working rather actively.

The Zaporozhye oblast weekly «Dosye» was founded in June 1999. One of the founders was major-general Oleksandr Poliak, the then city mayor, who died on 22 November 2003 of a cardiac seizure. The run of the newspaper is almost 100 thousand.

17 July 2003, Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

Attack on Oleg Eltsov, the editor of the Internet-edition «Ukraina kriminalnaya» On 24 July, in Kyiv, two strangers attacked journalist Oleg Eltsov, the

editor of the Internet-edition «Ukraina kriminalnaya» («Criminal Ukraine»). Oleg Eltsov informed «Interfax-Ukraine» by phone that two men were

waiting for him on the landing and tried to beat him, when he left the flat. One of the attackers had an electro-shocker, another – a pipe wrapped in some-

122

thing. For some time the journalist defended himself, and they ran away. The journalist feels well.

O. Eltsov suggests that these men tried to get to his flat: they ringed his doorbell twice during the day, but he was very busy and did not want to open the door. The journalist left the flat, since he had to go to court.

Now the militiamen, who were called by Eltsov, are making portraits of the criminals. The journalist also saw a car, which, in his opinion, might be-long to the attackers.

The journalist does not think that the attack was connected with the trial, which had to take place on 24 July, because this case had been considered for a long time. At the same time, he does not exclude the possibility that the at-tack was connected with some of the publications, which appeared on the site during several recent months. «Almost every article could have such result», he said.

The Internet-edition «Ukraina kriminalnaya» elucidates journalist’s inves-tigations concerning the activities of Ukrainian top officials, MPs, representa-tives of force agencies, etc. More than once the deputies’ requests to the Gen-eral Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine were based on the materials placed on the site.

The materials of the site are thoroughly studied and analyzed by the law-enforcing organs.

Interfax-UkraineThe last material published by Oleg Eltsov in the Internet-edition

«Ukraina kriminalnaya» was connected with the past of one of the most influ-ential Ukrainian bankers.

(«Shliakh peremogi», No. 31, 24-30 July 2003)

Murder of Aleksandr Panich, a journalist of the newspaper «Donetskie novosti» In the middle of June a headless body was found in Kalmius river. The

Donetsk prosecutor declared that it was the body of Aleksandr Panich, a jour-nalist of the newspaper «Donetskie novosti».

Aleksandr worked in the newspaper, which was in the scope of interests of the soccer club «Shakhter» and its president Rinat Akhmetov. Panich con-ducted journalist’s investigations. In autumn 2002 the conflict occurred be-tween the Makeevka metallurgical plant (MMP) and the so-called «Donetsk group». The conflict was caused by seizure of some property by the metallur-gical plant, in particular, the Komsomolsk ore directorate and a former kol-khoz in a village of Privolnoe. The editorial board proposed to A. Panich to investigate these events and to clear up the role of MP Vladimir Boyko in this incident. «Donetskie novosti» published several acute materials on this topic. In November 2002 the open confrontation in the «Donetsk clan» stopped. Since that time Aleksandr did not come to the editorial board. The administra-

123

tion of the newspaper did not try to find out the reasons of his absence and fired him.

In the beginning of December Panich’s sister turned to militia with the appeal about the disappearance of her brother. The prosecutor’s office started the case on… the murder of the journalist. At the same time it became known that Aleksandr had sold his flat, so the investigation began to consider the version about the murder because of money. At that, the investigators prac-tically disregarded the professional activities of A. Panich, and mentioned his articles about the masters of the MMP only casually.

As well as in G. Gongadze’s case, militia was looking for some drag addicts, which were allegedly connected with the murder of Panich. Two journalists, who had talked with Panich before the disappearance, appeared in the case. Then nobody recollected about «Panich’s case» during seven months. And suddenly, as if by somebody’s order, after the refusal of V. Boyko to join the parliamentary fraction «Regiony Ukrainy», the law-enforcing organs re-sumed the active work. Approximately on 20 June they declared that journal-ist’s body had been found and the murderers had been arrested.

However, there are many unsolved questions in this case. For instance, Donetsk prosecutor Aleksandr Olmezov informed at a press conference that the proofs allowed to state for certain that it was Panich, whose body had been found. Yet, Aleksandr Sukhov, the head of the oblast bureau of forensic exper-tise, insists that «the body was not identified». By the way, the suspected of this crime was released after giving a written undertaking not to leave a place.

This information was communicated by our colleagues from «Donetskie novosti».

(«Svoboda», No. 28, 15-21 July 2003)

Head of the National Union of journalists expressed his anxiety about the terror applied to journalists Igor Lubchenko, the Head of the National Union of journalists of Ukraine,

directed the letter to Yuri Smirnov, the Minister of Interior of Ukraine, in which he expressed the anxiety of the NUJU about the terror applied to mass media workers. I. Lubchenko points out that, soon after the death of Dne-propetrovsk journalist Vladimir Efremov, some unknown criminals beat Anatoliy Naumov, the editor-in-chief of the weekly «Dosye», in Zaporozhye, and Oleg Eltsov, the editor of the Internet-edition «Ukraina kriminalnaya», in Kyiv. The fact that the beatings took place near the houses of the journalists and that the victims were not robbed allows to think that the attacks were con-nected with the professional activities of the journalists.

Therefore, Igor Lubchenko asked the Minister of Interior to control the investigation of the cases of murders and beatings of journalists and to inform the public about the results.

124

I. Lubchenko appealed to Sviatoslav Piskun, the General Prosecutor of Ukraine, with the request to conduct at the end of September the collegium of the General Prosecutor’s office with the participation of the NUJU secretary, and to sum up at this collegium the investigation of the cases concerning the attacks on journalists.

«Svoboda slova: Poltavshchina», No. 38, 28 July 2003

Head of the NUJU I. Lubchenko about criminal attemptsat journalist Igor Lubchenko, the Head of the National Union of journalists of

Ukraine, and the NUJU are worried with the continuation of the terror against mass media workers.

I. Lubchenko points out that, soon after the death of Dnepropetrovsk jour-nalist Vladimir Efremov, some unknown criminals beat Anatoliy Naumov, the editor-in-chief of the weekly «Dosye», in Zaporozhye, and Oleg Eltsov, the editor of the Internet-edition «Ukraina kriminalnaya», in Kyiv. The fact that the beatings took place near the houses of the journalists and that the victims were not robbed allows to think that the attacks were connected with the professional activities of the journalists.

The Head of the National Union of journalists directed the letter to Yuri Smirnov, the Minister of Interior of Ukraine, in which he expressed the anxi-ety of the NUJU about the terror applied to journalists and asked the Minister to control the investigation of the cases of murders and beatings of journalists and to inform personally the public about the results.

I. Lubchenko appealed to Sviatoslav Piskun, the General Prosecutor of Ukraine, with the request to conduct at the end of September the collegium of the General Prosecutor’s office with the participation of the NUJU secretary, and to sum up at this collegium the investigation of the cases concerning the attacks on journalists.

On 14 July 2003 Dnepropetrovsk journalist Volodymir Efremov perished in a road accident: his car collided with a truck. 52-year-old V. Efremov was the editor-in-chief of the Dnepropetrovsk newspaper «Sobor» owned by the Dnepropetrovsk oblast council, headed the 11th TV channel, informational agency «Sobor» and the newspaper «Dnepropetrovsk». For last three years he has been a correspondent of the Institute of mass information in Dne-propetrovsk.

On 17 July Anatoliy Naumov, the acting general manager of theZaporozhye oblast weekly «Dosye», a member of the National Union of jour-nalists, was attacked in Zaporozhye. The attack was committed about 20:30 in the doorway of the apartment house where Naumov lived. When Naumov en-tered the house, where, for some reasons, the light was switched off, he was hit on the head. The criminal (or criminals) disappeared immediately after the attack; they did not try to rob the journalist.

125

On 24 July, in Kyiv, two strangers attacked journalist Oleg Eltsov, the editor of the Internet-edition «Ukraina kriminalnaya». When Eltsov went out from his flat, two strangers (about 25-30 years old) ran up to him near the ele-vator and tried to stun him with electro-shocker and fists. Yet, O. Eltsov began to defend himself, and the attackers ran away. (The independent media trade union, 28 June 2003).

(UNIAN)

Death of Igor Goncharov In the morning of 1 August Igor Goncharov, one of the accused in the

«case of turnskins», died in the emergency hospital. According to some data, it was Goncharov, a former senior officer of the DFOC, who, after the disap-pearance of Georgiy Gongadze, passed to mass media the information about some concrete officers of criminal investigation department that kept the watch over the journalist. Later this information was officially confirmed by representatives of law-enforcing organs.

The Institute of mass information received the envelope with the inscrip-tion: «To open after my death». The envelope contained the appeal written by Igor Goncharov.

The IMI published this appeal without making public the names of the persons mentioned in it and the place, where material evidences were stored.

APPEALI, Igor Goncharov, born in 1959 in Kyiv, a Ukrainian, pensioner of the

Ministry of Interior, is writing this appeal being in right mind. I ask every-body, who will receive this appeal, to make it public.

In June 2002 I communicated to Khomula, the head of the Kyiv DFOC, the names of the persons, who had committed the kidnapping and murder of journalist Gongadze, and the facts connected with a number of other crimes planned and committed by the DFOC officers jointly with the members of criminal group […]. After this I was cruelly beaten. Before the beatingKhomula and his subordinate, detective Igor, tortured me in the building of the DFOC on the Moskovskaya Square.

Khomula demanded from me not to evidence against the DFOC officers, who, together with […] and another criminal, who also was a member of «Kisel’s» criminal group, had committed the kidnapping of journalist Gon-gadze in September 2000 (I communicated to the USS officers […] and […] the surnames of these persons and of the workers of criminal intelligence ser-vice, who shadowed Gongadze, as well as the facts about the participation of the DFOC officers in other murders and kidnappings committed by members of the criminal group […]).

These crimes were committed by the direct order of […] and, later, of […]. Some top authorities of our state, […], also knew about these kidnap-pings and murders and were connected with them.

126

I have the materials collected jointly with the USS officers: audio re-cords of talks, written confession of […] and other materials. I proposed to Khomula to seize these materials officially, in presence of journalists and rep-resentatives of the USS. I promised to show where these materials were stored. Yet, Khomula demanded to pass these materials to him for destruction. Be-sides, he refused to write down my testimony, he demanded from me to give the false evidence on the facts connected with the investigation, and promised that then I would be only a witness in this case.

When I refused, Khomula promised that I would be murdered by other criminals in the preliminary prison, and that my death would be represented as suicide or the death because of a disease. In spite of my invalidity, the prison doctors refused to examine me, and I cannot get any medical aid in the pre-liminary prison in spite of my complaints on frequent abdominal pains and losses of consciousness. I think that this is done with the consent and by the order of Khomula. Probably, the attempts to unmask the people, who organ-ized the crimes, will result in my death. Yet, I am doing that for the sake of truth and justice.

24 February 2003. Written and signed by I. Goncharov. («The Poltava oblast media club», No. 40, 7 August 2003)

* * * The Institute of mass information received the envelope with the inscrip-

tion: «To open after my death». This was the appeal of Igor Goncharov. Now the IMI conducts its own investigation.

The envelope contained 17 hand-written pages signed by Igor Gon-charov.

Taking into account the gravity of the accusations and the fact that the guilt of a person may be proved only by court, we will not mention some names, to which Goncharov refers.

In February 2003 Goncharov wrote: «In spite of the moral pressure ex-erted on me by the investigating officers of the General Prosecutor’s office, in spite of the threats that I will be murdered by other convicts in the preliminary prison, … I am not going to commit suicide, although somebody, I am sure, is hoping for this. I also want to inform that more than once I got the threats that I would be murdered, and my death would look as a suicide or a death of a dis-ease.

Evidently, it is connected with my statements that I am going to tell at the trial about a number of crimes initiated and committed by the officers of militia, Kyiv department of the DFOC and the special squad «Sokol», as well as with my intention to unmask the persons, who organized the kidnapping and murder of journalist Gongadze. I am going to evidence in court in the presence of journalist, because I do not trust to the General Prosecutor’s office. 20 February 2003. Written and signed by I. Goncharov.»

127

On 24 February Goncharov returned to the topic of Gongadze’s disap-pearance: «I have the materials collected jointly with the USS officers: audio records of talks, written confession of and other materials. I proposed to Khomula to seize these materials officially, in presence of journalists and rep-resentatives of the USS. I promised to show, where these materials were stored. Yet, Khomula demanded to pass these materials top him for destruc-tion. Besides, he refused to write down my testimony, he demanded from me to give the false evidence… When I refused, Khomula promised to murder me in the preliminary prison…»

The most interesting document is the appeal of Goncharov (without a date) with the postscript:

«I buried the material evidence, photos, video and audio records, con-nected with the above-mentioned crimes, … the evidence are in a metal box in a briefcase and sack, […] and my friend […] know the place».

According to the IMI data, the application on the seizure of these materi-als with the participation of MPs has been already presented to Grigoriy Omel-chenko. He gave the consent to render any assistance, but the materials have not been obtained yet.

The editorial board got the anonymous warning about the possible prob-lems connected with the publication of some facts, so we had to shorten our ma-terial. Yet, we have to inform about some interesting data presented by Gon-charov.

The most interesting information concerns one of the murders committed in the Kyiv oblast. A local businessman gave the order to a top officer of the DFOC to get the debt from the head of a bank. The order was passed to the DFOC officer M., who sent three drug addicts to fulfill the task. During the action the unpleasant incident happened. The executors injected a psychotropic substance to the busi-nessman’s wife, and she died. So, in order to liquidate the witness, they shot the businessman. One of the murderers stays now under the guard of the DFOC as an important witness, and officer M. departed for the USA (probably, it was he, who was detained this year in the connection with the attempt to learn the address of Gongadze’s wife in the USA)…

Moreover, Goncharov believes that the death of the driver of a well-known political figure was also caused by the injection of a psychotropic substance…

Another case, where three persons were murdered, was committed with the participation of the DFOC officers by the order of a brother of the rector of one of famous Ukrainian technical institutes…

These facts are not only interesting, they are also socially important. So, it is rather strange that the investigation ignored them.

On Tuesday the IMI passed the copies of the documents to the General Prosecutor’s office, and we are continuing our journalistic investigation.

(Institute of mass information, 5 August 2003)

128

The comment on the official request of the IMI to the General Prosecutor’s office concerning the documents of former DFOC officer Igor Goncharov Sergiy Taran, the vice-president of the Institute of mass information: More than once the authorities stated that there was no information in the

letters of I. Goncharov, a former DFOC officer, which would help in the in-vestigation of the murder of journalist Georgiy Gongadze. In the connection with these statements and taking into account the fact that the Institute of mass information conducts its own investigation of G. Gongadze’s murder, the IMI prepared the official request to the General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine.

On 11 August 2003 Mr. Medvedko, a deputy of the General Prosecutor of Ukraine, officially stated that there was nothing new for them in the materials received from the IMI. So, the facts about the close cooperation of criminal and power structures are not interesting for the prosecutor’s office. Yet, it is obvious that these facts will worry the Ukrainian public, because the facts de-scribed by Goncharov evidence that concrete top state officials were con-nected with the activities of the group of «turnskins», moreover, they shielded the group. Well, if the prosecutor’s office had already known about these facts, then why the criminal cases were not started, which would not only dis-close the organizers of Gongadze’s murder, but, maybe, would also change the political situation in Ukraine.

Yet, if the prosecutor’s office still has not arrested any of the authorities connected with Gongadze’s case, whose names we learned from the letter of Goncharov, then one can suppose that the workers of the prosecutor’s office did not believe in the facts stated in the letter, although they «checked» them. However, it is strange that the prosecutor’s office did not refute the facts pre-sented by Goncharov, since the accusations are very serious: they concern not only the honor of the agency, but the honor of the state as a whole. The dili-gence, with which the prosecutor’s office insists on the nothingness of Gon-charov’s documents, resembles the times, when the prosecutor’s office was headed by Potebenko, when any information about the probable connection of top state officials with the kidnapping of the journalist were rejected as impos-sible.

Maybe the prosecutor’s office does not believe that the letters were really written by Goncharov? Then why they did not interrogate him officially, when he was still alive? Why the prosecutor’s office did not seize the material evi-dences from the place, which was indicated by Goncharov in his letter to the General Prosecutor? Why the prosecutor’s office is so sure that there is «noth-ing new» among these evidences?

The IMI, on the basis of Article 40 of the Ukrainian Constitution and Ar-ticles 9, 32 and 33 of the Law of Ukraine «On information», turned with the official request to General Prosecutor of Ukraine Sviatoslav Piskun. The rep-resentatives of the IMI ask to inform:

129

– Why the case on the premeditated murder of Georgiy Gongadze is in-vestigated so slowly, if the information communicated by Goncharov «had been known already for a long time»?

– Why Goncharov was not interrogated, although, according to the in-formation given by his advocate Smorodin, he was more than once visited by a top officer from the General Prosecutor’s office?

– Why the prosecutor’s office did not seize the material evidences, al-though Goncharov indicated the place, where they were stored, in his letter to the General Prosecutor?

When we passed the copies of Goncharov’s letters to the General Prose-cutor’s office, we hoped that the prosecutor’s office would thoroughly check the facts contained in these letters. We also hoped that the investigation of Gongadze’s case would be more transparent. Yet, neither of these hopes was justified. For several times we tried to get the comments from Sergiy Khomula, the former head of the Kyiv DFOC, whom Goncharov accused of the application of torture. Yet, all our attempts were vain, and we learned from our unofficial sources that it was allegedly prohibited to Khomula to commu-nicate with journalists at all. Yes, we understand that the secret of investigation exists. Yet, we also hope that the law-enforcing organs understand that citizens have the right for information, and journalists have the right to conduct their investigations.

(«The Poltava oblast media club», No. 42, 19 August 2003)

On the death of Volodymir Efremov Maria Sambur, a representative of the IMI, who conducts the journalistic

investigation of the death of Volodymir Efremov in a road accident, visited Kremenchug. She called on the hospital, where Pavlo Pinchuk, the driver of the truck with which Efremov’s car had collided, stayed. In what follows we present the description of the road accident told by P. Pinchuk.

Before the accident, about 50 meters from that place, he saw that some-thing was wrong with the car, which was coming in the opposite direction: it whirled as on ice. Pinchuk did his best to avoid the collision, but the car darted out to the opposite traffic lane and hit his truck between the gasoline tank and front wheel. The stroke was so strong that the car was thrown to its lane again, and the truck drove to the ditch and stopped.

«When I got out from the cab, I even did not feel my traumas», tells Pavlo Pinchuk. «I was thinking only about the driver of the car. The car was not on fire yet, but I saw the smoke. I looked into the car and saw that the safety cushion had burst. When I was dragging the driver out, his car was al-ready burning.»

Let us restore the events that happened before the tragedy. «Several min-utes before the accident, passing through a village, Efremov drove with the speed 90-100 kilometers per hour», Igor Prushinskiy, a deputy of the editor-in-

130

chief of the Chernobyl publishing house «Nash chas», told to Maria Sambur at their meeting in Dnepropetrovsk.

«I was surprised that this car passed through the village with such great speed. He overtook my car, and I absentmindedly looked at the speedometer, it showed 60 km/h», I. Prushinskiy said, «So I thought that his speed was about 90-100 km/h».

When Prushinskiy came to the place of accident, five cars were already staying there. The car, which had overtaken him in the village, was burning. He reckons that the driver of this car overtook these five cars too. The people brought fire extinguishers and water from their cars, but they could do noth-ing.

«The driver of the truck was in shock, but nobody had the anti-shock drugs in their medicine chests», told Prushinskiy. The behavior of the drivers of two other trucks, who were standing near their vehicles and did not react at the accident, seemed to be strange to Igor.

Other drivers ran up to Pinchuk and helped him to drag the victim out from the car. Efremov’s body was maimed, and he was already dead. The peo-ple tried to extinguish the fire, but did not succeed: the car burned to the ground in five minutes. Pavlo Pinchuk had time to see that a man was standing near Efremov’s car with video camera and recording all what happened. After that Pinchuk fainted, and did not observe the arrival of motor ambulance and militia.

The IMI turned to public with the request to assist in the investigation of V. Efremov’s death and obtained several essential evidence and documents.

In particular, a video record, made by one of the eyewitnesses of the trag-edy, was sent to the editorial board. Many witnesses of this accident can be found on the basis of this record, and that increases the chances to learn something about the causes of the accident.

(«The Poltava oblast media club», No. 40, 7 August 2003)

* * * Alla Lazareva: Recently the IMI has got two cassettes with video records of the death of

journalist Volodymir Efremov made by two different people. Neither the offi-cial investigation nor our journalistic investigation is completed yet.

After the talk with P. Pinchuk, the driver of the truck, with which Efre-mov’s car had collided, we turned to public with the request to send to us the video record of our colleague’s death. We learned about the existence of the record from Pinchuk. Pavlo Pinchuk saw a man, who was standing near Efre-mov’s car with video camera and recording the accident.

Although we scarcely believed in the success, our hopes were justified, and even more than we could expect. At first journalist Valeriy Kiselev, a rep-resentative of a TV company from Nikopol, phoned and proposed to pass the

131

video record to us. This TV company is owned by the Nikopol plant of ferro-alloys and is a partner of the Dnepropetrovsk 11th channel. The person, who made the record, refused to contact with us directly. This person also did not want to explain us, what he had done at this road with the professional camera. We only managed to learn that this man was not a journalist.

By the way, the record was made not in the professional, but in the ama-teurish format. Later one more phone call was got by the IMI and somebody… again proposed to give us the video record of Volodymir Efremov’s death. That time the author of the record was not anonymous. Petro Sushko, the head of the public organization «Zakhyst» told us, that accidentally he had been at the 299th kilometer of the road «Dnepropetrovsk – Borispol», and recorded the accident hoping to sell the record to some TV channel. Yet, no TV channel agreed to buy this material. The Nikopol anonymous video amateur was luck-ier: he sold his record to the local TV channel.

When our representative Matia Sambut visited Dnepropetrovsk soon af-ter Efremov’s death, the unofficial information was circulating in journalistic and law-enforcing circles of the city that the 11th channel possessed this re-cord. Yet, the 11th channel, which had been founded and headed by Efremov, neither confirmed this information nor rendered the record to the investigating organs.

Thus, the IMI officially passed the copies of the both cassettes to the in-vestigation. Other copies were left in the Institute for the independent expert analysis. One of the records is concentrated on Volodymir’s car, and another – on the truck, with which our colleague collided.

However, why two persons with video cameras appeared at the place of allegedly usual road accident? Well, one of the amateurs might be there by chance, but the presence of two people seems to be not casual. So, how to ex-plain this situation? I cannot say it for sure, since the investigation still lasts, but I will express one assumption. Volodymir told me for many times that he was shadowed. Now I am blaming myself for the lack of interests to his words: I did not ask who shadowed him and for what. Efremov was not a paranoiac, but he was a very cautious man. For example, he always switched off his cell phone during serious talks.

Maybe the people, who shadowed Efremov, decided to make the video record of their object’s death for reporting to their employees? Or these people knew that the accident would happen? Alas, these questions are merely rhe-torical, because the «author» of the «Nikopol cassette» refused to communi-cate with us.

Two years ago V. Efremov wrote in the newspaper «Golos Ukrainy»: «For the first time during thirty years of my work as a journalist I am writ-ing because I am afraid. I am afraid of a senseless death. Yet, I am afraid even more that my death will be presented as an accidental one: «murder by drug addicts», «murder for robbery» or «a tragic road accident»».

132

I cannot say that I knew Volodymir very well, but it is doubtless that he was afraid of something. Of some information, which he knew, but did not communicate either to his relatives or to his colleagues? Of the revenge of his former (or actual) partners? Or of something else?

When Pavlo Lazarenko was the head of the Dnepropetrovsk oblast council and, later, the Prime-Minister of Ukraine, V. Efremov created the media-holding in Dnepropetrovsk: the 11th TV channel, newspapers «Soi-bor» and «Dnepropetrovsk», radio company and informational agency… When, at the election of 1998, Lazarenko’s party «Gromada» got about 80% of votes in Dnepropetrovsk, other influential person of the city dis-liked that very much. P. Lazarenko escaped to the USA, and the destruction of the «pro- Lazarenko» mass media began throughout the country.

In January 1999 Efremov stayed in custody for several days under the pretext of the allegedly incorrectly registered bank credit. Yet, what really happened? Volodymir told me that the pressure was exerted on him for the cooperation with the ex-prime-minister, in particular, for the agitation for «Gromada» at the election. Little by little Efremov lost all his mass media, naturally not for his own free will. In spring V. Efremov met with Laza-renko’s advocates Harold Rosenthal and Marina Dovgopola. The advocates con-firmed that he had agreed to come to San Francisco and to appear in court. Later the American Embassy informed the IMI that the candidature of this witness was suggested by the advocates, but the court refused to listen to him.

Could the consent to give evidence on Lazarenko’s case become the reason of Efremov’s death? We do not know, since we have no materials proving or disproving this version. Yet, we know for sure that the status of the editor-in-chief of several large-scale regional mass media guaranteed to Efremov the great amount of information about the events of 1996-1999.

Could Efremov cooperate with the political opponents of the present owners of the 11th Dnepropetrovsk TV channel, whom he, obviously, dis-liked? We hope that the investigation will answer this question. And we will continue our journalistic investigation…

(«The Poltava oblast media-bulletin», No. 42, 19 August 2003)

Attacks at journalists in Donetsk (Eduard Malinovskiy,Sergiy Kuzin, Vasyl Vasiutin) Three journalists were attacked in Donetsk during three days. At night of 12 August, in the downtown of Donetsk, five strangers at-

tacked Eduard Malinovskiy, a correspondent of the Internet-edition «Ostrov». The offenders did not take journalist’s bag, documents and credit card.

In the early hours of the morning of 14 August Sergiy Kuzin, a journalist of the oblast newspaper «Aktsent», was beaten and robbed. The criminals at-

133

tacked him from behind, hit him with a club for several times and took away his cell phone and brief case with passport and service documents.

The third victim, Vasil Vasiutin, a deputy of the editor-in-chief of the magazine «Zolotoy Skif», was attacked in a street. The criminals cruelly beat him, took away his cell phone and escaped. The journalist was transported to the oblast hospital with the cerebral brain concussion.

In the connection with the repeated attacks on journalists the General Prosecutor’s office took these cases under its special control. Aleksandr Med-vedko, a deputy of the General Prosecutor, made this information public at a briefing. 170 criminal cases connected with robbing, hooliganism, road acci-dents and thefts directed against journalists and journalists’ collectives were instituted during 2002 and 2003. More than 60 of these cases have been al-ready passed to courts.

(«Kievskie vedomosti», 16 August 2003)

Appeal for the press in the connection with beating of three journalists on Donetsk Oleksandr Mishchenko:Taking into account the fact that, in any civilized country, the activities of

mass media representatives are considered to be one of the most important principles of democracy, every attack on journalists in these countries is re-garded by everybody, including the power structures, as a threat to the entire society. Unfortunately, the Ukrainian power, in particular the law-enforcing organs, does not trouble oneself with the thorough investigation of such cases. On the contrary, they do their best for the concealment of the actual reasons of the attacks on journalists.

The events in Donetsk, when three my friends and colleagues were beaten during three nights, wholly confirm this statement.

Maybe law-enforcers are right, and the attacks on Malinovskiy, Kuzin and Vasiutin are not connected with their professional activities. Yet, then I want to ask out brave militiamen: why robbers and hooligans rage in the downtown? If three attacks on journalists during three nights is a quite normal phenomena, then one can calculate how many people (if to take into account the number of the professions in Donetsk) suffer daily in Donetsk. Now I am not surprised with the fact that the representatives of state power and large-scale business walk along Donetsk streets only with their bodyguards. Alas, common citizens, including journalists, are unable to protect themselves, and those, who must protect them, are passive.

I do not insist that the attacks on the Donetsk journalists were committed by somebody’s order, but the number of the victims seems to be too large for such a short term.

I regard these crimes as the consequences of another repartition of power and business in the region. The journalists merely became the scapegoats in

134

this conflict. I do not believe that the power can protect them and stop the ter-ror against the representatives of mass media.

(«Politichna Ukraina», 15 August 2003)

* * * The conflict in Donetsk between Rinat Akhmetov’s group and Viktor

Yanukovich’s group is obvious now. The story with the billboards became the first evidence of the repartition

of influence spheres. At night all billboards advertising «Zolotoy Skif», a pro-ject of V. Yanukovich, were dismounted without proper documents and per-missions. The events in other spheres also confirm the development of the conflict between the financial-industrial groups at the advertising market. Now the people, who are connected with «Zolotoy Skif», suffer various troubles.

Three local journalists were beaten in the Donetsk downtown. All of them got the cerebral brain concussion or bone fractures. And all of them were working in the magazine «Zolotoy Skif»: deputy editor Vasil Vasiutin, journal-ists Eduard Malinovskiy and Sergiy Kuzin. Militia does not connect these crimes with the professional activities of the victims. However, Sergiy Guz, the head of the independent media trade union, is sure that these attacks are connected with the conflict that is raging in the region after the transfer of several top city authori-ties to Kyiv. Leonid Zverev, the executive manager of the Institute of mass infor-mation, reckons that these crimes are connected with the repartition of the media-space on the eve of presidential election.

Oleksandr Mishchenko, the editor-in-chief of the magazine «ZolotoySkif», also thinks that the attacks on his colleagues were connected with «an-other repartition of power and business in the region». In his statement for the press he said: «I am surprised with the brutal revenge on journalists. I do not insist that the attacks on the Donetsk journalists were committed by some-body’s order, but the number of the victims seems to be too large for such a short term».

(«Ukrainske slovo», No. 34, 21-27 August 2003)

Criminal attacks on journalists in the Lugansk oblast Soon after the events in Donetsk, new victims appeared in the Lugansk

oblast, informs the newspaper «Luganski novyny». That time the criminals attacked Yuri Aseev, a journalist of the newspaper

«XXXI vek», Volodymir Inogorskiy, the editor of the same newspaper, Boris Ivanov, a journalist of the Lugansk oblast newspaper «RIO+», and OlenaKravchenko, a journalist of the Donetsk TV company «Zakaz». All victims were returning from the wedding of Yuri Aseev. When the journalists entered one of dark alleys, they noticed a jeep, which drove after them. Several strang-ers attacked the journalists, beat them and took away their personal things. In the morning the victims were transported to the Central hospital of Alchevsk.

135

Now all of them are already discharged from the hospital. A criminal case was started after the fact of the attack. The investigation is going on.

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 153, 22 August 2003, «Barometr», 16-08-2003)

Response of the General Prosecutor’s office to the IMI about the criminal attacks on journalists The Institute of mass information received from the General Prosecutor’s

office the response to the resolution of the Forum of journalists «Legal self-protection» concerning the impediment to the professional activities of journal-ists. The response reads that all facts mentioned in the resolution will be checked and the conclusions will be made. So, the General Prosecutor’s office checked the materials of the investigation of the criminal case on inflicting the body injuries to Mikhail Novik, the head of the fund «Reporter», and came to the conclusion that there were no data, which evidenced about the impediment to professional activities of the journalist.

As to the intimidation of Vera Kitaygorodska, the editor of a Chernivtsy newspaper, by Ivan Muntian, the head of the oblast council, the General Prosecutor’s office answered that, after the second check of the facts, the deci-sion was taken not to start the criminal case.

The pre-trial investigation of the attack on Rivne journalist Vitaliy Dov-gich was also suspended because the criminals had not been found.

(«Ukrainske slovo», No. 34, 21-27 August 2003)

Kirovograd militia protects journalists Taking into account the specificity of journalistic profession and the pub-

lic interests to the crimes committed against the mass media workers, the top officers of the Kirovograd oblast militia directorate control every case of that kind. This was confirmed by the cases on robberies of three Kirovograd jour-nalists that were committed in June-July 2003.

Within two days the detectives of Kirovograd town militia directorate disclosed the robbery of two workers of local TV company. Efim Marmer, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Ukraina-Tsentr», called the disclosure of the robbery of a correspondent of his newspaper «a demonstration of high profes-sionalism of militiamen». Journalists of the newspaper «Ukraina-Tsentr»thanked the law-enforcers for their conscientious work.

(«Imenem zakonu», No. 33, 15-21 August 2003)

Two journalists were attacked in Zaporozhye Zaporozhye oblast youth public organization «Young Rukh»: This information was communicated by Anatoliy Eriomin, the prosecutor

of the Khortitskiy district of Zaporozhye. According to the prosecutor’s words, on 3 September Sergiy Goncharenko, a journalist of the newspaper «Zaporizhska Sich», was stabbed with knife in his stomach. «The victim tells that a stranger

136

greeted him in the doorway of his house. The journalist answered the greeting. After this he felt the acute pain in his stomach and saw that he was wounded with the knife». The journalist got to a hospital, where he underwent a surgical operation. Now his condition is of medium gravity. Eriomin informs that both the victim and editor of the newspaper «Zaporizhska Sich» Oleksandr Veriovkin reckon that the attack was caused by the preparation of the material about the re-partition of the property in the sphere of trade and privatization. The criminal case was started after part 4 of Article 296 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine «hooligan-ism with the application of cold steel».

On 4 September 2003 Mykola Loy, the a deputy of the manager of the weekly «Dosye» in charge of the questions of sale, was beaten in the Khortitskiy district of Zaporozhye. «Three strangers attacked him in the yard of his house and delivered several blows in his face», tells the prosecutor of the Khortitskiy district. The criminal case was started after part 2 of Article 296 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine «hooliganism committed by a group of persons».

It should be noted that both journalists lived in the same house. The second attack took place on the next day after the first one.

In both cases the hooligans did not took from the victims either money or other things.

The oblast organization of the National union of journalists turned to the prosecutor of the Zaporozhye oblast, the head of the militia directorate of the Zaporozhye oblast and mass media: «We have the grounds to believe that these crimes were connected with the professional activities of the victims. The oblast organization of the National union of journalists is turning to leaders of law-enforcing structures with the demand to investigate thoroughly the criminal cases started after the facts of the attacks on the workers of mass media, and to guarantee the safety of journalists».

(«Prava ludyny» (English version), September 2003)

* * * In the evening of 3 September a young man with a knife in his stomach

was transported to the casualty ward of the 9th city hospital of Zaporozhye. This was Sergey Goncharenko, a free-lance correspondent of the municipal newspaper «Zaporizka Sich».

Sergey believes that the reason of the attack was his journalistic activities, in particular, the publication of the article about the repartition of property in the trade sphere. Goncharenko tells that more than once some people phoned him, of-fered money and threatened him with physical violence. Aleksandr Veriovkin, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Zaporizka Sich», adheres to the same opin-ion. He told that Goncharenko was preparing the materials about the illegal ac-tions «concerning very great sums of money that may be connected with shadow economics».

The attack on the journalist is investigated by a special group.

137

(«Fakty», No. 162, 6 September 2003)

* * * On the next day after the attack on S. Goncharenko Mykola Loy, a

worker of the newspaper «Dosye» in charge of sale of the edition, was at-tacked by strangers near his own flat. Many mass media informed that M. Loy was the acting manager of the newspaper, but this information was not true; moreover, he did not work in the edition since 5 September. Criminal cases af-ter Article 296 were started in both cases: «hooliganism» with the use of cold steel in the first case, and «hooliganism» committed by a group in the second case.

As to the attack on Anatoliy Naumov, a journalist of «Dosye», which was committed in July 2003, law-enforcers have now his explanation that he fell down and bruised himself.

(«Dosye», Zaporozhye, No. 38, 11 September 2003)

The fourth journalist was beaten in Donetsk Nikolay Tuzhikov, a cameraman of the «First municipal» TV channel,

got to the neurosurgery ward of Donetsk Kalinin hospital. Tuzhikov is the fourth worker of mass media, who has been attacked in Donetsk during the re-cent time. The victim is still unconscious. Nikolay’s sister asserts that this was not the first attack at him. The mother of the journalist suggests that the beating of her son is connected with his professional activities. The doctors consider the state of Tuzhikov’s health as grave.

The officers of the Leninskiy district militia precinct are conducting the preliminary investigation of the incident.

(«Populiarnye vedomosti», Pavlograd, No. 37, 11 September 2003)

Attacks on journalists in Donetsk: the opinion of militia Three attacks on representatives of mass media in Donetsk are not con-

nected with their professional activities, stated Oleksandr Ivashchuk, the act-ing head of the Donetsk city militia directorate, at a briefing.

«Kontekst» communicates that, according to Ivashchuk’s words, one man was arrested in the connection with the attack on Eduard Malinovskiy. The in-vestigation of the crime is finished and the case is passed to court.

«As to two other incidents, the ODA for the detention of the suspected were realized simultaneously in two towns of the oblast. As a result, two dwellers of Artemovsk were detained, who had attacked Sergiy Kuzin. The term of detention of one of them was prolonged to 10 days, since there was the information about his connection with other crimes», said Oleksandr Ivash-chuk.

138

Oleksandr Kucheriavy, the head of the investigation department, in-formed that the attack had been committed by three persons, and the law-enforcers were searching for the third criminal.

According to Kucheriavy, material evidences were seized from the de-tained: the stool legs, with which the journalist had been beaten, charger and cover of the cell phone, which had been stolen from the victim (the criminals threw the phone away). The both detained gave evidence.

Besides, the investigation group arrested the suspected of the attack on Vasyl Vasiutin: a dweller of Avdeevka born in 1985. Yet, the journalist insists that he was attacked by two men. Now the law-enforcers are checking this fact. The cell phone taken from Vasiutin by the criminals was seized from the de-tained.

As we informed before, three journalists were attacked in Donetsk in Au-gust 2003: Eduard Malinovskiy, Sergiy Kuzin and Vasyl Vasiutin. Two inves-tigation groups disclosed these crimes in a month. The investigation of the cases on the attacks on representatives of mass media was personally con-trolled by Vladimir Malyshev, the head of the militia directorate of the Do-netsk oblast. The groups were rewarded for the successful investigation of these crimes.

(ForUm, 25 September 2003)

Tragic event in the life of Vasyl Koriak (Lubny) On 12 September Vasyl Koriak, the 51-year-old former mayor of Lubny

(the Poltava oblast), who had survived several attempts at his life, wounded a man, who stole to his yard at night. V. Koriak made two warning shots from his rifle (for which he had the permission). The thief attacked Koriak and tried to stab him with a screwdriver. Then Koriak shot in the attacker’s legs, but the bullet hit the offender’s groin and he died of the loss of blood.

The law-enforcing organs established the identity of the burglar: this was a 29-year-old dweller of Lubny, who had a mental disease. The Lubny district prosecutor’s office started the criminal case. Vasyl Koriak stays at large yet.

(«Fakty», No. 169, 17 September 2003)

* * * Ludmila Kucherenko, the President of the Poltava oblast media club: On 12 September, at about 1 a.m., Vasyl Koriak, a Lubny correspondent

of the all-Ukrainian newspaper «Informatsiyny bulleten», the author of the fa-mous serial «Tominiana» (about E. Tomin, the then head of the Poltava oblast administration), woke up and saw the light of a torch and that somebody had opened the window of his room. He also heard that somebody tried to open the window on another side of the house. When his eyes got accustomed to the dark-ness, he saw several figures in his yard, one of which slipped to the garage. V.

139

Koriak, who in July underwent the attack, when some strangers fired at him with buckshot, had no illusions about the intentions of the night visitors. So, he loaded the rifle and prepared to protect his life and family. Koriak awoke his wife, dart out to the yard and ran into the garage. The moon shone brightly and he could see a big fellow, who was doing something near the car.

Vasyl Koriak is a former investigator, so he has some experience in detaining criminals. He ordered to the uninvited guest: «Freeze!», but the «guest» rushed towards him. Vasyl fired to air and shouted «Freeze!» again. Yet, the criminal ig-nored the cry and continued to approach. Then Vasyl made another warning shot and after that shoot in the legs of the bandit. The latter fell down: he was wounded. «What is your name?», asked Koriak. «Dakhnovskiy», answered the man.

Vasyl returned to the house and called for ambulance and militia. The bullet, that hit the criminal passed through his hip and stuck in the car board. However, the medics, apparently, incorrectly estimated the seriousness of the wound and did not bandage it tightly, so Dakhnovskiy died from the loss of blood during the transportation to hospital.

Soon after that the ambulance had to come to Koriaks, because Vasyl, his wife and their 12-year-old son were deeply shocked.

In the morning a knife with 40-centimeter blade and a can with some fuel were find near the garage. Although the militiamen learned the name of the at-tacker from Vasyl Koriak as early as at 1 a.m., they reported to the general that they managed to establish the identity of the criminal only at 19 p.m. Besides, they announced by radio about an unidentified corpse found in the Ko-nonivskiy forest.

Dakhnovskiy’s mother told that in the evening of 11 September two men had come to her son and proposed «to work as watchman at the summer cot-tages». Dakhnovskiy agreed and went away with these men. By the way, 30-year-old Dakhnovskiy was rather tall: 184 cm, so he was much higher than Koriak. Besides, he had psychical disorders, so it is most possible that, if he would survive, he would not be punished strictly. Naturally, the prosecutor’s of-fice of the Lubny district started the criminal case. For the present moment the law-enforcers do not deny the legal right of Koriak to protect himself, his family and his property with arms. And the wound in a hip had not to be fatal, if the medical aid was more qualified.

As well as in four previous cases, where Koriak was attacked with the use of firearms, he does not believe (and he had the grounds for this disbelief) that the criminals will be found and punished. In July 2003, after the night shooting with buck-shot, the criminal case was started after the article on hooliganism, but not on the attempted murder. The versions proposed by law-enforcers after the July attempt were nonsensical and scandalous: the militiamen alleged that the former mayor organized the attempt by himself in order to increase his rating, or that somebody merely tried to frighten him a little.

14 0

That time the night visitors tried to enter Koriak’s house. And, if his sleep were not so light, this story would result in the tragedy with more than one victim: the criminals had the can with gasoline and, most likely, they were going to set fire to the house with all its sleeping inhabitants. However, we are sure that, in spite of this can, the prosecutor’s office will see there only a banal attempt of rob-bing, but not the revenge for the professional activities of the journalist.

The former colleagues of V. Koriak (he worked as an investigating officer for 25 years) behaved very strangely. When they came to his house in the tragic night, they said that he had to escape, but not to shoot.

– To escape? – cried Koriak. – I, man, father and husband, had to escape, when my wife and son faced danger?!

Perhaps, Dakhnovskiy’s mother would be able to recognize the men, with whom her son went away. Yet, basing on the experience, we think that the law-enforcers will do nothing to find the organizers and executors of the hunt for journalist and public figure Vasyl Koriak. On the contrary, the unprofes-sional, to put it mildly, actions are carried out: for instance, the militiamen asked one of the suspected directly whether it was he, who had shot at Koriak.

It is even unknown whether two accomplices of Dakhnovskiy are still alive, since they might know the organizer of the crime and were the unwanted witnesses.

V. Koriak connects the attempt with the fact that he openly criticizes in his articles the vices and criminal essence of the modern regime. So, on 10 August, at the mass meeting in Lubny, he told publicly that the Lubny militia practically did not react to the crimes committed against common Ukrainians, that militia was one of the links of the narcotic business. And this business is connected with great money, for which some people will commit any crime, even a murder. V. Koriak suggests that he was visited by the same men, who had come to him in July. Maybe, he believes, the organizers ordered them to finish the work.

Lubny dwellers reckon that militia is unable to protect them from crimi-nals, so everybody must defend his life and property with weapons, like Koriak.

V. Koriak’s colleagues, independent journalists, are also sure that our society is completely corrupted and demoralized, and all state institutions are so weak morally and professionally that one cannot hope for clearance of crimes against journalists, protection of journalists envisaged by laws and superiority of right at consideration of the claims against mass media and journalists. It seems that jus-tice, as a social-ethical category, died in Ukraine. In spite of the slashing assess-ment of the work of law-enforcing organs, given by the Ukrainian President in his speech devoted to the 12th anniversary of independent Ukraine, almost nothing has changed in this agency.

There is only one positive moment: maybe, after the story with Koriak, the number of the people, who are ready to fulfill the orders of the enemies of disagreeable journalists, will decrease, and the journalists will use their legal right

14 1

agreeable journalists, will decrease, and the journalists will use their legal right to arm.

P.S. Ruslan Bilokin, the Lubny district prosecutor, has informed that the criminal case was started after Article 115 part 1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (premeditated murder).

(«The Poltava oblast media club», No. 47, 16 September 2003)

Attack on Igor Danilenko, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Dankor» (Sumy)A correspondent of FurUm informs that in the night of 24 September Igor

Danilenko, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Dankor», was attacked in Sumy. Social-business weekly «Dankor» is one of the most influential editions in Sumy.

About midnight two strangers pounced upon Danilenko in the doorway of his house. One of the attackers blocked the editor, and another sprinkled his face from a spray can with some oily liquid smelling with kerosene. After that the attackers escaped. Danilenko called to militia at once. The officers of the Zarechy district precinct compiled the protocol about the incident.

By the words of Igor Danilenko, the attackers were absolutely silent and made no attempts to rob him, although he had a briefcase in his hand. The edi-tor is sure that the attack was not accidental. He insists that, one day before it, on 23 September, about 2 a.m., one of the attackers was waiting for him near the house. Yet, that time he avoided the assault, because he came home by taxi, and the criminal did not want to attack him in presence of witnesses.

(24 September 2003, www.for-ua.com, dancor.sumy.ua)

* * * Officers of the Zarechny militia precinct started the investigation of the

attack on Igor Danilenko. Fortunately, the face and eyes of journalists were not injured seriously.

The editor-in-chief connects the attack with his professional activities, since recently «Dankor» has published a series of critical articles, which could be disliked by the personages of these materials.

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 177, 26 September 2003)

Svatoslav Piskun refused to call the names of the suspectsof the murder of Igor Aleksandrov In the beginning of this week General Prosecutor Svatoslav Piskun de-

clared that the investigation of the murder of Igor Aleksandrov, the manager of the Slaviansk TV company «TOR», was almost completed. The General Prosecutor refused to call the names of the suspects of the murder, but said that they were staying in the preliminary prison and testifying in presence of

14 2

advocates. Several days ago the press service of the Security Service of Ukraine published the information in some mass media that Aleksandrov had been murdered by the members of Kramatorsk gang «The 17th district». In the course of the special operation the investigation group arrested ten members (including the leaders) of this gang.

It is rumored that the organizers and executors of the murder of Aleksan-drov were also detained. Now the ODA are continued in order to check the connection of the detained with other ordered murders and to bring them to criminal responsibility. Svatoslav Piskun expressed his gratitude to the former militia officers, members of the investigation group, MPs from the Supreme Rada Committee for fighting the organized crime and other persons, who as-sisted in the investigation and clearance of the crime.

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 177, 26 September 2003)

Roksana Gedeon. Chain reaction The unexpected event happened: the General Prosecutor’s office declared

that the murder of TV journalist Igor Aleksandrov was solved. On the past Tuesday Svatoslav Piskun informed that the direct executors of the crime had been detained and were giving evidence in presence of advocates, and the Pecherskiy district court of Kyiv resolved to leave them behind the bars till the beginning of court consideration.

The author of this article knows from the trustworthy sources that Alek-sandr Rybak, an ex-businessman from Slaviansk and the former head of the firm «Ukrliga», was arrested. The inhabitants of the Northern Donbass not un-foundedly believe that it was Rybak, who ordered the murder of I. Aleksan-drov.

The law-enforcers dealt with Rybak for two years. He was detained in Kyiv on 8 August. According to some data, he had been in hiding for a long time. For two years the law-enforcers hunted him, but in a very strange way: they detained Rybak, and, after some negotiations (most probably about the sum of ransom), released him.

For instance, in summer 2001, soon after the death of I. Aleksandrov, the group of Kyiv law-enforcers came to the Donetsk oblast and tried to detain the manager of «Ukrliga». Yet, Rybak arrived to the interrogation under escort of the USS special squad «Alfa» (some time later Yuri Vandin, a deputy head of the squad, recognized that in the press accompanying his statement with some incoherent explanations).

It became clear that Rybak had the protectors not only in Donbass, but also in Kyiv. In particular, according to the data of deputies’ commission, which investigated the murder of Aleksandrov, the essential part of his busi-ness was patronized by the Security Service.

So, Rybak was released. And on the next day the law-enforcers an-nounced that he was wanted again!

14 3

For the second time he was caught in November 2001 in Kramatorsk. The official version was that he was wanted not for the murder of the journalist, but for some financial gerrymander. This sham version was supported by Sergiy Vinokurov, a deputy of the General Prosecutor (now – the first deputy of S. Piskun). In his interview to «Interfax» this «upholder of legality» hotly pro-tected Rybak from the suspicions and insisted that the latter «had no connection with the murder of Aleksandrov». So, how Mr. Vinokurov may pretend to the high post, epaulets and great salary paid at the expense of tax payers?

The version of Vinokurov is disproved by the fact that the detention of Rybak was directed by Chechil, a deputy head of the Main Criminal Investiga-tion Department. However, the gangster gave the written undertaking not to leave a place and was released in the accordance with the decision of Slavi-ansk town court. It is rumored that this time Rybak had to pay 30 thousand USD.

The business of «Ukrliga» was destroyed. During last two years Rybak became poor. The political situation changed too. Svatoslav Piskun, who ap-peared to be unable to solve the murder of Gongadze, decided that he had to solve at least Aleksandrov’s murder that seemed to be simpler (it did not in-fringe the interests of Leonid Kuchma and other top officials). So, the prosecu-tor dared to disturb «the Donetsk hornet's nest». Along with Rybak two other citizens were arrested, who were the direct executors of the murder. The law-enforcers were looking for these people throughout Ukraine. It is not compre-hensible why the criminals did not escape, since they had two years to do that. Maybe, they were sure of their impunity or had no money. In any case, their detention is a great success.

Now Dmytro Rybak, a younger brother of Aleksandr, is wanted by mili-tia.

However, it were not only wealth and relations with influential persons that made A. Rybak immune to justice. According to the data collected by Oleg Solodun and Mykhaylo Serbin, the former officers of the Kramatorsk DFOC who provided the information for Aleksandrov’s TV features, prudent Rybak created something like a video studio in his office. The office was situ-ated in the downtown of Slaviansk, near the buildings of prosecutor’s and mayor’s offices. Cavalcades of expensive cars came to his office. Many influ-ential people: prosecutor’s, state officials, USS officers and militiamen, came to the den of mafia to discuss their problems. Rybak helped to many of them to make the career. And, naturally, he made the video records of some meetings in his office…

Moreover, Rybak had a very scrupulous secretary. She made notes about everyone, who came or phoned to the office, in a special register. Unfortu-nately, this priceless material evidence vanished in militia storerooms after the murder of Aleksandrov. Yet, Solodun and Serbin managed to get the copy of the register. I saw the copies of several pages, and I can say that many person-ages would pay much for the disappearance of their names from this list!

14 4

The register proves that militiamen, USS officers, prosecutors (including the prosecutor for supervision over the law observance!) and MPs visited Ry-bak in order to inform him about their law-enforcing and other important ac-tivities. It is not strange: «Ukrliga» operated with great sums. Yet, another thing is strange: why these officers were not disturbed by the investigation for two years?

Rybakov’s register evidence, in particular of a very ominous detail: on the days, when Aleksandrov’s feature was broadcasted, real conferences of law-enforcers and state officials gathered in Rybak’s office. Maybe, they liked to look TV together?

The list of the surnames mentioned in the registed allows to imagine the scale of the risk, which Aleksandrov ran, when he gave the floor to Solodun and Serbin. In fact, he saved their lives at the cost of his own life.

The ex-militiamen were loyal to the memory of their friend. During two years after his death they continued the active work. The main reason of the progress of the investigation was the fact that Solodun and Serbin were, at last, included to the investigation group. The version of the murder suggested by the former militiamen has become official now. Most probably, the accusation has been already preferred against Rybak.

However, there are many other questions. For instance, what will be the lot of the accomplices of Rybak: the Donetsk law-enforcers, who planned and committed the ordered murders?

Besides, the circle of the people involved to «Aleksandrov’s case» in-clude not only those persons, who are mentioned in Rybak’s register. After all, the investigation of this crime was crudely falsified. The behavior of some of-ficials was very suspicious. Viktor Pshonka, the Donetsk oblast prosecutor, in-vestigating officer Perunov, many Kramatorsk militiamen did their best to find a tramp, who had allegedly murdered the journalist, and prosecutors Sergiy Vi-nokurov and Mykhaylo Potebenko actively supported this fabricated version. The leaders of this «plot» of law-enforcers occupy the high posts in the oblast militia, USS and prosecutor’s office.

I heard that the Kyiv investigation group that detained A. Rybak and the executors of the murder works actively and coherently. The investigators are full of enthusiasm. They promise: «Wait a little. Soon we will send a train to the Donetsk oblast and detain everybody connected with this case».

At the same time, it is rumored that some MPs, who are afraid that Ry-bak’s arrest will affect them, are collecting the enormous bribe for his release. It is unlikely that they will succeed, but the attempt to give this bribe is quite probable.

The serious struggle is conducted now. And the time will show, who will win the field.

(«Silski visti», No. 112, 25 September 2003)

14 5

Events around «Moloda Galytchina» 3 October 2003. Four strangers in the respiratory masks burst in the edi-

torial board of the Lviv newspaper «Moloda Galytchina». They sprayed some gas into faces of two workers of the edition and smashed the computer center of the newspaper and the office of the literary editor situated in the next room. «At first these men ringed the doorbell, and one of our workers opened the door. They sprayed the gas into his face. Then they smashed the computer center with an axe. The criminals had something resembling a gun. They splashed an unknown liquid over the room and tried to set fire, but had no time for this», told Iosif Paziak, a worker of the newspaper.

The newspaper «Moloda Galytchina» is a primary journalistic organiza-tion. In the opinion of experts, the political credo of the newspaper is close to the SDPU (PRO).

The prosecutor’s office of the Frankivskiy district of Lviv started the criminal case on hooliganism and the premeditated infliction of damage to the property of the editorial board of the newspaper «Moloda Galytchina» (part 4 Article 296 and part 2 Article 194 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine). In the ac-cordance with Article 112 of the CPC of Ukraine, the case was directed for further investigation to the Frankivskiy district militia directorate. Evhen Tar-navskiy, a deputy editor of the «MG», communicated to the IMI: «Militia has not found the criminals yet. We have no information about the progress of the investigation, since the law-enforcers refer to the secrecy of information. We turned to the state guard agency with the request to render us the protection».

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

* * * The press conference has been conducted recently in Lviv with the par-

ticipation of law-enforcers and the victims of the attack on the newspaper «Moloda Galytchina». The workers of the newspaper do not say much about the reasons of the attack, but they suppose that it could be caused by their pro-fessional activities.

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 183, 4 October 2003)

Volodymir Moshchinskiy, an editor of the Kirovograd oblast TV and radio company, became a victim of hooligans Volodymir Moshchinskiy, the editor-in-chief of social and political fea-

tures of the Kirovograd oblast TV and radio company, became a victim of hooligans. Moshchinskiy tells that he was attacked at night of 29 September, when he was returning home from a business trip. The offenders hit the editor on the head, ribs and legs, then they knocked him off his feet and took away his cell phone, watch and money.

14 6

The UNIAN informs that this crime is investigated by the detectives of the town militia precinct. Kirovograd journalists turned to law-enforcing or-gans with the official appeal, in which they asked to consider this case espe-cially attentively and to conduct the investigation as fast as possible. This ap-peal was approved at the sitting of the oblast Committee for the protection of journalists’ rights and the executive committee of the oblast Union of journal-ists. The appeal was addressed to the prosecutor of the Kirovograd oblast and the head of the oblast militia directorate.

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 183, 4 October 2003)

Sound producer of the TV company «Aleks» was beatenand robbed in Zaporozhye 19 October 2003. On 19 October Igor Narochny, a sound producer of the

local TV company «Aleks» was beaten and robbed in Zaporozhye. The attack was committed on the territory of the Ordzhonikidzevskiy district not far from the house where the victim lived.

«I. Narochny was struck on the head with something heavy and fell down. He hit his head against a fence and fainted. When Igor regained his conscious-ness, he saw that he was robbed. By the words of the victim, the criminals took from him the cell phone, leather jacket, service ID and student’s card», told the representatives of town militia. The victim was transported to the neuro-surgical ward of the 5th town hospital with the cerebral brain concussion and craniocerebral trauma. The Ordzhonikidzevskiy district militia precinct started the case after Article 186 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine («robbery»). The investigation is carried out.

The beating of the sound producer of the TV company «Aleks» is not connected with his professional activities, insists Oleksandr Smokov, the main editor of the TV company. According to his words, I. Narochny works in the company for a short time (six months) and fulfils only technical work.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

* * * At the meeting devoted to the investigation of the cases connected with

the attacks on journalists (the meeting was conducted by Grigoriy Sereda, the prosecutor of the Zaporozhye oblast) it was pointed out that there were essen-tial drawbacks in the investigation of such cases. In most cases the law-enforcers could not get the proofs of the connection of these crimes with the professional activities of the victims. All in all, 3 criminal cases concerning the crimes against journalists were directed to courts during 2002-2003. Radio «Nostalgi» informs that all accused were condemned to incarceration.

(«Dosye», Zaporozhye, No. 45, 30 October 2003)

14 7

On the murder of Igor Aleksandrov On 1 October 2003 the investigation activities were started connected

with the case on the murder of I. Aleksandrov, the manager of the TV com-pany «TOR». As a result, on Wednesday the work of the TV company, which had been headed by the late Aleksandrov, was paralyzed. According to Valeriy Chaly, the general manager of the TV company, the suspected of the murder of Aleksandrov were taken to the office of the TV company two times during that day: about 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Chaly tells that the suspected were guarded carefully: they were escorted by a great number of the officers of special USS squad in masks and with machine carbines. The building of the TV company was surrounded by militiamen, and they blocked everybody, who wanted to enter or leave the building. The guards ignored even the IDs of the workers of the TV company.

«Nobody warned us beforehand about these investigation activities. As a result, our work was deranged on that day», told V. Chaly.

Some days before, on 26 September, Viktor Shokin, a deputy of the Gen-eral Prosecutor, declared that the law-enforcing organs had arrested the organ-izers and executors of the murder of Aleksandrov. The murder was organized by Oleksandr Rybak and his younger brother Dmytro Rybak; it was committed by citizens Tursunov and Onishko. The law-enforcers are looking for other participants of the crime. The USS has the information that some criminals connected with this case are the members of the Kramatorsk criminal group «The 17th district».

Igor Aleksandrov died in a hospital on 7 July 2001. On 3 July he was bru-tally beaten with baseball bats by some strangers near the building of the TV company. The prosecutor’s office accused Yuri Verediuk, a tramp, of this crime, but on 17 May 2002 he was acquitted by the Donetsk appeal court on the ground of the failure to prove his participation in the murder. The Donetsk prosecutor’s office appealed against this court decision, but two months later Yu. Verediuk died of the acute cardiac decompensation complicated with the cardiac infarction.

On 25 July 2002 the Supreme Court of Ukraine resolved to direct the case for the additional investigation. The acquittal of Yu. Verediuk was cancelled.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

Murderer of Oleksandr Panich was condemned to 12 yearsof incarceration 15 October 2003. The Kyivskiy district court of Donetsk convicted Olek-

sandr Bernik accused of the murder of Oleksandr Panich, a worker of the newspa-per «Donetski novyny». The murderer was condemned to 12 years of incarcera-tion. According to the words of Mykhaylo Sakun, a deputy of the Donetsk prose-cutor, the accused pled guilty and apologized to the relatives and friends of his victim.

14 8

We want to remind that Oleksandr Panich disappeared on 17 November 2002. On the eve of his disappearance he sold his flat, where brothers Berniks also lived. The co-lodgers had disappeared from the city too, but in summer of 2003 Oleksandr Bernik came to militia and confessed to the murder of Panich. On 2 December 2002 Panich’s wife turned to militia with the application about the disappearance of her husband. Olga Galska, a deputy of the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Donetski novyny», believes that the disappearance of jour-nalist Oleksandr Panich is not connected with his professional activities.

The detectives, who examined Panich’s flat, found the traces of blood on a carpet.

On 13 July 2003 Oleksandr Olmezov, the Donetsk prosecutor, stated at a press conference that the law-enforcers had found the body, which could be the body of O. Panich. The prosecutor informed that the body had been found in a pond, at a depth of about seven meters. The corpse had no head and extremities. Olmezov did not present the results of expertise to journalists, so he did not prove that it was the body of Panich.

The colleagues of the journalist do not connect his disappearance with his work in the edition.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

Complaint of editor of the Internet edition «Vlasti.net» Igor Enin against the illegal actions of law-enforcers Igor Enin, the editor of the Internet edition «Vlasti.net», the Internet-version

of the newspaper «Kuryer», Melitopol: On 26 February 2003, at 22:30, the editor was driving to the railway sta-

tion to receive the run of the newspaper «Kuryer». The car was stopped by road militia. The militiamen took away the documents from the editor. In the town militia precinct I. Enin compiled the application against the illegal ac-tions of militiamen. Yet, the officer-on-duty refused to inform Enin about the registration number of the application, referring to the absence of his boss, who allegedly had to register the document. Some time later the editor came to the precinct again. That time the video record was made. As a result, the appli-cation was registered, and Enin learned its registration number.

In two days, on 28 February 2003, an attack was committed on I. Enin. Two strangers grabbed him for hair and hit his head against the iron gate of a garage. The attackers «blandly» offered him to stop the publication of «vile ar-ticles» in his weekly. A week later the galley-proofs of the weekly «Kuryer» were stolen from the editorial car. The numerous complaints to law-enforcing organs were fruitless.

However, the editorial board received a very strange response: «The Melitopol town militia directorate started the criminal case after your

complaint in accordance with Article 296 part 1 of the CC of Ukraine (hooligan-ism) and Article 185 part 1 of the CC of Ukraine (theft). The investigation is con-ducted.

14 9

Besides, militia captain-on-duty S. Ivchik was brought to disciplinary re-sponsibility for the tactless treatment.

Head of the Melitopol town militia directorate Kolomiets». So, the militia head punished captain S. Ivchik, although we tried to explain

more than once that the captain behaved well and did his best to stifle the conflict. Seven months later, on 2 October, the militia head, together with his deputy,

came to the editorial board and asked not to give publicity to this incident; they promised to solve all questions «on-the-fly».

The editorial board of the newspaper «Kuryer» have already written for several times that the town authorities headed by V. Efimenko, organized the in-formational blockade of the newspaper. It is impossible to get any information about the events occurring in the town. At the same time, the total sum of the claims handed against the newspaper has reached 75 thousand hryvnas.

(«Dosye», Zaporozhye, No. 45, 30 October 2003)

Deaths of journalists 28 September 2003. At 6:00 a.m. Valentin Sakov, a journalist of the local

newspaper «Partner», perished in the town of Iziaslav, the Khmelnitskiy oblast. According to the information of the press center of the oblast militia directorate, the 57-year-old journalist was knocked down by a car «Nissan» driven by a man, who was heavily drunk. Valentin Sakov got serious traumas and died in a hos-pital.

The death of the journalist is not connected with his professional activi-ties, believe his relatives and colleagues. His daughter Ilona Sakova informed the IMI that, in her opinion, her father had perished accidentally.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

150

* * * 3 October 2003. At 7 a.m. Irina Goncharenko, a free-lance correspondent

of the newspaper «Fortetsia» (Khmelnitskiy), jumped off the roof of a house and died. A week before the newspaper published her article about the work of the narcological ward of the Kamyanets-Podilskiy town hospital.

After the publication the administration of the hospital discharged her from the hospital for spreading the information about the problems of the ward. The woman had nowhere to go and demanded to continue the treatment. On 2 October Irina was driven away from the hospital, and on 3 October she was found dead. Now militia refuses to give any comments.

Irina Goncharenko was 27 years old. When she was 14, she became an orphan; in 1998 she lost her flat. She managed to get rid of the narcotic de-pendence, but she had the decompensated cirrhosis and needed permanent medical treatment. Irina preserved her sound mind and was cooperating with the newspaper «Fortetsia».

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

On the murder of Georgiy Gongadze 22 October 2003. Oleksiy Pukach, a former head of the intelligence de-

partment of the Ministry of Interior, was arrested in the connection with the murder of journalist Georgiy Gongadze. In the course of the detention the law-enforcers seized from him the ID of the head of the so-called «external obser-vation» department. The accusation has not been brought in yet.

On 5 November 2003, according to the decision of the Kyiv appeal court, Oleksiy Pukach gave the written undertaking not to leave a place and was re-leased. In the opinion of MP Yuri Lutsenko, «the release of Oleksiy Pukach in the courtroom may be regarded as wiping out the tracks in Gongadze’s case». «In that way», he says, «the law-enforcing organs are trying to protract the in-vestigation of this case».

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

* * * 30 October 2003. The appeal by Myroslava Gongadze on the dismissal

of the General Prosecutor: «The dismissal of S. Piskun testifies that the authorities are trying to ham-

per the progress in the investigation of Gongadze’s case. The arrest of the workers of the Ministry of Interior logically implicates the official accusation of Yuri Kravchenko, the head of the tax administration and former Minister of Interior (in 2000). It is obvious that after this the thread would lead to the President. Such evolution of the events is, naturally, too venturesome, so Ku-chma hastily dismissed the energetic General Prosecutor. I was not satisfied by the course of the investigation headed either by Potebenko or by Piskun, but I

151

reckon that this time the power discredited itself and proved that it did not want to conduct the efficient investigation of the crime.

In my opinion, the considered decision of the President also proves the wish of the power to control the law-enforcing organs. This dismissal must become the last warning for all politicians, who still hope for democratic presidential election-2004.

Everyone must draw the conclusions from this situation, first of all Svia-toslav Piskun. If he and the investigating group really have the proofs and authen-tic information concerning the murder of Gonganze and many other crimes com-mitted by actual or former militia officers, then, for the sake of their own safety and the honor of their profession, they must tell about that to the public. S. Piskun has the choice now: either to be forgotten or to get the new chance for the devel-opment of his career.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

A correspondent of the newspaper «Fakty i komentarii» was beaten in Odessa The appeal of the Odessa Guild of correspondents: On 19 November, at 20:45, Aleksandr Levit, a correspondent of the all-

Ukrainian newspaper «Fakty i komentarii», was attacked by several strangers. The men hit the journalist on his head for several times, knocked him

down and began to kick him. The attackers warned the journalist: «This is only the beginning, and later we will murder you». A. Levit got the bodily injures of various degree of gravity.

The criminals did not take either money, or valuables, or the cell phone, therefore they beat the journalist with another purpose. A. Levit handed the of-ficial complaint about the attack to the Primorskiy district militia precinct.

We believe that this crime, committed against a member of the Odessa Guild of correspondents, evidences on helplessness of the power and law-enforcing organs. The publications by Levit are very acute and principal, which, naturally, irritates the officials and other influential persons.

A. Levit carried out the journalistic investigation of the arbitrary actions of the workers of a café, situated in one of the houses at Panteleymonovskaya Street, towards the tenants of the house. Maybe, the position of the journalist in this conflict caused the attack on him, as well as the beating of his father, a 80-year-old veteran of the WW2, participant of the Grigoryevskiy landing, de-fense and liberation of Odessa, a veteran of journalism.

We regard this crime, committed against our colleague, as another at-tempt of pressure on journalists, who have their own opinion about the events occurring in Odessa. We keep in mind the beatings of Igor Rozov, Stanislav Shandar and Arkadiy Romm, the members of the Giuld, as well as intimida-tion by phone of other journalists of all-Ukrainian mass media, who work in Odessa.

152

We demand from the Odessa oblast state administration, mayor Ruslan Bodelan, oblast militia directorate and the Odessa city militia directorate to comment this scandalous crime against the journalist, to conduct the effective investigation of the crime and to inform the public about the measures taken for the prevention of such facts in future.

Viacheslav Voronkov, the president of the Odessa Guild of correspondents

Attack on Igor Danilenko, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Dankor» (Sumy) The Ukrainian Association of publishers of periodicals (UAPP) prepared

the appeal, which, in particular, reads: «We are demanding the decisive actions from militia. The attacks on journalists and publishers of mass media continue, but the law-enforcing organs do nothing».

The UAPP received the response from V. Evdokimov, the head of the Criminal Investigation Department of the Ministry of Interior of Ukraine, «On the measures for the investigation of the hooligan actions committed against I. Danilenko, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Dankor»:

«The Criminal Investigation Department of the Ministry of Interior of Ukraine attentively considered your appeal. We established that at midnight of 24 September 2003 two unknown criminals sprayed some oily liquid intoDanilenko’s face and escaped. The experts examined this liquid and did not find any toxic components. The Zarechny district militia precinct instituted the criminal case after the fact of the attack in accordance with part 1 Article 296 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (hooliganism). A group of detectives was created for the investigation of this offence. The group checks now several versions, including one connected with the professional activities of the vic-tim. The law-enforcing organs of the Sumy oblast are trying to establish the identity of the attackers: the militiamen are analyzing the publications in the newspaper «Dankor» in order to find the information compromising some ju-ridical or physical persons. The persons, who are registered in militia and medical establishments of the oblast, are also checked as to the participation in this attack. The investigation of the crime is controlled by the Ministry of Inte-rior of Ukraine».

The UAPP expresses its gratitude to the head of the CID for his response, but we want to remind that, along with the attack on I. Danilenko, we men-tioned in our appeal the attack on Vinnitsa publishers Taradaykos (father and son) and other crimes against journalists: «The Ukrainian Association of pub-lishers of the periodicals demands the immediate reaction of the Ministry of Interior to the facts of criminal terror against journalists and publishers. The UAPP proposes to create the special commission at the Ministry of Interior, which should regularly report to the public and mass media about the course of investigation of the crimes against mass media workers. Not a single attacker has been found until now».

The commission was not created.

153

(Electronic bulletin of the Ukrainian Association of publishers of periodicals, «Novyny drukovanykh ZMI Ukrainy», No. 39, 18 November 2003)

154

Murders in Obukhiv. Death of journalist Sergiy Khavtura On 11 November Sergiy Khavtura was buried. Sergiy was a journalist.

He had worked in various informational agencies, but for some time before the death he was jobless. Khavtura was murdered in the night of 9 November near his house. A great haematoma and wound on his temple confirmed that the journalist was murdered. However, forensic experts resolved that Khavtura had died of cold and getting of food particles into his respiratory tract. The head traumas were not mentioned in the expert conclusion at all.

Obukhiv inhabitants tell that this was the 14th murder in their town during the last month. And every time the experts found any causes of the death, ex-cept the murder. The facts of falsifying the expert conclusions and passivity of militia in Obukhiv are scandalous! People are in panic. They asked Sergiy Khavtura’s friends, who came from Kyiv, to do something for the investiga-tion of these crimes. They asked the journalists to describe this situation in the press in order to make the local militia act.

P. S. We learned that this electoral district was represented by Zasukha, the wife of the governor of the Kyiv oblast. The site «Maydan» already in-formed about the criminal riot, which takes place in the towns headed by the Zasukhas’ clan. This problem was also mentioned in the speeches of the par-ticipants of the Forum of democratic forces of the Kyiv oblast, which was held on 18 October in Bila Tserkva.

(11-2003, «Maydan-INFORM»,«The Poltava oblast media club», No. 55, 17 November 2003)

According to the materials of monitoring conducted by the ombuds-person 40 workers of mass media perished since 1991

(«Segodnia», No. 279, 8 December 2003)

Yulia Buk, an editor of the newspaper «Ekspress», was robbed Yulia Buk, an editor of the newspaper «Ekspress», was robbed yesterday.

The editorial board of the newspaper informed the UNIAN that a stranger had attacked the Yulia in the doorway of her house in evening, when the woman had been returning home from work. The man threatened the journalist with physical violence and snatched out her bag with small sum of money, editorial ID, passport, cell phone and credit card. The victim turned to the Sykhivskiy district militia precinct. The militiamen compiled the picture of the criminal and are now taking measures for his identification.

(«UNIAN», 4 December 2003)

Reaction to the beating of journalist Oleksandr Levitwas traditional Everybody reacted to the beating of Oleksandr Levit, an Odessa corre-

spondent of the newspaper «Fakty», traditionally: Union of journalists – with

155

an appeal, journalists – with indignation, militia – with promises to find and pun-ish the attackers, prosecutor’s office – with silence.

I want to remind that Oleksandr was cruelly beaten in the Odessa down-town. This was not a robbery or hooliganism – the attackers warned the jour-nalist that they would murder him, if he would not stop to write.

Oleksandr Levit is a reporter. His duty is to inform society about various events. This profession is very dangerous nowadays, and Levit was not the first journalist, who learned that from his own experience. Other journalists had been beaten before: Yuri Fedotkin, Vitaliy Chechik, Igor Rozov, Volodymir Bekhter (he died in a hospital), Stanislav Shandor and Oleksandr Mizin. Some criminals shot at Sergiy Lebedev and Boris Derevianko. The deaths of Yuliy Mazur and Yuri Ivanov were also doubtful. Are not such facts too frequent?

None of these crimes were investigated. The murder of Boris Derevianko is the most glaring example of hushing up the case. The brave Odessa militia almost at once found a usual bandit from the Pridnestrovskiy region. The in-vestigation was falsified so crudely that the case nearly fell to pieces in court. However, the accused was condemned, although even the prosecutor ex-pressed the doubt about his guilt.

The militia also found the scapegoat in O. Levit’s case. Yet, the unex-pected thing happened: the accused stated during the interrogation in presence of his victim that militiamen had forced him to admit the guilt.

By the way, I know well about the efficiency of such investigations. I had been also attacked, and militiamen turned to me for the last time in April 1998, although the guilty are not found until now. And I am sure that the investiga-tion of O. Levit’s case will be fruitless too.

The state of the media space of Odessa is pitiable. During last years al-most all printed and electronic mass media of the city degenerated into the worst examples of propaganda of successes and prominent qualities of the mayor and governor. What one can say about common journalists, if even the Odessa Guild of correspondents for several years on end awards the governor with some prize as a better friend of the press, and the local branch of the Union of journalists of Ukraine calls him a pattern of journalistic creative activities!

By the data of the Odessa city militia directorate, 9 attacks on journalists were committed this year «with the purpose of robbery». The main version of the attack on O. Levit considered by law-enforcing organs is hooliganism…

I have another version: the journalists are attacked and murdered by order. This is a peculiar national method of cultivating the loyalty in journalists.

Leonid Kapeliushny («Svoboda», No. 47, 2-8 December 2003)

Maksim Birovash, a correspondent of the newspaper «Dilovy novyny» (Nova Kakhovka), is threatened with physical violence The newspaper «Vgoru» (the last issue) and the newspaper «Dilovy

novyny» (the issue of 20 November) published the article by M. Birovash «The

156

way of Roksolana» – a journalistic investigation of the facts of selling Nova Kakhovka women abroad for the work in sex-business.

«Everything began before the publication in «Dilovy novyny», tells Mak-sim Birovash. «While the issue was printed, a man came to the editor-in-chief of the newspaper, called himself a USS officer and asked what it should be done to prevent the publication of the article «The way of Roksolana». The editor told that it was impossible, then the man promised «the problems» and went away. After that some strangers began to phone to the editorial board, to my mother and to me with threats. Yet, they did not content themselves with the phone threats. On 26 November, when I went out from the building of edi-torial board, a car pulled up near me. Two boys appeared from the car; they told that I had damaged their business and, so, owned money to them».

On the same day Maksim sent by fax the application to the General Prosecutor’s office and informed his Kherson colleagues and Sergiy Guz, the head of the Kyiv media trade union, about the threats. The oblast or-ganization of the Voters’ Committee of Ukraine (Birovash heads the Nova Kakhovka branch of this organization) directed the letter to head of theoblast USS Oleksiy Obal with the request to investigate the situation and to defend their colleague. The town militia proposed the guard to M. Birovash.

By the words of the journalist, the mother of the girl, whose story was de-scribed in the article, is intimidated too.

The oblast USS directorate informed us that, according to the law, they had not to investigate such cases: this was the competence of militia. They also said that the officer of the Nova Kakhovka town directorate, who investigated the case of women-trade, had the right to ask to postpone the publication of the article in interests of the investigation.

(«Vgoru», Kherson, No. 49, 4 December 2003)

Hooligans attacked Oleksandr Nezhivoy, a deputy of the editor-in-chief of the magazine «Pamyatki Ukrainy» The attack was committed on 25 December about 4 a.m. in the town of

Fastov (the Kyiv oblast). Members of the local organization of the Ukrainian People’s party be-

lieve that this attack was not accidental, since on 25 December the Fastov town court had to consider the complaint of Oleksandr Nezhivoy’s son Ivan against the Fastov town executive committee, which prohibited Ivan Nezhivoy to collect the signatures in the downtown for the all-national election of the President of Ukraine.

A week before another «accident» had happened. Bronislava Sytnik, the head of the Fastov organization of the party «Batkivshchina», was run over with a car.

The son of the journalist informed that some persons in civil clothes had shadowed him during several last weeks, and that the week before he had been

157

warned about the possible physical violence as a «punishment» for his politi-cal activities.

(«Svoboda», No. 51, 30 December 2003)

A journalist of the newspaper «Faktor» was attackedin Cherkassy In the evening of 27 November 2003 a lady-journalist of the newspaper

«Faktor» was attacked near the Cherkassy state university. The informational agency «Kontekst-Media» learned about this incident today from Vadim Koma-rov, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper. By the words of Mr. Komarov, the journalists of the newspaper «Faktor» got the information that the administration of the University was going to organize the protest action against the construction of the café «Kartopliana khata» near the university. The journalists also learned that a group of students allegedly planned to attack the building site. It is known that the administration of the Cherkassy University protests against this building for a long time. V. Komarov informed that he had sent journalist Irina Bereza to the epicenter of the events with the task to photograph everything. Yet, the jour-nalist was attacked by two strangers, they took away her camera, spoiled the film and inflicted slight bodily injuries to the girl. Bereza immediately phoned to the editorial board and her colleagues drove to her. Yet, the attackers had time to es-cape. The editor-in-chief of «Faktor» turned to militia with an application. An in-formant from the Cherkassy oblast militia directorate communicated to the «Kon-tekst-Media» that the investigation of the crime was carried out. The administra-tion of the university gave no comments.

(«Kontekst-Media», 28 November 2003, www.context-ua.com)

INTERFERING INTO PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES OF JOURNALISTS

Journalists got the proposition to abandon pseudonyms Mykola Tomenko, the Head of the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of

the freedom of speech and information, declared that MPs proposed to journal-ists to sign their articles with their own names, if the cases against the editions criticizing President Kuchma would be started again.

He told this at the press conference «Guaranteeing the freedom of speech under the conditions of the current political situation in Ukraine».

Tomenko believes that this measure will change the situation, when«every article criticizing the President can entail the visit from prosecutor’s of-fice and institution of criminal case». He reckons that MPs must put an end to such actions of prosecutor’s offices, because else this will turn into «the beat-ing of journalists for every critical word».

Mignews.com.ua«Prava Ludyny», No. 4, April, 2003

158

«Sailor» gives the signal « SOS» On 18 April 2003 Evhen Kravets, the editor-in-chief of the all-Ukrainian

trade-union weekly «Moriak» («Sailor»), turned for help to the Institute of Mass Information (IMI). He informed that on 31 March Mykhaylo Kireev, the head of the Trade Union of the sea transport of Ukraine, categorically de-manded from him to leave the service on own will. This demand was moti-vated by the argument that the newspaper allegedly caused damage to the co-operation of the trade union with its social partner – the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine. Mr. Kireev also declared that he would introduce censorship in the newspaper and would personally check all materials before the publication (or these materials would be checked by his deputy Oleksandr Kaloshin). The head of the trade union ignored the remark of E. Kravets that such actions con-tradicted the Constitution of Ukraine and operating laws. The editor proposed to summon the editorial board for discussing the situation, but M. Kireev an-swered that he was not interested in the opinion of the editorial board and that he would stop the financing of the newspaper until the dismissal of E. Kravets.

On 2 and 9 April 2003 Oleksand Kaliushin visited the newspaper office with the aim to check the materials before sending to printing shop and re-peated to the editor the demand to leave his post. Since April 2003 the financ-ing of the newspaper «Sailor» was terminated. On 11 April 2003 M. Kireev turned to the editor-in-chief with the written demand to pass to him the origi-nals of all statute documents and accounts in the connection with the planned re-organization.

The newspaper «Sailor» is the oldest Ukrainian trade-union newspaper, which is issued since 1912. This newspaper has its circle of readers and is a symbol of Odessa and the professional unity of sailors. The newspaper was founded by the trade union of workers of sea transport of Ukraine.

The IM I commentary: The termination of financial aid endangers the existence of the newspaper

and is a form of pressure on the collective of the edition. 1. The financing of the newspaper was realized on the basis of the agree-

ment between the central council of the Trade union of workers of sea trans-port of Ukraine and the editorial board of the newspaper. According to this agreement, the founder must render the financial aid to the editorial board. The agreement does not envisage the one-side refusal to fulfill the obligations.

2. Article 2 of the Law of Ukraine «On printed mass media» reads: «The freedom of speech and free expression of opinions and convictions in the printed form are guaranteed by the Constitution of Ukraine and, according to this Article, mean the right of each citizen for free and independent search, ob-taining, storage, use and distribution of any information with the help of printed mass media.

159

Printed mass media are independent. The creation and financing of state organs, establishments, organizations or posts for censoring the mass media are prohibited.

The demand of the preliminary agreement of messages and materials spread by printed mass media, as well as the prohibition to distribute the mes-sages and materials on the side of state organs, establishments, organizations or citizens’ unions are inadmissible, except the cases, where a state official was the author of the distributed information or gave the interview.»

Thus, the introduction of censorship by the head of the trade union of workers of sea transport is illegal, since the legislation does not permit to founders to interfere in the editorial policy of newspapers, which is the pres-sure on the editorial board. By the way, the censorship is PROHIBITED in Ukraine (Article 15 of the Ukrainian Constitution).

The editor-in-chief has the reasons to turn to the prosecutor’s office with the appeal on the institution of criminal case according to Article 171 – imped-ing the legal professional activities of journalists.

Part 1 Article 171 envisages the punishment for impeding the activities of journalists: the fine up to 50 untaxable incomes, or the arrest for the term up to six moths, or the restriction of freedom for the term up to three years.

3. According to Article 34 of the Ukrainian Law «On enterprises», liqui-dation or reorganization of an enterprise is realized after the decision of its owner or, in the cases envisaged by law, after the decision of the owner and the labor collective or the organ empowered to create such enterprises.

«Sailor» is a trade union newspaper. It is owned by the trade union of workers of sea transport. The decision about the foundation of the newspaper was taken at the Plenum of the Central Council of the trade union of workers of sea transport of Ukraine. According to the Statute of the editorial board of the newspaper, the decision on reorganization (liquidation) of the newspaper may be taken only by the Presidium of the Supreme Rada. So, it is senseless to speak about the reorganization without the decision and resolution of the Ple-num.

The Institute of mass information [21 April 2003 5:33 p.m.] «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 16-30 April, 2003

Intimidation of the chief-editor of «Volna» On 15 April Natalya Safikhanova, the chief-editor of the news service

«Volna» of the Black Sea TV and radio company, was threatened by phone by a stranger. The talk was connected with the protest action of the tradesmen of the former Simferopol market «Autostop», who erected the tent camp on the central square of the Crimean capital. The hunger-strike lasted already for 16 days. The man, who phoned to the news service «Volna» and asked to call Na-talya Safikhanova, mumbled his name to the correspondent, who took the re-ceiver, and the latter understood nothing. Safikhanova points out that the man was talking to her in the manner, which allowed to think that he knew her per-

160

sonally. The stranger asked why the news program «tells often about«Autostop» tradesmen» and asked: «Are you sympathizing with them, are you bored with your work?» When Safikhanova asked her interlocutor to introduce himself, he hanged up the receiver. This dialog did not contain direct threats, but the news service decided to made this case public. They did not hand the complaint to militia yet.

News service «Volna» news@bstv.crimea.ua «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 16-30 April, 2003

M. Tomenko: The decision to prohibit to the National TV company to conduct the live broadcast with the participation of MPs was issued by the President of Ukraine M. Tomenko asserts that the prohibition to the administration of the Na-

tional TV company to conduct the live broadcast with the participation of MPs was issued by the President of Ukraine. The head of the Supreme Rada com-mittee said this at the press conference in Kyiv.

Tomenko appealed to the administration of the National TV company with the request to permit the political discussions in the live broadcast. He proposed to cancel the translations of the records of the Days of government, Parliamentary hearings and the features about the work of the Supreme Rada and to transmit instead of them the features in the live broadcast with the par-ticipation of the leaders of various political forces.

«I mean not the political debates, but the opportunity to discuss the deci-sions of the Supreme Rada at the end of the session day», he pointed out. «Such format of the features with the participation of political leaders is the only possibility to express one’s political position». Tomenko said that such features might be translated on the days of session sittings, and then the Par-liament should refuse from the pretensions to other features.

The head of the committee also supported the creation of a special par-liamentary channel, which would broadcast through the cable TV and satellite.

According to his words, such channel can appear in the cable network of Kyiv as early as in 2003. Tomenko said that the greatest Kyiv operator «Volia» reserved the place for such channel in its package – this obligation was taken by the company when it obtained the license.

Speaking about the results of the work of the committee during the year, Tomenko welcomed the signature by the President of the amendments to the law, which released the journalists from the responsibility for their evaluative judgments.

At the same time, commenting the reproaches to his address on the side of President’s administration, Tomenko remarked: «During this year the Presi-dent, being a subject of legislative initiative, did not propose any amendments to the laws directed at their improvement. So, it is strange, when the Presi-

161

dent’s administration states that our laws are bad and the Supreme Rada is guilty of this».

Tomenko informed that the committee handed to the Parliament the pro-posal on the amendments to the Civil and Civil-Procedural Codes, proposing to liquidate the norm reading that «negative information is regarded as in-authentic».

He also told that during the next session the draft of the law on public TV would be presented to the Supreme Rada. He said that the subscribers of this TV would pay about 2-5 hryvnas per month, the channel will not contain ad-vertisements, and will contain a great amount of news, educational and culture programs. At the same time the MP expressed the doubt that this channel will begin to work before the Presidential election-2004.

9 June 2003, UP, http://www.pravda.com.ua «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Head of the Vinnitsa oblast administration obliged medics to subscribe to state newspapers Viktor Kotsemir, the Head of the Vinnitsa oblast administration, signed

the order on the organization of the subscription of all medical establishments of the oblast for state (communal) periodicals. The ForUm correspondent communicates that the heads of medical establishments got the corresponding phoned telegram from the oblast administration.

The telegram reads: «According to the order of the head of the oblast state administration, the subscription must be organized in the medical estab-lishments for state and oblast editions («Podoliya», «Vinnichina», «Pano-rama», «Uriadovy kuryer», «Golos Ukrainy»). You must inform about the re-sults of the fulfillment of the order in writing up to 8 July 2003. Deputy head of the directorate D. Bilous. Transmitted by Suprun».

Journalists of Vinnitsa independent newspaper «33 kanal», who managed to get the copy of the telegram, turned to the oblast prosecutor’s office and the Anti-monopoly Committee with the request to estimate the actions of the power organs and the co-founders of the newspapers.

ForUm, 16 July 2003, http://ukr.for-ua.com/

Oleksandr Zinchenko breaks the relations with the TV channel «Inter» 7 July 2003. Deputy head of the Supreme Rada Oleksandr Zinchenko

announced at a press conference about breaking his relations with the TV channel «Inter». Two weeks before he had the meeting with the collective of the channel, where he declared about this decision. «I said that I had exhausted my resources for providing the stability of the informational policy», told O.

162

Zinchenko. «A national channel may not be a mouthpiece of one political force», stated he, meaning, obviously, the party SDPU(u).

Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

Editor-in-chief of «Yuridichna gazeta» turned to the prosecutor’s office Svetlana Maksimova, the editor-in-chief of «Yuridichna gazeta» («The

juridical newspaper»), turned to the prosecutor’s office of the Pecherskiy dis-trict of Kyiv with the claim about the institution of the criminal case after Arti-cle 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (impeding the professional activities of journalists). In her claim the journalist informed that on 23 July she under-went the impediment to her professional activities on the side of representa-tives of the defendant in the civil case started after the claim of citizen Bere-govoy against Kyiv city council. According to Ms. Maksimova, the physical and psychological pressure was exerted upon her: the offenders tried to stop her, to take away her camera-recorder, etc. The IMI sent the request to the prosecutor’s office and took this case under its control.

24 July 2003, Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

Mykola Tomenko: «temniks» again? 29 August 2003. Mykola Tomenko commented the appearance of new

«temniks», which were sent by journalists to the Parliamentary committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information. These documents contain the recommendations about the elucidation of the most important events in social and political life of the country. In particular, according to the information given by the press service of «Nasha Ukraina», it is proposed to journalists to ignore the statements about the political reform by MPs Boris Bespaly, Petro Oliynuk and Aleksey Gudyma, the meeting of vice-speaker A. Zinchenko with the delegation of the German Union of young state employees, as well as the article, which was published by the American newspaper «The New YorkTimes», that reads that Ukraine is governed by «gangster» Leonid Kuchma. M. Tomenko informed that the experts, who analyzed the «temniks», reckonthat these documents were compiled by the specialists from Bankova Street.

(Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», August 2003)

The Supreme Rada of Ukraine vs. the National TV company The confrontation of the Supreme Rada and the National TV company of

Ukraine (NTVC), connected with the transmission of the sessions of the Par-liament, lasts. The National Council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting is going to apply the strict sanctions and to fine the NTVC (1.15 million hryvnas) for non-fulfillment of the state order on the direct broadcasting of the sessions of the Supreme Rada.

163

Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Parliamentary committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, explained that, on the basis of the deci-sion of the National Council on TV and radio broadcasting, the founders of the NTVC, the Supreme Rada and the Cabinet of Ministers, had the right to fine the TV channel for the sum of the non-fulfilled order.

(«Fakty», No. 163, 9 September 2003)

Journalists were locked in the press center of the Cabinetof Ministers 1 October 2003. The General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine received

and registered the appeal of the Kyiv independent media trade union. The journalists demand in their appeal to start the criminal case on the incident, when journalists were locked in the press center of the Cabinet of Ministers, and to punish the guilty. According to the information of the General Prosecu-tor’s office, this appeal was passed for consideration to the department of the control over the observance of the constitutional rights of citizens. Representa-tives of the GPO assert that the appeal will be considered in 30 days.

Sergiy Guz, the head of the trade union recons: «The attempts of the press service of the Cabinet of Ministers to dodge the responsibility evidences the biased attitude to journalists. By the words of the journalists, earlier the Prime-Minister’s guard and the workers of the press service demanded from repre-sentatives of the press to stay in the press center, while Yanukovich was walk-ing along the corridor. The journalists were not permitted to move freely in the building of the Cabinet of Ministers, when the top officials of the Cabinet were there. Such constraint may not be explained by the reasons of safety. This restriction was applied for the comfort of the authorities in order to hinder the journalists from putting the unwanted questions. This is one of the ways to conceal the important information from the press».

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

Executive committee of the Lviv town council spread its appeal to public with the demand to ignore the newspaper«Vysokiy Zamok» Executive committee of the Lviv town council spread its official appeal to

public with the demand to ignore the newspaper «Vysokiy Zamok», which al-legedly «became a mouthpiece of the anti-Ukrainian propaganda». This appeal was sent to all editions published in the region. This radical step of the officials was caused by publication of the words of the song «Ukraine» in this popular edition.

«The newspaper «Vysokiy Zamok» dared to mock at all Ukrainians, when it published the loathsome opus of an unknown author in the section «Let us sing together», reads the appeal of the executive committee. «If the freedom of speech is the right to blemish the native language and Motherland,

164

to mock at these values, and to represent this filth as a manifestation of culture, then we are protesting against such freedom and such culture».

Well, why the local power is so aggressive? It appeared that this song had been written by Andriy Kuzmenko, the leader of the musical group «Skri-abin», as early as in 1990, and concerned the Soviet Ukraine. Them A. Kuz-menko was persecuted by the Soviet militia, since the song was regarded as «a dirty opus against the Soviet reality». The Lviv officials ought to visit the site of the group and to learn the history of the song, against which they were pro-testing so decidedly. Yet, they did not do that and represented themselves as dolts, who did not know the elementary things. Alas, such people are respon-sible for culture in the town executive committee.

Commission on journalistic ethics appeals to its colleaguesto resist to the pressure of power Most probably, the coming election will deprive many state officials of

their posts. However, they do not want to surrender and do not disdain any means for reserving the posts. Both the state officials and their councilors un-derstand that the press is a very powerful weapon in the pre-election «battles». Yet, mass media most of all suffer from this «war». The Commission on jour-nalistic ethics is worried with the pressure exerted on the all-Ukrainian and re-gional mass media by the organs of state power. This pressure has the follow-ing forms: restriction of the access to information, ignoring the critics in the press and the inconvenient questions of journalists, application the strict prop-erty sanctions to mass media and their founders», reads the appeal of the com-mission.

«The Ukrainian laws declare that the power organs must inform the pub-lic about their activities and decisions. The constitutional freedoms of citizens are also guaranteed by laws, but the state officials ignore the professional rights of journalists», states head of the commission Volodymir Mostovoy, the editor of the newspaper «Dzerkalo tyzhnia». Mostovoy gives the concrete ex-amples of the unlawful behavior of regional authorities: «So, since 14 July 2003 the journalists of three independent Sumy newspapers are not admitted to the sittings of the town executive committee. Only the journalists of the newspaper of the town council and the TV company, with which the town council has the agreement about the elucidation of the council activities, are let there. Publishing houses of the oblast refuse to negotiate contracts with the independent editions, although these refusals are not reasonable from the economic viewpoint». There are many such cases. Unfortunately, such incidents «are not, as a rule, known to the public, thus forming the atmosphere of impunity of the local authorities». «At the same time», points out V. Mostovoy, «the practice becomes rather common of exerting influence on journalists and editions on the side of power organs by means of various privileges, assistance in the access to information, competitions, premiums, awards, etc. In that way the authorities try to control the activi-

165

ties of these mass media. The matter is that this is the press, from where the citizens mainly obtain the information necessary for realization and protec-tion of their rights, freedoms and legal interests!»

The commission reminds that in the beginning of October 2003 Lidiya Budjurova, a Crimean journalist, was deprived of accreditation to the Yalta summit «Ukraine-EC». And on 17 September the governmental security service impeded the activities of journalists: a group of representatives of Ukrainian and foreign mass media were locked in the press center of the Cabinet of Ministers. So the journalists were deprived not only of the op-portunity to get the commentaries of the top state officials, but also of the freedom of movement.

These actions, by the way, have not got the juridical assessment until now. «A month has passed since the publication of the appeal of a number of journalistic NGOs of Ukraine, which appeal contained the demand to the prosecu-tor’s organs to conduct the thorough investigation of the disgraceful actions of the officials and to bring them to the responsibility in the accordance with Ukrainian legislation. The General Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine, which obtained the offi-cial appeals from the Kyiv independent trade union and the Academy of the Ukrainian press, answered that the appeal had been passed for consideration to the Cabinet of Ministers – the organ, against the workers of which the journalists complained. We reckon that the General Prosecutor’s office demonstrated in that way its unwillingness to investigate this incident objectively and to fulfill its func-tions and tasks envisaged by the laws of Ukraine», states the appeal of the journal-istic commission.

«At the same time, the unexampled war against «Lvivska gazeta» was started under the pretext of law-observance. The pressure is put upon the edition through the state fiscal organs. The State Tax of the Lviv oblast carried out the check of the newspaper and its founders. This check can result in the closure of the news-paper because of the non-market reasons, so the journalists will lose their job, and the readers – their right to obtain the information from different sources, says Vo-lodymir Mostovoy. He warns: «The increase of the number of the cases of pres-sure on mass media evidence that another campaign against mass media, which try to represent the information objectively, has begun in Ukraine». Thus, the Commission on journalistic ethics reminds: «The respect to the right of public for the complete and unbiased information about the facts and events is the primary duty of a journalist» (item 5 of the Ethical Code of Ukrainian journal-ists); «A journalist, who is collecting information, acts in the legal field of Ukraine, so he has the right to resort to any procedures, including judicial ones, against the persons, who are impeding his work» (item 12 of the Ethical Code); «A journalist may not be made to write or do anything, which contradicts to his own views or principles» (item 15 of the Ethical Code)».

On behalf of the Commission on journalistic ethics V. Mostovoy appeals to his colleagues: «You must understand the danger of disregard of such de-mocratic values as human rights and freedoms or the right for free collection

166

and distribution of information and ideas»; «You must struggle for the realiza-tion of the professional rights of journalists, independently of their political views and the form of property of the edition». Besides, the Commission de-mands «from the organs of state power and local self-rule to observe the norms of the Ukrainian Constitution and laws», and «from the General Prose-cutor’s office to carry out the thorough investigation of every case of impedi-ment to the professional activities of journalists and to bring the guilty to re-sponsibility envisaged by laws».

(«Zerkalo nedeli», No. 41, 25-31 October 2003, «Ukraina moloda», 29 October 2003)

Situation with the freedom of speech in the Poltava oblast Situation with the freedom of speech and the work of mass media has some

peculiarities in different regions of our country. In the Poltava oblast the authori-ties are doing their utmost to make all journalist obedient and unanimous. The di-rectorate in charge of the press and information of the oblast state administration, jointly with a number of press centers, tried to «establish order» in regional mass media. Even the oblast council was not engaged in this process. The name of the corresponding permanent deputies’ commission was changed: every mentioning of mass media was removed from the name. Thus, the deputies were deprived of the opportunity to govern the situation in mass media.

Yet, the hopes that the replacement of the cogent arguments by the open pressure on the editions and the curtailing of the authorities of the deputies’ commission would liquidate all problems were not justified. On the contrary, the effect was quite opposite. The administration of the directorate in charge of the press and information took the occasion and made a series of errors and mis-uses of such a great scale that it became impossible not to notice them. At the same time, the independent mass media closed the ranks, and the Poltava oblast media club became so influential that the power cannot ignore it any more. The public committee for the protection of the freedom of speech, created by the media club, held a number of round tables and public actions, which resulted in the resti-tution of the authorities to the members of the deputies’ commission.

Well, it seems that nothing extraordinary happened in the Poltava oblast. In many oblasts such commissions never stopped to exist, although, to be candid, they did not disturb the power very much. However, that was a great achievement for Poltava. At last the power organ appeared, to which journalists could turn with their questions and problems.

When the deputies’ commission, which also includes the experienced work-ers of mass media, considered the activities of the press directorate of the oblast administration, many of the participants of the sitting were shocked. The press suf-fered very much from «the attention» of the officials. As a result, some «disobedi-ent» newspapers stopped to exist, and others, in order to survive, are now pub-lished and distributed outside the oblast. The local courts are overburdened with claims. Editorial boards of newspapers have legal proceedings with printing houses, journalists of some editions – with journalists of others. Maybe, one

167

might rejoice at the «success» of local officials, who managed to complicate to the highest degree the work of the newspapers that did not want to slave to the power and dared to have and uphold their opinions, if this increased the authority of the pro-power mass media and their bosses from the oblast directorate in charge of the press. Yet, this did not happen. It seems that the dull echo of lickspittles do not please the local authorities any more, as well as the position of many professional journalists from respectable editions, who has begun to divagate openly from the political and social problems in expectation of better times and are printing the neutral materials about gardening, family problems, etc.

The participants of the sitting of the commission could make sure, on the ba-sis of concrete facts, that the officials with journalist’s certificates, who violated laws by the order from the top in order to suppress the independent press, got ac-customed to the lawlessness and continued to commit the arbitrary actions on their own initiative. For instance, the regional newspapers lack for money for elemen-tary necessities, and the budget funds are spent for the needs of the informational agency «Novyny Poltavshchiny», which publishes the uninteresting and outdated materials-reprints. Other disgraceful situations are possible now: the publishing houses, which refused to print the opposition newspapers, referring, in particular, to great amount of work, were publishing for the long time the 10-volume book of historical chronicle written by Yuri Dmitrenko, the head of the directorate in charge of the press and information of the oblast state administration. Managers of the publishing houses are still calculating the losses and cursing themselves for yielding to the pressure. Despite the unwillingness of the deputies’ commission of the oblast council to go to the heart of the «slippery» problems of mass media, each sitting of the commission reveals very demonstrative facts. For instance, a representative of one of opposition parties, in his speech at a session of the oblast council, drew the attention of the deputies to the newspaper «Tsilkom vidverto». This edition has very serious co-founders (such as the oblast prosecutor’s office, militia, appeal court and oblast USS directorate), but this does not prevent it from irresponsibility and application of black (very black!) PR. Even the perfunctory consideration of the activities of this newspaper disclosed the serious violations of laws. It appeared that the majority of serious co-founders, to which the edition refers, had refused to cooperate with it long ago. According to the law, the publi-cation of this newspaper should be suspended, at least for re-registration. How-ever, the oblast directorate in charge of the press and information is a co-founder of «Tsilkom vidverto» too. And the newspaper, which has such influential pa-tron, can afford itself to enjoy the permissiveness, even after the «tricks» of the newspaper (the run of which varies from 50 to 450 thousand, depending on the amount of discreditable materials) became widely known to public.

However, one should not overestimate the results of such criticism, as well as the change of the attitude of power to mass media. The information about the unlawful actions and misuses is known to the small group. The offi-

168

cial mass media published only brief notes concerning the situation, from which notes it is very difficult to understand the matter of the fact.

«Nevertheless», says Ludmila Kucherenko, the head of the Poltava oblast media club, «the signs of resentment shown by the representatives of power about the authoritarian style and unsatisfactory level of managing mass media are very significant».

(«Zerkalo nedeli», No. 41, 25-31 October 2003)

Not a single all-Ukrainian TV channel showed the filmby Andrey Shevchenko about the action «Ukrainewithout Kuchma!» Aristarkh Didych: The authors of the film drew the attention to the actual political concepts,

represented different views and opinions. This is a television production of a very high quality. The authors separated the protest action from the «cassette scandal» and «Gongadze’s case», mentioning them only casually. The main personage of the film is not a man, but the energy, which destroys the fear and apathy. The authors also gave the opportunity to express the opinion to the op-posite side – militia. Apropos, the law-enforcers liked the film: top militia of-ficer Savchenko, who played one of the main parts in these events, said that at the premiere.

Volodymir Chemeris, a member of the board of the Institute «Respublika»: We visited more than 10 Ukrainian towns and showed there the film.

People are very interested with it. In Rivne the cinema hall intended for 700 persons was full, 100-200 persons visited our performances in small towns. Naturally, the authorities put obstacles to our activities. In Rivne the represen-tatives of power came in during the performance and demanded to stop it. In Kharkov we were met by a militia squad.

Only regional TV channels dared to show the film: in Lviv, Lutsk, Bila Tserkva, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ternopil and Rivne. Besides, the film was shown in cinemas in Genichesk, Zaporozhye, Lviv, Lutsk, Odessa, Rivne, Ivano-Frankivsk and Kharkov.

(«Bez tsenzury», No. 33, 24-30 October 2003)

IMPEDING PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF MASS MEDIA PRODUCTS

Film-laureate «Oblychchia protestu» cannot seepto the TV screens TV journalist Andrey Shevchenko became the first laureate of the recently

founded literary-artistic premium named after Volodymir Kosovskiy. He got the premium for the film «Oblychchia protestu» («The face of protest») de-voted to the political events in Ukraine in 2001-2002.

169

The premiere of the film «Oblychchia protestu» was held in the Kyiv House of cinema in March, but none of the all-Ukrainian TV companies did not dare to show it in spite of the requests of hundreds of journalists, cultural workers, heads of public organizations and MPs.

The participants of the public demonstration of this film, which took place after the presentation of the premium, approved the appeal to the State committee of TV and radio broadcasting, to the founders, owners and heads of TV companies, which broadcasted at all-Ukrainian TV channels, with the re-quest to show the film «Oblychchia protestu» to the millions of viewers.

In what follows we present the complete text of «The appeal to the State committee of TV and radio broadcasting, to the founders, owners and heads of TV companies, which broadcast at all-Ukrainian TV channels: NTCU, «Inter», «Studio «1+1», «Novy kanal», STB and ICTV»:

The participants of the public demonstration of the film «Oblychchia pro-testu» created by our fellow-countrymen Andrey Shevchenko are surprised by the fact that, in spite of the requests of hundreds of journalists, cultural work-ers, heads of public organizations and MPs to the persons, on whom the TV programs depend, the film has not been shown at any all-Ukrainian TV chan-nel until now, although 5 months has passed after the premiere.

«Oblychchia protestu» is the first honest film about modern Ukraine: it does not contain any political assessments, does not endorse any political forces, does not thrust any opinions, but objectively describes the acute social and political processes in our country, elucidates actions and views of all con-flicting sides. Maybe, this is the very reason why the film is not admitted to the TV screens? Maybe our officials are afraid of truth? This is a shameful and cowardly position, especially if to take into account the recent (before the pre-vious election) repeated demonstration at several TV channels of the power-loyal and insincere film «PR», which had to obtrude the false ideas about the events in Ukraine.

We are turning to you with the request to show the film «Oblychchia pro-testu» to the millions of your viewers, who get tired of lies and hypocrisy, thus expressing your protest against the political censorship in Ukrainian mass me-dia and confirming your wish for the development of the freedom of speech in Ukraine.

Approved by the participants of the public demonstrationof the film «Oblychchia protestu», Fastov, the Kyiv oblast, 25 July 2003

Telekritika, 28 July 2003, www.telekritika.kiev.ua

Will the Poltava company «UTA» return to the TV screens? Ludmila Kucherenko, Poltava: Since 18 June 2003 the Poltava TV and radio company «UTA» stopped

to broadcast on the 24 thTV channel, on which it worked for many years. The attempts to destroy the TRC «UTA» began much earlier, when Geor-

giy Chechik, the head of the TV company, «quarreled» with A. Kukoba, the

170

the Poltava mayor at that time. At first the subscribers of the cable network of Poltava lost the opportunity to watch the transmissions of the TV company: in May 2001 four Poltava operators of cable TV switched off the TRC «UTA». And several days later the TV company «Misto» began to work. The new company was founded by three (out of four) operators of cable TV and one physical person. The goals of the creation of this TV company and the level of its independence are quite obvious from its features. It is widely known that, having the official status of a private company, «Misto» works for the mayor.

The next attack on the TRC «UTA» was realized through the Poltava Fund of communal property. When the TV company, according to the con-tract, transferred the money for the rent of the building, where it worked, the fund returned the money thrice, until the officials from Kyiv interfered to the situation. After this the campaign began with the purpose to evict the TV com-pany from the building by the address 43 Zhovtneva St., where the company «Poltava plus» was situated. The head of the oblast state administration issued the order to dismount the transmitting antenna. The authorities tried to force the manager of the building (The House of Technique) to cancel the rent agreement with «Poltava plus». The essence of the pretensions of the local sanitary station was that the transmitting antenna located on the roof of the building allegedly radiated the radio waves dangerous for health, although several months earlier the main sanitary physician of Poltava had signed the permission for the work of the TV company.

When the attempts to evict the company from the building were repulsed, the officials began to apply more strict methods.

During the parliamentary election campaign the TRC «UTA» cooperated with Kyiv TV company «TET». After the election, in November 2002, «TET» handed a suit against «UTA» demanding to pay the compensation equal to 9,300,000 hryvnas for violating the conditions of the contract. The sum of the claim exceeded the actives of the TV company more than in three times. By the opinion of Pavel Moiseev, a lawyer of «Internews-Ukraine», to whom the TRC «UTA» turned for the legal aid, the demanded sum and other circum-stances of the case showed that the actions of the claimant were directed at the destruction of the company. By the way, just at that time the National council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting had to announce the competition for the use of the 24 thchannel, which was used then by the TRC «UTA».

Further events confirmed that the persecution of the TRC «UTA» was «ordered» by some influential persons, since on the next day after the claim was handed to the economic court of the Poltava oblast the court issued the resolution about the arrest of the property and bank accounts of the TV com-pany and sent this resolution to the state executive service. The executors ful-filled the decision quickly: on the next day the accounts of «UTA» were ar-rested (usually this procedure takes 2-4 weeks). As a result, the activities of the company were almost paralyzed.

171

The TRC «UTA» handed the counter-claim on the acknowledgement of the invalidity of the contract between «UTA» and the TRC «TET».

The economic court of the Poltava oblast approved the decision on the collection from the TRC «UTA» of 9,300,000 UAH of compensation and 17,118 UAH of legal expenses. At that, according to the words of lawyer of «Unternews-Ukraine» Pavel Moiseev, the court ignored all explanations of the TRC «UTA», refused to satisfy its counter-claim and announced a part of the decision in the absence of the parties, thus brutally violating the norms of the material and procedural right.

On 12 March 2003 the Kharkov appeal economic court considered the appeal of the TRC «UTA» and acknowledged the contract between the TRCs «UTA» and «TET» to be invalid. «TET» did not appeal against this decision.

Meanwhile the TRC «UTA» handed the documents for the participation in the competition of the National council for the right to use the 24 thchannel,since the term of their license had finished by that time. At the first sitting of the National council the votes of eight members of the council divided into two equal parts: 4 members voted «for» and 4 – «against». It is interesting that Lilia Mironovich, the representative of the National council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting in the Poltava oblast and a former referent of P. Shemet, the deputy head of the Poltava oblast administration), who, by logics, had to protect the interests of the Poltava TV company, voted for giving the li-cense… to the Kyiv TRC «TET», loyal to the SDPU (u). The members of the sitting ignored the fact that the TRC «UTA» had the most modern equipment in Poltava and the many-year experience of work.

In several weeks, at another sitting of the National council, the final deci-sion was taken: the 24 thPoltava channel was given to the TRC «TET».

However, there is some hope yet that the TRC «UTA», which became really independent after the numerous ordeals with political censorship, will return to the Poltava air: the company handed the documents for the participa-tion in the competition for another TV channel. Of course, if this competition would be honest…

«Prava Ludyny», No. 7, 2003 (July)

Kharkov militia confiscated from distributors the newspaper «Bez tsenzury». On 17 June the distributors of the newspaper of the bloc «Nasha

Ukraina» in Kharkov came across an unpleasant incident. The workers of the local militia confiscated from them 410 copies of the edition «Bez tsenzury». The political weekly was distributed free of charge in the passage of one of Kharkov subway stations. About 5 p.m. militiamen came to distributors Igum-nov and Poltavets and ordered them to walk to the station militia room. Here the militiamen compiled the protocol on the confiscation of 410 copies of the edition. The workers of the newspaper explained to our correspondent that the

172

law-enforcers adduced the formal reason that the distributors allegedly im-peded the movement of subway passengers. Yet, answering the official request of the assistants of MP Volodymir Filenko about the legal grounds of these ac-tions, senior sergeant Sapelnik informed that he fulfilled the order of captain Sukhoruk, the head of the department of subway guard. The members of the editorial board of the weekly «Bez tsenzury» stated that this was not the first case of persecuting the distributors of the newspaper in the Kharkov oblast.

«Ukraina moloda», No. 109, 19 June 2003 «Prava Ludyny», No. 7, 2003 (July)

Head of the Poltava oblast media club Ludmila Kucherenko about the newspaper «Novy den» «If a newspaper survives in spite of all obstacles, then the «heavy artil-

lery;» is applied. The printing houses, which are dependent on the power, can stop the work with the edition at any moment. These methods were applied for the destruction of the newspaper «Novy Den», a member of our media club. It has not been published during 18 months, after the printing houses «Poltava» and «Kobeliaki» broke the contract and refused to print the newspaper. Man-ager of one of the printing houses motivated his decision with «the impossibil-ity of further cooperation». We brought a suit to court and won the case. The court obliged the printing houses to continue the work with the newspaper. Yet, we are not quite satisfied with this victory. We want the guilty to rec-ompense the material losses of the edition for 18 months of the standstill. We understand that not the managers of the printing houses were the main guilty of this disgrace, but the top authorities, which protected their own in-terests. So, we are continuing the court proceedings demanding the compensation of the material damage and trying to prove that nobody, even the state officials, may ignore the laws.»

(«Zerkalo nedeli», No. 41, 25-31 October 2003)

Newspaper «VV» will not be sold in the kiosksof the company «Soyuzdruk» The salesmen of «Soyuzdruk» do not know the reasons of this decision,

they only fulfill the orders of their bosses. Since now one can buy the opposi-tional newspaper only in Kyiv or from the sellers in suburban trains.

(«Maydan», 7 November 2003, maidan.org.ua)

Nikolayev oblast publishing house refused to printthe all-Ukrainian newspaper «Ukrainskiy Pivden» The Ukrainian-language oppositional newspaper of the Rukh supported

the bloc «Our Ukraine». In particular, the newspaper criticized the oblast ad-

173

ministration. The formal reason of the refusal was the little run of the edition – 5000 copies.

This was an original present from the local power to the 10th anniversary of «Ukrainskiy Pivden»: the first issue of the newspaper had been published on 12 November 1993.

(«Nasha Ukraina», 18 November 2003; razom.org.ua)

* * * «It is even ridiculous to speak about the freedom of speech in the Niko-

layev oblast», declared Yuri Didenko, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Ukrainskiy Pivden», to the IMI correspondent in the course of the conversa-tion concerning the refusal of the Nikolayev oblast publishing house to coop-erate with his edition. We want to remind that on 15 November the publishing house refused to print «Ukrainskiy Pivden», which endorsed the interests of the bloc «Our Ukraine».

The editor-in-chief tried to find other opportunities for printing the news-paper, but not a single oblast publishing house agreed to cooperate with the edition, which criticized the local power.

(The Institute of mass information, 19 November 2003, www.imi.org.ua)

On 11 November the publishing house «Donetchina» refused to print the weekly «Ostrov» The reasons of the refusal were not explained, but it is obvious that the

one-sided breach of the contract on printing of the newspaper was caused by the independent position of the weekly, which had protested against the arbi-trary actions of local authorities. Besides, in every issue the newspaper pub-lishes the materials of journalist’s investigation concerning the corruption in the prosecutor’s organs. The main personage of this «epos» is GennadiyVasylyev, a former prosecutor of the Donetsk oblast, the first vice-speaker of the Supreme Rada and a candidate to the post of the General Prosecutor of Ukraine. The first hint at the breach of the contract was made on 10 Novem-ber, when Volodymir Diatlovskiy, the main technologist of the publishing house, in a private talk with Evhen Talyshev, the editor-in-chief of «Ostrov», said: «We have no complaints against your edition, but we cannot print the newspaper any more». At that Diatlovskiy assured that the next issue of the newspaper (No. 45) would be published. Yet, the publishing house did not keep this promise too. In the morning of 12 November, when the issue of «Os-trov» with the final part of the journalist’s investigation of Vladimir Boyko was made up, printed on the typographical film, and the driver of the editorial car was already trasporting these materials to the publishing house, the editorial board was informed by phone that «Donetchina» would not print «Ostrov». Some time later V. Diatlovskiy told that the order about the refusal to print the newspaper had been obtained from Vasyl Kovaliov, the head of the

174

board of the publishing house. The attempts of the editorial board to contact the head of the enterprise were unsuccessful: Kovaliov was absent. Yet, he confirmed the categorical refusal to print the newspaper by cell phone, but did not give any explanations. By the way, in the same morning, on 12 November, several young men with criminal appearance came to the building, where the office of the newspaper had been situated earlier, and told that they wanted to meet editor-in-chief Evhen Talyshev. When the visitors learned that the edito-rial board had moved to another place, they went away. Vladimir Boyko, a permanent author of «Ostrov», who is known well to the readers of the Ukrainian political Internet for his revelatory articles about the corruption in law-enforcing organs, is sure that the refusal of the publishing house «Donetchina» to print the independent newspaper is caused by the publication in «Ostrov» of his «serial» investigation of the church-prosecutor’s business of Gennadiy Vasylyev. His articles on this topic are the bestsellers in the Internet, but only «Ostrov» dares to publish them.

Yet, there is another version. The fact is that «Ostrov» is the only printed edition in the Donetsk oblast, which did not hush up the shameful events in Donetsk on 31 October. The newspaper elucidated these events in the 44th spe-cial issue under the title: «Criminal putsch in Donetsk». The first page of the special issue contained the photograph made by a correspondent of the news-paper at the instant, when leader of «Our Ukraine» Viktor Yushchenko pointed at the organizers of the Sunday «show» and called them by their proper name: «Toadies!»

(«Nasha Ukraina», 14 November 2003, www.razom.org.u )

* * *

The Institute of mass information: The issue of the Donetsk newspaper «Ostrov» of 13 November was pub-

lished in spite of all obstacles. The edition fulfilled its promise and published the end of the trilogy by Vladimir Boyko on the corruption in the prosecutor’s organs. This material tells about the connection of Gennadiy Vasylyev, the first vice-speaker of the Supreme Rada and a candidate to the post of the Gen-eral Prosecutor of Ukraine, with criminal circles of Donetsk. When the ad-ministration of the publishing house «Donetchina» learned what material «Ostov» was going to publish, they refused to print the issue until Boyko’s ar-ticle would be removed from it. The issue was printed by another publishing house.

Meanwhile, the conflict between the publishing house «Donetchina» and the newspaper «Ostrov» is an insignificant part of the iceberg…

(«Telekritika», 13 November 2003, 17:03)

175

Two years ago the TV channels controlled by V. Medvedchuk got the first «temnik» «Temnik» is a document containing the recommendations about the eluci-

dation of the most important events in social and political life of the country. Almost a year ago such «plans» of journalists’ work were discussed at the

Parliamentary hearings, where they were acknowledged to be a form of censor-ship. «Temniks» were also strictly criticized by the PACE and other European in-stitutions.

Yet, the «temniks» did not disappear, they just changed the form. The de-mands became less categorical, for example: «this topic is very important and ur-gent», «we ask to comment this event in details», etc.

Yesterday «Ukrainska Pravda» got an interesting document signed byVasylyev, the head of the Main directorate of informational policy. The short let-ter is addressed to «press-secretaries, heads of press-services, heads of PR depart-ments of oblast administrations and Sevastopol town administration, to head of the Committee in charge of information of the Crimean Autonomous Republic».

It is noteworthy that the Kyiv city administration was not included into the list of addressees. Apparently, the metropolitan power has «a special status» regu-lated, in this case, not by laws, but by the personality of the city mayor. Certainly, Omelchenko would be not be pleased with such a letter.

The document is very short, so we will adduce it completely: «Respected colleagues! We want to present to your attention the articles published on 3 December in the newspaper «Diplomaticheskiy mir»: «Azarov: shadow econ-omy recedes, the home investments increased twice» and «If Proshenko were the «minister of truth»…», in which the actual questions of internal politics are elucidated». Further the two mentioned articles were quoted.

The newspaper «Diplomaticheskiy mir» is published by the printing house «Fokus sobytiy» in Russian with participation of the General directorate in charge of foreign representations.

It is interesting that the articles were quoted not only in Russian, but also in the Ukrainian translation.

Well, the respect of the officials to the Ukrainian language is praiseworthy, especially when it is connected with paper work of the state organs. Yet, the arti-cles were published in Russian. And, naturally, all officials, from Donetsk to Lviv, know the Russian language.

So, Mr. Vasylyev’s agency wasted the efforts for the translation vainly, espe-cially if to take into account the fact that the articles were distributed only «for perfunctory familiarization».

According to the Constitution, Presidential Administration is a consulta-tive auxiliary organ at the President of Ukraine. This organ must assist the President in his work, and nothing else!

Instead of this the «translators» from the President’s office concentrate the attention of regional PR departments on the interview of first vice-Prime-

176

Minister Azarov and… the transcript of the wiretapped talk of MP Poroshenko with manager of «5 kanal» Lisovskiy.

In the context of the informational war aimed at discrediting of Yu-shchenko and his brothers-in-arms, it should be logical to publish the records in the «tamed» mass media, for example, «1+1».

There is another question: what connection with all this has the Presiden-tial Administration? Undoubtedly, any official from the Presidential Admini-stration or an oblast state administration has the right, as every other person, to be interested in sex, criminal events and political scandals. But how the famili-arization with such information may assist to the President in his work? After all, the letter was not private, it was written on the letterhead of the Presiden-tial Administration…

The Main directorate of informational policy of the Presidential Admini-stration for the umpteenth time refused to comment to «Ukrainska pravda» the appearance of new «temnik».

(«Ukrainska pravda», 11 December 2003)

Mykola Tomenko: five questions about the freedom of speech to President Leonid Kuchma – the open letter

Respected President Kuchma! Your attitude to the freedom of speech in Ukraine is known. It is deter-

mined laconically and exactly in the book «Ukraine is not Russia»: «Nothing can make me to encroach on the freedom of the press».

However, lately the heads of mass media and journalists turn, more and more frequently, to the Supreme Rada committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information with the complaints against the actions of the Presidential Ad-ministration and Yanukovich’s government. The main reason of the resentment is that the Administration and government are meddling into the activities of mass media referring to your decisions.

In this connection many experts and journalists again began to call you «en-emy of the press No. 1 in Ukraine». In order to disprove this opinion, I ask you to answer the following five questions about the present attitude of the Ukrainian President to the problems of mass media in our country.

I want to point out that your position is very important not only for me, as the head of the Supreme Rada committee in charge of the freedom of speech and in-formation, but also for journalists and common Ukrainian citizens.

Did you really prohibit to the First national TV channel the direct broadcast-ing of the Parliamentary debates with participation of the opposition? Is it true that you control personally the quantity of positive mentions by mass media of Olek-sandr Moroz, Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Timoshenko? Is it true that you make the administration of the TV channel «1+1» to transmit the feature «Prote», which you consider to be the most objective TV feature?

177

Do you begin your workday from reading the materials of the so-called «analytical» Internet editions notorious for publication of openly cynical and false information about the activities of the opposition? (On 26 November 2003 some Ukrainian TV channels showed the reportage about your working day in the hospital «Feofaniya», and these materials were on your table). I do not know whether you get all information from these editions or read other mass media too. Yet, by words of the workers of Presidential Administration, just the reading of such «analytical» Internet editions inspires you to your service activities.

Did you actually prohibit to the members of the National Council of Ukraine in charge of TV and radio broadcasting to vote for deprivation of li-censes of the TV organizations, which committed the violations of the laws of Ukraine, in particular, showed the advertising of alcoholic drinks in the day-time, demonstrated films without the permission of the Ministry of Culture and retransmitted the features prohibited in the civilized countries; of the FM-radio stations that broadcasted the «criminal» songs popularizing violence and cruelty?

Did you order the Tax Administration of Ukraine not to check the mass media, loyal to you, which concealed their profits from publication of adver-tisements, but to check the mass media that criticized you?

I ask you to answer personally, but not through V. Medvedchuk, the head of the Presidential Administration, as you did before, since, as I have already written, the position of Leonid Kuchma, the guarantor of the Constitution, is very important for the entire Ukrainian people.

Sincerely yours, Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Supreme Rada com-mittee in charge of the freedom of speech and information

(1 December 2003, «Ukrainska pravda», http://www.pravda.com.ua)

Printing of the newspaper «Ukrainskiy Pivden» is still forbidden The attempts to prevent the publication of the newspaper «Ukrainskiy

Pivden» in the Nikolayev oblast are becoming more and more scandalous. Some strangers stole a part of the run of the previous issue of the news-

paper, which contained the materials telling that the Nikolayev oblast news-paper «Ukrainskiy Pivden» was the only Ukrainian newspaper that got to «temniks».

All in all, 156 Ukrainian newspapers dared to criticize the power. And the prohibition, under some unconvincing pretext, to print «Ukrainskiy Pivden» demonstrates the intolerance of the oblast power to the freedom of speech.

«Ukrainskiy Pivden» is supported by the commission of the Nikolayev oblast council in charge of the local self-government, openness and relations with mass media, as well as a number of editions, which wrote about the arbitrary actions against the newspaper, the Supreme Rada committee for fighting the or-ganized crime and corruption, the Supreme Rada committee in charge of the free-

178

dom of speech and information and the Supreme Rada committee of human rights.

(«Maydan-INFORM», 10 December, 20:44)

COURT PROCESSES FOR PROTECTING THE FREEDOMOF SPEECH AND MASS MEDIA

Journalist V. Boyko demands to recompense the moral damage On 24 February 2003 Donetsk journalist Vladimir Boyko turned to the

prosecutor’s office of the Donetsk oblast with the claim about recompensing the moral damage equal to 1000 UAH inflicted to him by the illegal arrest in June 2002 and torture applied to him during his stay in the preliminary prison. On the same day he appealed to court against the resolution of the prosecutor’s office on the institution on 10 May 2002 of the criminal case against him. The case will be considered by the Voroshilovskiy district court of Donetsk.

The journalist affirms that on 4 July 2002 he underwent torture in the Do-netsk preliminary prison. He sent the complaint to the prosecutor of the Kuy-byshevskiy district of Donetsk, but got no answer.

«Because of the absence of the reaction on the side of the city prosecutor I cannot demand the compensation for the damage inflicted to me in the pre-liminary prison and bring to responsibility the persons guilty of this damage», wrote V. Boyko in his appeal to the court.

By the data of the Institute of mass information, on 25 June 2002 V. Boyko was detained by tax militia in the editorial office of the newspaper «Sa-lon Donu I Basa».

On 27 June 2002 a judge of the Kuybyshevskiy district of Donetsk pro-longed the term of Boyko’s detention up to 10 days. On 9 August criminal case No. 106-21663 on the accusation of V. Boyko according to the Articles 212 and 364 of the CRC of Ukraine was closed. On 16 August 2002 the Ap-peal court of the Donetsk oblast acknowledged the detention of V. Boyko to be il-legal.

On 8 October 2002 the General Prosecutor’s office cancelled the resolu-tion on closing the case, and the case was sent for the investigation to the prosecutor’s office of the Lugansk oblast.

LIGA ONLINE «Prava Ludyny», No. 3, March, 2003

Lviv mayor had no right to drive a journalist out from the press conference The Appeal court of the Lviv oblast partly satisfied the claim of Bohdan

Kufrik, a journalist of the Lviv newspaper «Express», against Lviv mayor Lubomyr Buniak.

179

The court recognized that the mayor exceed his authority demanding from the journalist to leave the hall of the Lviv town council, where the press conference of Lubomyr Buniak was hold.

However, the court rejected the demands of the journalist to recompense him the moral damage.

The Appeal court considered the appeal of the journalist against the deci-sion of the Galitskiy district court, which did not find any violations of laws in the actions of Lviv mayor. The Appeal court reversed the decision of the local court.

On 7 August 2002 Lubomyr Buniak asked Bohdan Kufrik to leave the hall, where the mayor’s press conference devoted to the tragedy on the air-drome «Sknyliv», which happened on 27 July 2002, was conducted. The mayor substantiated his demand saying that the newspaper «Express» eluci-dated in a biased way his activities during the preparation of the festival, when the airplane fell on the spectators. After this the journalist turned to the court.

Our informant «Prava Ludyny», No.6, June, 2003

A case on the impediment to journalists’ activities was started in Shostka On 2 June the Shostka district prosecutor’s office (the Sumy oblast)

started a criminal case after article 171 Part 1 of the CC of Ukraine (impedi-ment to the legal journalists’ professional activities) against the head of the department of the registration of the acts of civil status (DRACS) at Shostka directorate of justice.

Larisa Yakubenko, the general manager of the company «TELECOM-SERVIS», informed the IMI that the oblast informational-analytical weekly «Perekrestok» published the data about the number of the births, marriages, di-vorces and deaths registered during a week.

«We were obtaining these data from the DRACS since 1999, but newly appointed to this post Ms. Degtiariova refused to render such information to the editorial board without any explanations», told Larisa Yakubenko.

It is noteworthy that the case was started only after the deputy’s request of Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Supreme Rada committee, to the General Prosecutor’s office. Shostka district prosecutor’s office refused, as usual, to start the criminal case after the claim of the journalists. The prosecutor’s offi-cers said that there were no grounds for the institution of the case. Yet, the op-erating laws do not relate such statistical data to the information with the re-stricted access.

According to the information of the IMI, the judges of the local court, to which the case would be directed, have already formed their opinion: «the case is hopeless».

180

Maria Sambur, 09 June 2003, the Institute of mass information, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

The criminal case on the illegal deprivation of libertyof the workers of a TV company (Press release) On 5 June 2003 the Starokostiantynivskiy inter-district prosecutor’s of-

fice started the criminal case after part 2 Article 146 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine against the manager of the private commercial-industrial firm «Dvi Oleny» and his wife (illegal deprivation of liberty committed against two or more persons by prior collusion).

The check established that on 28 May 2003 the spouses illegally deprived of liberty three workers of the Khmelnitska oblast TV and radio company «Po-dillia-tsentr»: L. Samenova, G. Buyanovska and V. Krivoy, and kept them in the office of the firm «Dvi Oleny» for about two hours.

The creative group was released only after the interference of the officers of the district militia precinct.

The details of the case will be disclosed and considered during the pre-trial investigation, which will be conducted by a deputy of the prosecutor of the inter-district prosecutor’s office of the Khmelnitska oblast.

Lilia Ivakh, the press secretary of the inter-district prosecutor’s officeof the Khmelnitska oblast

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Judge refused to consider V. Boyko’s claim against the tax administration and the prosecutor’s officeof the Donetsk oblast Last year the Donetsk tax militia detained journalist Vladimit Boyko and

took him into custody. The only guilt of the journalist was that he had written the article about the corruption in Donetsk tax militia. The journalist illustrated this corruption with the example of Vadim Papaika, the head of the tax militia of the Kyivskiy district of Donetsk. After this Boyko was arrested by tax offi-cers in the editorial office of the newspaper «Salon».

After 10 months the criminal case against V. Boyko was closed because of the absence of corpus delicti, and the court acknowledged that the detention and incarceration of the journalist were illegal.

Nobody knows how much time will pass until the organizers and execu-tors of this dirty affair will be punished. Until now V. Boyko has not get the compensation of the damage inflicted by the illegal detention; moreover, he even has not obtain the documents and other property seized from him during two searches. The prosecutor’s office ignores journalist’s appeals; his claims and complaints to court are not considered.

On 26 June Ya. Rassuzhday, a judge of the Kyivskiy district court of Do-netsk, refused to consider the claim handed by V. Boyko against the tax offi-cers and the oblast prosecutor’s office about the compensation of the damage

181

inflicted by the illegal bringing to criminal responsibility. The arguments ad-duced by the judge were rather surprising. It appeared that Vladimir Boyko had to pay 5 thousand UAH of litigation fee.

According to Article 4 item 6 of the Decree of the Cabinet of Ministers «On litigation fee», litigation fee is not imposed on the claims on recompens-ing the damage inflicted by the illegal bringing to criminal responsibility. Moreover, the claimant must not turn to court and prove something at all, if the illegal actions were committed against him by law-enforcing officers. Ac-cording to the Law of Ukraine «On the order of recompensing the damage in-flicted to a citizens by the illegal actions of the organs of inquiry, preliminary investigation, prosecutor’s office and court», after closing a case because of the rehabilitating circumstances, the investigating officer must calculate the damage inflicted by the illegal bringing to criminal responsibility and to issue the resolution about the compensation. The size of the compensation may not be less than the size of minimal wages for every month of incarceration. If the citizen does not agree with the size of the compensation, he may appeal to court against this resolution without paying the litigation fee.

The tax militia returned only Boyko’s computer confiscated from his flat. The investigation officer explained the reason of this confiscation without any embarrassment: the officers liked the plain monitor and decided to take it to their office, so they seized the equipment without court permission. Yet, the law-enforcers refuse to return the journalist’s correspondence, workbook and other documents.

(«Vechernie vesti», No. 98, 4-10 July 2003)

03 July 2003. Donetsk journalist Vladimir Boyko turned to the Appeal court of the Donetsk oblast with the claim about starting the disciplinary pro-ceedings against Ya. Rassuzhday, a judge of the Kyivskiy district court of Do-netsk.

On 21 April 2003 V. Boyko handed the claim on recompensing the moral damage inflicted by the illegal bringing to criminal responsibility. He de-manded 100 thousand hryvnas of compensation. Yet, on 28 May the judge re-jected his claim, since the plaintiff allegedly had to pay 5 thousand UAH of litigation fee. The judge based his decision on the Law of Ukraine «On the in-troduction of changes to some legal acts of Ukraine concerning the unham-pered realization of the right for the freedom of speech». V. Boyko also turned to the General Prosecutor of Ukraine with the claim about the institution of criminal case against judge Rassuzhday after part 1 Article 375 (issuing a de-liberately unjust decision).

Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

182

A case on the premeditated impediment to journalists’ activities was started in Shostka 03 July 2003. The Shostka town court of the Sumy oblast did not con-

sider the complaint handed by Irina Degtiariova against the resolution of the Shostka district prosecutor’s office about the institution against her of the criminal case after article 171 Part 1 of the CC of Ukraine, since the represen-tatives of the prosecutor’s office did not come to the trial.

On 2 June the Shostka district prosecutor’s office started the criminal case after article 171 Part 1 of the CC of Ukraine (impediment to the legal journalists’ professional activities) against Irina Degtiariova, the head of the department of the registration of the acts of civil status (DRACS) at Shostka directorate of justice. Ms. Degtiariova pointed out in her complaint that the case had been instituted groundlessly. At the same time, Larisa Yakubenko, the general manager of the company «TELECOM-SERVIS», stated: «The oblast informational-analytical weekly «Perekrestok» published the data about the number of the births, marriages, divorces and deaths registered during a week. We were obtaining these data from the DRACS since 1999, but newly appointed to this post Ms. Degtiariova refused to render such information to the editorial board without any explanations».

Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

Journalist of the newspaper «Ekspress» Bogdan Kufrikwon the trial against Lviv mayor Lubomir Buniak 24 June 2003. The Appeal court of the Lviv oblast took the decision that

the actions of Lviv mayor Lubomir Buniak, who drove local journalist Bogdan Kufrik from mayor’s press conference, were illegal. Thus, the court cancelled the decision of the Galitskiy district court of Lviv, which rejected the com-plaint of B. Kufrik in March 2003. Yet, the claim was satisfied by the Appeal court only partly – the journalist will not get the demanded compensation of the moral damage equal to 5000 hryvnas. Soon after the incident, which hap-pened on 7 August 2002 at the briefing, two more most popular Lviv newspa-pers, «Postup» and «Vysokiy zamok», supported «Ekspress» and B. Kufrik. These newspapers published the joint appeal, in which they accused L. Buniak of the violation of the Ukrainian laws on the press and information, as well as the law «On state service», which regulate the access of journalists to informa-tion. The newspapers appealed to the mayor to apologize publicly to the jour-nalists and inhabitants of Lviv.

The Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», June 2003 «Prava Ludyny», No. 7, 2003 (July)

«Lvivska gazeta» vs. Sergiy Medvedchuk The Lviv tax inspection got into the focus of the attention of local press

again. The numerous chicaneries of the tax administration at «Lvivska gazeta»

183

drove the journalists to despair and, on the eve of the first anniversary of the creation of the newspaper, they decided to bring the claim to court against the tax service. It is known in Lviv that Markiyan Ivashchikhin and Yaro-slav Rushchishin, two local businessmen close to the bloc «Our Ukraine», are the investors of the «improper newspaper». On 8 September the law-yers of the company «Lvivska gazeta» handed the claim against Sergiy Med-vedchuk, the head of the Lviv tax administration, who, in the opinion of the newspaper, had spread at one of his press conferences the inauthentic infor-mation about the activities of the newspaper. The weekly asks the court to forbid Medvedchuk to spread the false information.

«The Lviv tax administration tried to levy the fine from the newspaper, and the sum was sufficient for the institution of a criminal case. 23 thousand hryvnas were imposed on us because of the erroneous decisions of tax inspec-tors. In particular, we had to pay 17 thousand for the use of the Internet and phone by the newspaper allegedly for non-service purposes. Yet, journalists cannot work without these modern communication means», says Yuri Naza-ruk, the manager of the edition.

In the opinion of Oleg Onisko, the editor of the weekly, the methods ap-plied by the tax administration evidence on the goals different from a usual check of documents. The quibbles of the tax inspectors, he believes, have the political grounds, since they resemble, most of all, «the total pressure on the newspaper».

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 167, 12 September 2003)

On the claim of Ragim Gumbatov, the editor of the newspaper «Alubika»21 October 2003. The Crimean Appeal court refused to satisfy the appeal

of Alupka mayor Viktor Andik against the decision of the local court on the claim of Ragim Gumbatov, the editor of the newspaper «Alubika». Mr. Gum-batov pointed out that the approval of the decision in favor of his newspaper evidenced on the acknowledgement of the right of journalists for obtaining the information from local power. «I hope that this precedent will be a lesson for all state officials», remarked the editor.

We want to remind that in July 2002 journalist Gumbatov, the editor of the newspaper «Alubika», turned to the Yalta town court with the complaint against the illegal refusal of Alupka authorities to render the information to him. The claim was considered in the courts of several levels. Twice the local court satisfied the claim, but every time the Alupka mayor appealed against the court decision.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

184

Shostka district prosecutor’s office directed to courtthe criminal case of the head of the town departmentof the registration of the acts of civil status 28 October 2003. Recently Irina Degtiariova, the head of the town de-

partment of the registration of the acts of civil status (DRACS), has refused to cooperate with journalists of the weekly «Perekhrestia». The motive of the re-fusal was that the newspaper did not want to publish free of charge the adver-tising of the department. The written request of the editor-in-chief was also fu-tile. The newspaper had to turn for help to the prosecutor’s office. On 2 June 2003 the criminal case was instituted after part 1 Article 171 (impediment to the professional activities of journalists).

The check conducted by the prosecutor’s office confirmed the legality of the demands of journalists and the wrongfulness of I. Degtiariova’s position. By the way, Ms. Degtiariova has the juridical education, so she must be aware about Article 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which envisages the punishment (up to three years of the restriction of liberty) for impediment to the profes-sional activities of journalists.

In the course of the check, which was carried out by the prosecutor’s of-fice of the Sumy oblast for disclosing the facts of violation of journalists’ rights, no serious offences were found, stated oblast prosecutor Yuri Udartsov. Yet, the incidents happen, when journalists are not admitted to the sittings of town council. The prosecutor calls such situations «the ungrounded refusals» and reminds that a journalist has the right to sue against the refusal to give him accreditation.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

Kherson journalist protected their right for the freedomof speech and the right of their readers to obtainthe information from mass media. Kherson journalist protected their right for the freedom of speech and the

right of their readers to obtain the information from mass media We want to remind: in July Alena Rotona, the vice-mayor of Kherson,

handed a claim against the weekly «VIK» about the compensation of the dam-age inflicted to her honor and business reputation by the publications in the newspaper. The demanded sum was 15 thousand hryvnas. The vice-mayor also asked the court to prohibit to the weekly to publish any information about her until the court decision would be taken.

Aleksandr Golovko, a judge of the Suvorovskiy local court, «for guaran-teeing the objectivity of court», issued the decision: «To prohibit to the com-pany «VIK»… and other persons to publish in mass media any information on the activities of A. Rotova, … on the violation by her of the demands of the Constitution and Laws of Ukraine until the court decision would be taken».

185

So, the judge prohibited to ALL mass media of Ukraine to spread the informa-tion about the violation of laws by an OFFICIAL.

The editorial board of «VIK» handed the complaint against the decision of judge Golovko to the appeal court.

Besides, the fact that it was prohibited «to other persons» to write about the violations of the Constitution and Ukrainian laws exasperated many local journalists. The Kherson town association of journalists «Pivden» proposed the legal aid to all representatives of the «fourth power», who were going to fight for their right for the freedom of speech in court. As a result, 23 corre-spondents of local editions appealed against the court decision to the higher instance.

On 4 December the Appeal Court of the Kherson oblast expressed its atti-tude to the actions of judge A. Golovko: «The conclusion of the court… about the prohibition of the publications, connected with the case, by the defendants and other persons contradicts the demands of Articles 149 and 152 of the CPC of Ukraine». In other words judge Golovko applied «not proper» articles of the Civil-Procedural Code.

The appeal instance also pointed out the fact that the judge of the local court had no right to prohibit anything to the persons, HAD NO CONCERN with the court proceedings between the vice-mayor and the company «VIK».

«Along with the defendants, the court prohibited to spread any informa-tion about the activities of the plaintiff to other persons, but did not determine the circle of these persons. So, the court exceeded the limits of the controver-sial legal relationships, reads the resolution of the Appeal court.

Thus, the Appeal court made the judge «to return into the limits» and gave the journalists the right to spread the information about the violation of laws by the official. After all, the freedom of speech is regarded as one of the most important valuables in a democratic society, because it gives the oppor-tunity to the society to control the activities of the power. Citizens have the right to know, what the power does, whether it observes laws, and for what the taxes are spent. And the professional duty of journalists is to collect and spread the information.

It should be noted that the Kherson journalist have never been so solidary in protecting their rights in court. That became possible thanks to the project «Legal aid to journalists of the Kherson oblast» realized by the Kherson town association of journalists «Pivden». The project was endorsed by the depart-ment of education and mass media at the US Embassy in Ukraine.

«Prava Ludyny», No. 12, 2003 (Desember)

186

CASES WHERE JOURNALISTS AND MASS MEDIA ARE ACCUSED

IVIL CASES

Authorities against «Ukrainske Slovo» O. Timoshchuk, a judge of the Rivne town court, and A. Timoshchuk, a

deputy of Rivne prosecutor, demand to recompense them the moral damage equal to 200 thousand UAH inflicted by the Oleg Teliga publishing house, a founder of the weekly «Ukrainske Slovo», and Yurko Sirotiuk, the editor of the political department of the weekly. The damage was inflicted by making public the results of the journalist investigation, in which the claimants are suspected of the participation in falsifying a criminal case, applying illegal in-vestigation methods, exerting moral pressure and using threats and torture for obtaining evidence.

Everybody knows that tortures are applied in the Ukrainian preliminary prisons. In the beginning of January 2002 the editor of the political department of «US» received a note from the preliminary prison of Rivne. The author of the note, V. Grin, who had been summoned as a witness and then detained for hooliganism, informed about savage torture that were applied to him forobtaining false evidence and the confession that he was guilty of a theft, which he had not committed. Three other detained underwent the same procedure. All they were forced to confess the large-scale theft from a house situated in the village of Pantaliya of the Dubenskiy district of the Rivne oblast. By the way, the house belongs to the mother of the judge and prosecutor.

Besides, Sirotiuk got the information that both brothers Timoshchuks were present at the torture and were giving orders. He learned these facts from the advocate of other incarcerated. Moreover, the decision on the administra-tive arrest, in the result of which the witnesses turned into the detained for hooliganism and later – into the accused of the theft, was taken by the court, where O. Timoshchuk worked.

Major Yu. Khariniuk, the head of the criminal investigation department of the Dubenskiy district militia directorate, who had been the first officer in-vestigating this case and refused to falsify the case, was dismissed and retired on a pension. The prosecutor’s office (where A. Timoshchuk worked and still works), to which the detained turned with the complaints, responded with formal replies.

187

Understanding the social importance of this case, as well as the direct danger to the life of the detained, editor of «US» Yu. Sirotiuk made public the mentioned facts in the series of publications in his newspaper. The information about this scandalous case investigated by Sirotiuk was also published by other Rivne printed mass media, in particular, the newspaper «Rivne-rakurs» (6 February 2003).

As a result, four accused, who spent in custody more than a year, were at last released. During this year one of them caught TB, and a chronic disease of another one became more acute.

Trying to cover up the traces, brothers Timoshchuks brought an action against Yu. Sirotiuk and «Ukrainske Slovo». Taking into account the posts oc-cupied by the claimants and the sum of the demanded compensation (paying the compensation will cause the closure of the newspaper and the publishing house, and the author of the article will give away all his salary for more than 18 years), it is clear that only strong social resonance and the active elucida-tion in the press will allow to solve this case fairly.

03 March 21:10 www.maidan.org.ua

Prava Ludyny, No. 3, March, 2003

Court satisfied the claim of the former head of the Chernivtsy oblast department for fighting organized crime against the newspaper «Chas» The Pershotravnevy town court partially satisfied the claim of Oleksandr

Semenko, the former head of the Chernivtsy oblast department for fighting or-ganized crime, against the newspaper «Chas». The claim was connected with the insult of honor, dignity and business reputation inflicted to Semenko by a feuilleton printed in the newspaper. The newspaper must pay 50 thousand UAH to recompense the moral damage (the sum demanded by the plaintiff was 200 thousand). By the way, the surname of the claimant was not men-tioned in the newspaper. The decision will be appealed in the appeal instance.

Our informant «Prava Ludyny», No. 4, April, 2003

The lawsuit between MP P. Kuzmenko and the Uman newspa-per «Vulyk» will continue in the Supreme Court Petro Sushko, the head of the union «Zakhyst»: On 7 April the Cherkassy appeal court confirmed the legality of the deci-

sion issued by the Uman town court on the claim of MP Petro Kuzmenko against the newspaper «Vulyk».

Tetiana Chornomaz, a representative of the newspaper «Vulyk» and a correspondent of radio «Liberty», who came to the court session 20 minutes

188

after the assigned time of the beginning, was informed that the case was con-sidered in the absence of the party that handed the appeal. Before this the first sitting of the appeal court had been postponed because of the default of a rep-resentative of P. Kuzmenko.

As the newspaper «Antenna» informed, P. Kuzmenko, the deputy from the Uman election district, turned to the court in the connection with the publi-cations in the local newspaper «Vulyk». The newspaper printed two articles, in which the authors put the question about the membership of Kuzmenko in the managing committee of the charity fund named after Rabbi Nakhman. Petro Kuzmenko decided that these articles insulted his honor, and demanded to recompense the moral damage equal to 10 thousand UAH. Yet, the court de-creased this sum to 3 thousand UAH.

The editorial board of the newspaper believes that the Uman town court took the decision in favor of Kuzmenko without any grounds, because the question raised in the article was not a statement or information, which was as-sessed as inauthentic by the MP. Whether a question may be authentic or not? Moreover, both articles were based of the materials of the sitting of the District committee, which was conducted in presence of mass media. The audio record of the sitting was presented to the court. The record confirms that Kuzmenko was questioned about his connection with the Rabbi Nakhman fund. These ar-guments, as well as other proofs of the groundlessness of the decision issued by the Uman court, were expounded in the appeal. Yet, Cherkassy judges, like their Uman colleagues, settled the dispute by the principle: the right side is that one, which has more rights.

The editorial board of the newspaper «Vulyk» is going to turn to the Su-preme Court.

«Prava Ludyny», No. 4, April, 2003

The appeal of representatives of mass media and human rights protecting organizations of the Lugansk oblast On 24 April 2003 the Leninskiy district court of Lugansk chaired by

judge O. Matveyshina started the consideration of a civil case. The case con-cerns the claim of V. Medianik, a well-known Lugansk businessman and a deputy of the town council, against the editorial board of the newspaper «Ra-kurs-plus» and journalist Nikolay Severin on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation. The deputy assessed his honor and dignity at 100 thousand UAH.

We want to remind that the indignation of V. Medianik was aroused by the article written by Nikolay Severin and published in the newspaper «Ra-kurs-plus» in summer of last year. In this article the deputy was criticized for his unwillingness to fulfill his pre-election promises.

189

Being a Ukrainian citizen, deputy V. Medianik has the right to turn to court demanding to protect his rights. Yet, this court, according to the Consti-tution, must guarantee the equality of all parties of the process.

In October 2002, when the case was on the stage of pre-trial preparation, judge O. Matveyshina issued the decision about the seizure of all runs of the newspaper «Rakurs-plus» until the end of the year, of the equipment of the editorial board and personal property of the author of publication. This deci-sion was taken on the basis of a petition of V. Medianik.

In fact, the newspaper had been already closed before the beginning of the trial. The damage equal to tens of thousands hryvnas was inflicted to the editorial board.

The editorial board of the newspaper «Rakurs-plus» handed the com-plaint against the decision of judge Matveyshina to the Appeal court of Lugansk. Five months later the appeal court cancelled the decision. This could happen even earlier, but neither deputy Medianik nor his representative advo-cate N. Bukvich appeared on the court sessions.

On 24 April 2003, during the first court sitting on this case, judge O. Matveyshina prohibited to the TV company «Irta» to make video-records. Thus, the judge violated Article 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine that en-visages criminal responsibility for impeding the professional activities of jour-nalists. For some reasons, the consideration of the case having a great public resonance was conducted in judge’s office, and not in a courtroom.

Before this, in autumn 2001, the same judge considered the case of the same deputy against the national TV and radio company «Kontinent» and is-sued the decision about the seizure of the transmitters of the company. This meant the termination of the work of the company «Kontinent», while the re-sult of the consideration of the case was not known yet.

However, the administration of the TV company «Kontinent» managed to force the officers of justice to respect laws. It should be noted that the men-tioned case is considered already for two years, and nobody can predict when this red tape will finish.

The actions of O. Matveyshina mean either that she does not know the laws on informational activities, or that she fulfils some political order.

Unfortunately, this attempt of court interference into the activities of in-dependent mass media did not obtain any legal assessment of higher court in-stances. This disturbing fact allows to think that the methods similar to the ac-tions of judge Matveyshina can be used during the forthcoming Presidential election, when both local authorities and political parties will not be interested in the independent and unbiased court.

Alas, such incidents are not infrequent in the Leninskiy district court, as well as in other courts of the Lugansk oblast.

190

We, journalists, want to live and work obeying the Ukrainian laws. But we demand to observe our rights, in particular, the right for own opinion, the right for information and for the opportunity to deliver this information to our readers, listeners and spectators without obstacles.

V. Bakumenko, the head of the press center of the all-Ukrainian newspa-per «Gromadskiy kontrol»;

K. Poltavskaya, the editor-in-chief of the national TV and radio company «IRTA»;

A. Savenko, the head of the informational service of the national TV and radio company «IRTA»;

N. Kozyrev, the head of the board of the Public committee for the protec-tion of constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens, a correspondent of the newspaper «Svoboda».

«The Chronicle of violations of human rights in the Lugansk oblast», April 2003, the bulletin of the Lugansk oblast branch of the public organiza-tion «Voters’ Committee of Ukraine»

«Prava Ludyny», No.5, May, 2003

Court made the newspaper «Stolichny novyny» to pay almost 3 million hryvnas to IASM 07 May 2003The holding company «Stolichny novyny» must pay almost 3 million

hryvnas of compensation for discrediting honor, dignity and business reputa-tion to the Inter-regional Academy of Staff Management (IASM). This deci-sion was issued on 5 May by the Pecherskiy district court of Kyiv. The defen-dants do not want to pay the compensation, so they handed the appeal against the court decision.

The pretensions against «Stolichny novyny» were brought by several plaintiffs. The claimants were: the IASM, the International Staff Academy, Georgiy Shchokin, the head of these academies, and Igor Slesarenko, the edi-tor-in-chief of the magazine «Personnel». They demanded to print in all news-papers of the holding company the refutations of all materials published be-fore, which discredited their honor, dignity and business reputation.

Igor Slesarenko, the editor-in-chief of the magazine «Personnel», told that the claimants were offended with «the series of articles that were pub-lished during the last year», so they turned to court. «These were the invented accusations», he said, «presented in the insulting and cynical form with bad in-tentions. The defendants clearly understood that their actions were illegal».

Vadim Rabinovich, the President of the holding company «Stolichnynovyny», is sure that the court issued a biased verdict:

«During last year we turned to the Pecherskiy court for 72 times, and for 72 times we lost the cases. We write much about this court, and they dislike

191

us. Yet, they are disgracing laws. We will see what will happen later. If Mr. Shchokin thinks that the court decision will rehabilitate him, he is wrong».

The officers of the Pecherskiy court responded to all questions in the fol-lowing way:

«Commenting the court decisions is not related to the competence of the court. Do you know the surname of the judge, who considered the case? Well, then turn to him in his reception hours – on Wednesday from 15:00 to 18:00 and on Friday from 8:00 to 13:00».

The President of the holding company told in the interview to the Public radio that his lawyers had already handed the appeal against the decision of the Pecherskiy district court. V. Rabinovich is sure that the higher instances will cancel the decision. The administration of the IASM is also preparing to the new trial. They decided that, if they would obtain the compensation, they would pass the money to charity organizations that patronize orphans.

The Institute of mass information, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of expression in Ukraine», 1-15 May, 2003

3000 journalists of the Kyiv oblast supported their Chernivtsy colleagues Yuri Chorney, Chernivtsy: The Kyiv organization of the National union of journalists of Ukraine

(NUJU), the greatest Ukrainian trade union of journalists, resolutely supported the efforts of the Chernivtsy journalists community «to stop the savage pressure exerted by the insolent authorities on the freedom of speech and democratic prin-ciples stipulated by the Constitution». The telegram of 27 May 2003 is signed by Igor Zaseda, the head of the Kyiv oblast organization and the secretary of the NUJU, on behalf of 3000 members. In particular, the appeal states: «Teofil Bauer, the head of the Chernivtsy oblast state administration, is known as a persecutor of the freedom of speech, and he is unworthy of occupying his high post».

The Kyiv journalists declare that they respect their Chernivtsy colleagues «for courage and honesty, for the intentions to selflessly struggle for justice». «If we would not join our efforts in the struggle against the adherents of the «Soviet freedom of speech», we would lost out freedom», the telegram reads. The Kyiv journalists concluded their appeal with the slogan: «We will struggle and we will win!»

The solidarity showed by Chernivtsy journalists, great public resonance and the support on the side of the all-Ukrainian journalists union had some effect and made the Chernivtsy authorities to retreat. On 29 May the press service of the oblast administration published the appeal of governor Teofil Bauer to the repre-sentatives of oblast mass media. From the very beginning the appeal demonstrated the unwillingness (or inability?) of the governor to understand the role of the rep-resentatives of mass media in any civilized society. The principal position of the

192

journalists, who were asserting their rights, is called «ambitions» and «PR-campaign against the oblast administration and governor, which displays the fea-tures of simple political order and has nothing common with truth – the main crite-rion of journalistic activities». Yet, after the general words about his successful work on the post of the head of the oblast (the successfulness of this work can be assessed by the dwellers of the oblast, which is one of the poorest in Ukraine) Teofil Bauer recognized the existence of some «errors and drawbacks» in his work, as well as of the conflict «in the relations between the power and a part of journalists’ community of the region». This statement arouses optimism, since it was declared by the state official, who earlier had been sure of his impeccability.

Finally, T. Bauer appealed «to the workers of oblast mass media, independ-ently of their status and political orientation, to be tolerant and steady in their rela-tions with the power, to elucidate the events and facts objectively». In order to demonstrate his «good will» the governor declared his decision to call away «some claims against mass media and journalists, since these claims can become a destabilizing factor in the process of the development of the regional informa-tional space. Let the publication of these editions, which are far from the actual situation in the oblast, be on conscience of their authors». Now Teofil Bauer hopes for the «steps of the representatives of main regional mass media towards the establishment of the constructive cooperation between mass media and local organs of state power».

Yet, it is doubtful that the governor, who savagely persecuted mass media for the long time, will now become a friend of journalists. Moreover, it will hardy help him, since the majority of oblast mass media proclaimed their editorial boards as «territories free from Teofil Bauer», and the motto «Bukovina without Bauer» still remains actual.

29 May 2003 «Prava Ludyny», No.6, June, 2003

The Bukovina governor is going to call away the claims against mass media and journalists «for the sake of public order» The press service of the oblast administration published the appeal of gover-

nor Teofil Bauer to the Bukovina dwellers and representatives of oblast mass me-dia. In this appeal the governor declares that he is going to call away the claims against mass media and journalists «for the sake of public order», since these claims «can become a destabilizing factor in the process of the development of the regional informational space». Bauer asked all mass media of the region «to leave their ambitions and to begin the constructive dialog».

The UNIAN informs that for more than six months the court process lasted after the claim of governor T. Bauer against the independent newspaper «Chas», which accused the head of the oblast of mass falsifications during the last election to the Chernivtsy oblast council. The next court sitting was planned to be con-ducted on 6 June – on the Day of journalists of Ukraine.

193

The governor of Bukovina points out that «the tension in the relations be-tween the state power and some regional mass media has its objective and subjec-tive reasons», but affirms that he «never initiated it personally». T. Bauer recog-nized that he fulfilled the adopted decisions in the interests of people and used «urgent, but sometimes unpopular measures, which generated some misunder-standings and, maybe, errors».

Teofil Bauer stated that he always «thought highly about the hard work of journalists and people of other professions». He also appealed to the workers of oblast mass media, independently of their status and political orientation, «to be tolerant and steady in their relations with the power, to elucidate the events and facts objectively».

At the same time the governor declared that he was forced to turn to the oblast dwellers and mass media because of the «PR-campaign against the oblast administration and governor, which displays the features of simple political order and has nothing common with truth».

According to the information of the UNIAN, on 13 May the Bukovina jour-nalists and members of their families organized the picketing of the building of the Chernivtsy oblast state administration. The picket was directed at the protection of the freedom of speech in the region and was a demonstration of solidarity with the newspaper «Chas», which was obliged by court to pay 50 thousand hryvnas of compensation for publishing the feuilleton, where the concrete names of heroes were not mentioned. On 23 May the NUJU and the Parliamentary committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information turned to President Leonid Ku-chma with the request to dismiss T. Bauer from his post for the persecutions of journalists and violation of informational laws of Ukraine.

30 May 2003 UNIAN

«Prava Ludyny», No.6, June, 2003

Independent mass media are persecuted in the Lugansk oblast Nikolay Kozyrev, Lugansk: This year the Lugansk public committee for human rights protection con-

ducts the investigation of the level of freedom of local newspapers. The inves-tigation is conducted in the framework of the project «Consulting and inform-ing peasants through district newspapers» and is financially supported by Na-tional Endowment for Democracy and Foundation of the development ofUkrainian mass media at the USA Embassy, Kyiv.

We have already disclosed some problems, the existence of which may be interpreted as the almost complete dependence of district newspapers on local power organs.

This dependence has the political and economic character: after the elec-tion-2002 the systematic process of replacing the owners of the newspapers began in the oblast. Before this the newspapers were founded, as a rule, by

194

journalists (journalists’ collectives) or editorial collectives and district councils. This year (in fact, the process began in autumn of the last year), according to the decision of the local councils, the journalists’ collectives were removed from the composition of founders of eight out of seventeen district newspa-pers. In four of these newspapers the place of journalists was occupied by state administrations:

Newspaper District Founder

«Slavianoserbskie Visti» Slavianoserbskiy District council «Visti Bilovodshchiny» Belovodskiy District council «Slovo khliboroba» Melovskoy District council «Radianske slovo» Markovskiy District council «Peremoga» Novopskovskiy District council and administra-

tion «Vestnik Novoay-darshchiny»

Novoaydarskiy District council and administra-tion

«Popasnianskiy vestnik» Popasnianskiy District council and administra-tion

«Trudovaya slava» Lutuginskiy District council and administra-tion

Most probably this tendency will result in the complete estrangement of journalists from the ownership of newspapers and absolute economic depend-ence of journalists’ collectives on district administration.

During the monitoring of local newspapers it appeared that the majority of the newspapers work not for readers, but for administration: they contain the information pleasant for the authorities, but almost do not write about the urgent problems of the districts, such as the violations of property rights in the course the agrarian reform. This is the reason of scanty runs: 3-5 thousands.

The committee concluded the agreements with the editors of two district newspapers («Antratsitovskiy vestnik» and «Vestnik Novoaydarshchiny») about the creation of the consulting centers at the editorial boards. The editors were summoned to the administration. They got the «recommendations» not to co-operate with the committee, since this project was allegedly financed by the political opposition (!). The representatives of Novoaydarskiy district admini-stration insistently inquired me about my political orientation, they asked «for whom I had been working» during the previous election campaign, and who financed the committee now.

195

The reason of this situation is trivial: numerous violations of the rights, especially in the property sphere, must not, in the interests of the corrupted bu-reaucrats, be elucidated by the newspapers and discussed by public.

Under such conditions of censorship (or self-censorship) and the absence of freedom the protest reactions are inevitable, either in the form of delitescent conflict or in the open form. For example, for more than a year one of the courts considers the claim of V. Poydin, the editor of the Novopskovsk news-paper «Peremoga» against the district administration in the connection with the illegal persecutions after the publication of an article criticizing the district authorities for corruption.

There is another aspect of the dependence of mass media and violation of journalists’ rights – claims about the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation (Article 7 of the Civil Code of Ukraine), which often ruin the news-papers because of the enormous recompensing sums.

Some statistics. In 2002 there were 269 claims on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation in the oblast courts, 203 of them were handed in 2002. During that year 188 cases were considered, among them 31 were re-jected, 56 were closed (i.e. the demands were not satisfied); the decisions were issued on 92 claims, 69 of them were satisfied. The greatest number of such cases was considered in the Leninskiy and Zhovtnevy courts of Lugansk and in the Stakhanov town court.

The total sum of moral and material compensations demanded in the claims was 2,089,077 hryvnas, and 42,514 hryvnas must be paid according to the court decisions.

49 claims on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation were brought against mass media, 31 of them were handed in 2002. 35 cases were considered during the year, 12 were rejected, 6 were closed; the deci-sions were issued on 17 claims, 14 were satisfied. Leninskiy district court of Lugansk considered 25 cases, Brianka town court – 7 cases, Krasnodon town court – 7 cases, Zhovtnevy district court of Lugansk – 6 cases, Stakhanov town court – 2 cases, Lutuginskiy district court – 1 case and Popasninaskiy district court – 1 case.

The total demanded recompensing sum was 1, 627,704 UAH the court obliged the defendants to pay 4039 UAH. Thus, the total sum that must be paid according to the decisions of Leninskiy district court of Lugansk equals to 1717 hryvnas out of the total demanded sum of 530500 hryvnas; the corre-sponding numbers for other courts are: Brianka town court – – 471 out of 7000, Krasnodon town court – 630 out of 80000, Lutuginskiy district court – 1017 out of 10000, Stakhanov town court – 204 out of 204.

So, the oblast mass media permanently stay in the field of social tension generated by the conflict of interests, more often the interests of bureaucrats and citizens, who try to defend their legal rights and interests through publica-

196

tions on the newspapers. Yet, sometimes the citizens together with the news-papers, become the victims of the illegal court repressions.

The above statement may be confirmed by the scandalous case Medianikvs. Lugansk newspaper «Rakurs plus», when Medianik, a businessman and a deputy of the town council, demanded to recompense the moral damage (100 thousand hryvnas) inflicted to him by the publication in the newspaper of the voters’ critical opinions about his work (!). And the court ruined the newspa-per even before the consideration of the case – it issued the decision about the arrest of all future issues of the newspaper!

«Prava Ludyny», No.6, June, 2003

197

The newspaper «Vikna» asks: whether the information about communal debts is personal information, which must not be divulged by organs of state power? 13 April. The response of Oleg Tseluyko, the KhG lawyer. This problem is very spacious, and I believe that this method of pressure

on the citizens is a demonstration of illegal actions of state organs and, in par-ticular, of state officials.

The protection of the citizens can be realized in several directions. 1) Distribution (publication) of the information about communal debts of

an individual may be interpreted as meddling into private life or/and creating the further conditions for such meddling. This contradicts Article 8 of the European Convention and Article 32 of the Ukrainian Constitution.

Why? As we know, Article 32 of the Constitution reads (pay special at-tention to the provisions set off in italics):

Nobody must undergo the interference into his private and family life, except the cases envisaged by the Constitution of Ukraine.

Collection, storage, use and distribution of confidential information about an individual without his consent is inadmissible, except the cases envisaged by law and only in interests of national security, economic welfare and human rights.

Every citizen has the right to familiarize in the organs of state power, lo-cal self-rule and other organizations with the data about him, which are not state secrets of other secrets protected by law.

Everybody has the right guaranteed by court to refute false information about him or members of his family and the right to demand seizure of any in-formation, as well as the right to demand the compensation of moral and mate-rial damage inflicted by the collection, storage, use and distribution of this false information.

This guarantee of non-interference to the private life also implies the guarantee of personal secrets, of providing the comparative independence from the state and society. The provisions of the Article contain the well-grounded restrictions of the collection, storage, use and distribution of confi-dential information on an individual (without his consent), since the disclosure of the financial and material state of the individual can exert the negative in-fluence on his life, family status and many other factors.

Here we must determine whether the data on communal debts are confi-dential. Let us consider Article 23 of the Law of Ukraine «On information».

Article 23. Information on an individual Information on an individual – is the aggregate of documented of pub-

lished data about the individual.

198

The fundamental data about an individual (personal data) are: nationality, education, family status, religious convictions, state of health, address, date and place of birth.

The sources of the documented information on an individual are the per-sonal documents of the individual, documents signed by the individual, as well as the data about the individual collected by the organs of state power and or-gans of local and regional self-rule in the framework of their activities.

Collection of the information on an individual without his consent is pro-hibited, except the cases envisaged by law. Every person has the right to famil-iarize with the information collected on him. The information on an individual is protected by law.

As we see, Article 23 defines the concept of personal data, and confiden-tial information is defined by Article 30 of the Law (not in very apt way, in my opinion):

The information with the restricted access is divided, by its legal regime, into confidential and secret.

Confidential information is the data, which are owned, used or handled by separate physical or juridical persons and are distributed by their wish and according to the conditions stipulated by these persons.

Citizens and juridical persons, who own the information of professional, business, industrial, bank, commercial or other types obtained at their own ex-pense or the information, which is an object of their professional, business, in-dustrial, bank, commercial or other interests and does not violate the secrets envisaged by law, regulate the regime of the access to this information by themselves, including giving the status of confidential one, and establish the system (methods) of protecting this information.

Now let us consider Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine No. 5- of 30 October 1997 (the case of Ustimenko). Item 1 of the resolution part of the decision reads that Part 4 of Article 23 of the Law of Ukraine «On information» must be interpreted as follows: not only collection is prohibited, but also storage, use and distribution of confidential information on an indi-vidual without his consent, except the cases envisaged by law and only in in-terests of national security, economic welfare, human rights and freedoms.

Confidential information includes, in particular, the information on an individual (education, family status, religious convictions, state of health, date and place of birth, property state and other personal data). So, taking into ac-count this interpretation, one can draw the conclusion that the data on property state belong to confidential information. Now let us solve the question whether the data on debts are the data on property state. This question is, unfortunately, not defined by the operating laws, but it may be solved in favor of the debtor on the basis of the laws of formal logics. Debt is one of the aspects of financial balance, so it is a part of property state of an individual; it is also a factor that influences property state of the individual and, maybe, of his family.

199

Here I want to remind that, according to the Law «On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine», decisions of the Court are obligatory for fulfillment on the territory of Ukraine and may not be appealed against.

Thus, the obligation of the Decision is characterized by two features: 1) general obligation – for all subjects of right; yet, this concerns not the entire decision, but only its resolution part, where legal principle is interpreted or formulated; that is in the decision on the case of Ustimenko the Court formu-lated certain legal provisions that are generally obligatory; 2) special obliga-tion – for the organs of state power, including court ones, which must take the decision in favor of Ustimenko in accordance with the Law «On the Constitu-tional Court of Ukraine», in particular, Article 70.

As to the citizens’ right for the access to information, Article 31 of the Law «On information» states:

Citizens have the rights: – to know during the period of collecting the information, which data are

collected about them and with which aim; by whom, how and with which aim these data will be used;

– to get the access to the information on them, to deny its authenticity, completeness, appropriateness, etc.

State organs and organizations, organs of local and regional self-rule,whose informational systems contain information on citizens, must render this information gratis and without obstructions on the demand of the persons, whom this information concerns, except the cases envisaged by law, and to take measures for preventing the non-sanctioned access to this information. In the cases of violating these demands the Law guarantees the protection of citi-zens from the damage inflicted by the use of this information.

The provision stated in the next part of the Article seems to be interesting in the context of the request.

The access of unauthorized persons to the information on an individual collected in accordance with the operating laws by state organs, organizations and officials is prohibited.

Yet, when the lists of the debtors with their names and sums are made public, the conditions are obviously created for the passive access of every-body to these data.

The Article also reads that the necessary amount of the data on citizens, which may be obtained in a legal way, must be maximally limited and may be used only for legally envisaged aim.

I reckon that it is difficult to distinguish any legal aim in the demands to pay debts under the pressure of the threats to spread negative information, which would cause damage to reputation and relations with other people. Moreover, there exists the alternative way of settling the property conflicts be-tween the providers and consumers of communal services without the public aspect: the debts may be demanded through a court according to the civil pro-

2 0 0

cedure, and this practice must be common in such interrelations. Such prob-lems must be considered in the context of property disputes, and not PR-actions with the use of pressure, which are so habitual and close to our power structures. After all, private persons are most often involved in these conflicts, but not public figures

2) There is another potential violation of informational legislation di-rected at the abuse of the rights for privacy of the debtors: use and distribution of the information on the personal life of a citizen without his consent by the person, who owns the corresponding information as a result of the fulfillment of his service duties.

According to part 2 Article 47 of the Law «On information», the person guilty of such actions must be responsible for the violation of informational legislation. I will not consider in details how the doctrine of bank secrets is stipulated in the national legislation and put into practice, but the attention to the secret of bank deposits in Ukraine and abroad is mush more than to the discussed problem. Yet, if to consider the question attentively, this question concerns the regime of elucidating the information about the finances of pri-vate persons, and the majority of citizens do not want this information to be made public.

3) And finally, how can we protect our rights? Article 48 of the Law «On information» states that in the case, where the

organs of local and regional self-rule and their officials commit the illegal ac-tions envisaged by this Law, these actions may be challenged in the organs of higher level or in court.

The complaints against the illegal actions of the officials are handed to the organs of higher level, to which these officials are subordinated.

If the complaint to an organ of higher level was not satisfied, the inter-ested citizen or juridical person has the right to appeal to court against the ille-gal actions of the officials.

The Constitutional Court pointed out that the fundamental norms of Arti-cle 48 of the Law «On information» are the norms formulated in the first part of the article, which norms envisage the right to appeal against the illegal ac-tions committed by the organs of local and regional self-rule and their offi-cials, as well as by political parties, other citizens’ unions, mass media, state organization, which are juridical persons, and separate citizens to the organs of higher level or to court, at the complainer's option. The second part of Arti-cle 48 specifies the procedure of the appeals against the illegal actions of state officials in the case of turning to the organs of higher level, and part 3 of this Article stresses that the appeal handed to the organs of higher level may not be an obstacle for the following appeal to court. In the context of the entire Arti-cle 48 the third part may not be considered as the demand that a citizen may turn to court only after the appeal to the organs of higher level. The direct ap-peal to court is the Constitutional right of everyone.

2 0 1

In the framework of Article 56 of the Constitution Article 49 of the Law stipulates that in the cases, where the offence inflicted material or moral damage to the citizen, the guilty must recompense this damage on the basis of court decision. The recompensing sum is established by court.

Besides, I want to point out that the new Criminal Code of Ukraine con-tains Article 182, which reads:

Violation of privacy. Illegal collection, storage, use and distribution of confidential information

about an individual without his consent or spreading this information in public speech, in work of art, which is demonstrated publicly, or in mass media are punished by the fine up to fifty untaxable incomes, or the reformatory works for the term up to two years, or the arrest for the term up to six months, or the restriction of freedom for the term up to three years.

The majority of obstacles and problems (which are mainly formal) appear in the connection with the proofs of the objective side of the potential offence, namely the illegality of the distribution. Thus, it is possible to raise the ques-tion in some cases about criminal responsibility of the officials, who take the decisions on behalf of state organs about the divulgence of the information on the debts.

To conclude, I see three possible directions of protecting the citizens, who have communal debts, in the case of the discussed actions on the side of state or communal organs:

1) to hand the complaint to the officials of higher level; 2) to bring the suit to court, possibly with the demand of compensation; 3) to turn with the appeal about the institution of criminal case.

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-14 April, 2003

The newspaper «Antenna» won the process against the headof the Cherkassy oblast directorate for fightingthe organized crime Aleksandr Mikisha, the first deputy of the Cherkassy oblast militia direc-

torate and the head of the Cherkassy oblast directorate for fighting the organ-ized crime (DFOC), demanded in his claim against the newspaper «Antenna» the compensation of moral damage equal to 80 thousand, public apology of the editor and publication of the refutation. The claim of the official against the newspaper was considered by judge T. Korshunova of the Sosnovskiy court of Cherkassy.

Aleksandr Mikisha accused «Antenna» of the publication of the article «General Kochegarov will go away and will not return» (8 May 2002), which read: «It is rumored that after 1 May general Kochegarov will go on leave and will not return back, and his post will be passed to… colonel Aleksandr Mikisha, the head of the DFOC. According to the rumors, the latter is already accepting the

2 0 2

congratulations.» Mikisha insisted that the editorial board had the goal to pro-voke the conflict between the militia officers. «And in the article «General Ko-chegarov became a hostage of militia intrigues» the newspaper deliberately misin-formed the public about the actions and crimes that I did not commit», stated A. Mikisha.

In his claim Mr. Mikisha points out that «the facts adduced in the article «General Kochegarov became a hostage of militia intrigues» are inauthentic, since I have no acute conflict with O. Kochegarov, the head of the Cherkassy oblast militia directorate. I also did not commit the crimes, of which the newspaper accused me, such as the control over some part of local criminal business, or-ganizing the unsuccessful attempt at Kochegarov’s life and driving him to sui-cide with the purpose to occupy his post». The claim contains an excerpt from the article, from which Aleksandr Mikisha drew the above-mentioned conclu-sions: «Lately O. Kochegarov had the permanent conflict with a number of lo-cal militia officers, who were displeased with his attempts to stop their illegal actions. Many people say that the administration of the local DFOC, with which O. Kochegarov always had not very good relations, controls some part of criminal business in Cherkassy. Yet, this organization also has a certain po-tential for the conduction of special operations. It would not be surprising if, after the dismissal of Kochegarov, his post will be occupied by an officer of the DFOC. By the way, several minutes ago the press conference has finished in the prosecutor’s office of the Cherkassy oblast. One more note found at a place of occurrence was mentioned at the press conference. The note reads: «You wanted to occupy this post? You will occupy it.» Perhaps, it is one more proof of the fact that Kochegarov tried to kill himself. Whom did he mean? Maybe the head of the local DFOC?»

On 30 May 2003 the Sosnovskiy court of Cherkassy issued the decision: it refused to satisfy A. Mikisha’s claim.

The Institute of mass information, 03 June 2003, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

The first consideration of the claim of Mirgorod mayor against journalist Viktor Kozoriz On 5 June the first consideration of the claim of Oleksandr Pautov, the

mayor of Mirgorod (the Poltava oblast), against Viktor Kozoriz, the editor-in-chief and journalist of the newspaper «Mirgorodska Pravda», took place in the town of Okhtyrka of the Sumy oblast.

The mayor demands 50 thousand of compensation of the moral damage inflicted to him by the publication of an article by V. Kozoriz in the newspaper «Mirgorodska pravda». The claimant was insulted with the phrases: «…Mirgorod dwellers were forced to accept Oleksandr Pautov, a not popular and, as it be-came known later, absolutely untalented manager» and «Oleksandr Pautov has

2 0 3

rather vague notion of the economic policy and the principles of managing a modern town. It seems that he does not understand at all, by whom and for which he was elected, and to whom he must serve». The mayor believes that these statements are untrue, that they defame him, discredit his honor, dignity and business reputation and defile his business reputation in public opinion.

The defendant was represented at the trial by former mayor of Mirgorod Vasyl Tretetskiy and IMI lawyer Tetiana Kirichenko. Local journalists also came to the trial to support their colleague.

During the trial Kozoriz lodged the petition, in which he asked to include into the case materials the documents that confirmed the facts stated in the ar-ticle, on the basis of which he, in his opinion, had the right to characterize the mayor in the above-mentioned way.

During the first consideration the parties put some questions, presented proofs and lodged petitions.

The second trial will be held on 19 June 2003. We want to remind that on 12 March 2003 the Local Mirgorod town

court approved the decision to seize the flat of Viktor Kozoriz «with the aim to secure the claim».

09 June 2003, The Institute of mass information, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

The Bloc of Yulia Timoshenko will demand to bringto criminal responsibility the administrators of «Studio 1+1» The BYT is going to turn to court with the demand to bring to criminal

responsibility the administrators of the TV company «Studio 1+1», if they would not refute the untrue information about Yu. Timoshenko.

The press service of the BYT informed the UNIAN that, according to the resolution of the state executor, the fine equal to 340 hryvnas was imposed on Vladimir Oseledchik, the general manager of the TV and radio company «Stu-dio 1+1», for non-fulfillment of the decision of the Obolonskiy district court of Kyiv, which was issued in favor of Timoshenko.

The BYT reminds that the Obolonskiy district court of Kyiv, in its deci-sion of 28 May 2002, acknowledged the information spread by the TV channel «Studio 1+1» during the pre-election TV debates as untrue.

The court decision obliged the company «Studio 1+1» to render to Yu. Timoshenko the air at the channel «1+1» for refuting the above-mentioned un-true information.

The court decision came into force as early as in December 2002, but it has not been fulfilled by the TV company until now.

According to the Law of Ukraine «On execution procedure», general manager of the company V. Oseledchik was fined for the non-fulfillment of

2 0 4

the court decision, and later the doubled fine was imposed on him for the same offense.

If the court decision would not be fulfilled, the appeal would be handed to the court with the demand to bring to criminal responsibility the administra-tion of the TV company, informs the press service of the BYT.

09 June 2003, The Institute of mass information, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

MP Petro Oliynyk won the trial against «Studio 1+1» The appeal court of Kyiv did not satisfy the appeal of the TV and radio

company «Studio 1+1» against the decision of the Pecherskiy district court of 6 February on the case started after the complaint of MP Petro Oliynyk (the bloc «Nasha Ukraina») against the TRC «Studio 1+1» on the protection of business reputation and recompensing the moral damage, and left the decision without changes. This information was provided by the press service of the Lviv oblast branch of the bloc «Nasha Ukraina».

The Pecherskiy district court satisfied the claim of Petro Oliynyk: the in-formation communicated in the news «TSN» on 18 March 2002 about the wreck of Chervonograd town economy by mayor Petro Oliynyk were ac-knowledged to be untrue, the defendant was obliged to refute this information by reading out the resolution part of the decision in the evening block of news and to pay the compensation of moral damage equal to 1650 hryvnas. On 6 February the decision came into force and had to be executed in a month.

MP P. Oliynyk commented the decision of the chamber on civil cases of the appeal court of Kyiv in the following way: «The decision of the appeal court of Kyiv evidences that the independent court power still exists inUkraine, and this power can protect the interests of the Ukrainian citizens». He also told about the moral compensation: «one must act wisely and justly in such cases». «It was our own initiative to demand the compensation sum equal to 10 minimal salaries. So I want to advise my colleagues, to whose business reputation the damage was also inflicted, to defend their honor and dignity emphatically and earnestly», said Petro Oliynyk.

04 June 2003, The Institute of mass information, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Brovary mayor has legal proceedings with the newspaper «Brovarskiy kuryer» Today the town court of Brovary (the Kyiv oblast) again considered the

claim of town mayor Viktor Antonenko against the editorial board of the newspaper «Brovarskiy kuryer». The mayor demanded from the editorial board to refute the untrue information and to recompense the moral damage equivalent to 40 thousand hryvnas.

2 0 5

«In his claim Mr. Antonenko stated that the information published in the October issue of the newspaper «Brovarskiy kuryer» is false», says editor-in-chief Nadiya Grytskova.

According to the words of the journalist, the publication was devoted to the celebration of the Day of the town. The newspaper published the interview of the head of the budget committee of the town council, who said that the au-thorities had to allot 100 thousand hryvnas for the celebration. The budget committee protested against such expenses, but the deputies of the town coun-cil approved the program. The opinion was expressed in the editorial comment that it should be more reasonable to allot such great amount of money not for the celebration, but for the salaries of the workers of communal sphere.

During the today sitting the court listened to the witnesses presented by the claimant, and on 24 May the will be summoned, who were presented by the defendant – the editorial board of the newspaper.

11 June 2003, The Institute of mass information, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Editor of the newspaper «Demokratichna Nosivshchina»(the Chernigiv oblast) is a plaintiff and a defendantat the same time An interesting juridical collision occurred in the town of Nosivka of the

Chernigiv oblast. The town court simultaneously considered two cases con-cerning the newspaper «Demokratichna Nosivshchina» (an edition of the dis-trict organization of the People’s Rukh of Ukraine) and its editor Mykola Efimenko. At that M. Efimenko was a plaintiff in one case and a defendant, together with his newspaper, – in another one.

Both conflict situations began more than a year ago, during the election to the Parliament and local organs of state power. The newspaper «Demokratichna Nosivshchina» criticized Oleksandr Volkov, a candidate to the Supreme Rada from his district. District state newspaper «Nosivski visti» and local TV com-pany «Obriy» supported Volkov. «Demokratichna Nosivshchina», in its turn, started the polemics with these mass media; in particular, it published a critical material about «Obriy».

Another conflict emerged in the connection with the fact that editor of «Demokratichna Nosivshchina» Mykola Efimenko ran for the post of Nosivka mayor. Three days before the election the newspaper «Nosivski visti» printed in its special issue two critical materials about M. Efimenko. Efimenko had no time and opportunity to response to these materials in the same newspaper.

The election finished. O. Volkov became an MP, M. Efimenko was not elected to mayor’s post. And the Nosivka court got two claims on the protec-tion of honor and dignity during the election campaign. Mykola Efimenko brought a suit against the newspaper «Nosivski visti», he pointed out that the

2 0 6

publication of the critical materials about him on the eve of the election was a direct violation of the election laws.

Head of the TV company «Obriy» G. Voytok handed a claim against «Demokratichna Nosivshchina» and its editor for the above-mentioned publi-cation concerning his company. He also reckoned that the newspaper insulted his honor and dignity and the organization headed by him.

Both cases were considered by the same judge – O. Kireev. The result was the following: the claim of M. Efimenko against the newspaper «Nosivski visti» was rejected, in other words, neither insults nor violations of the election laws were found in the materials published by the newspaper. (By the way, Mykola Efimenko demanded, if the verdict would be issued in his favor, to re-gard the mayor’s election as illegal). The claim of G. Voytok against the news-paper «Demokratichna Nosivshchina» and its editor was satisfied, and the defendants were obliged to pay rather great sum to G. Voytok for recom-pensing the moral damage.

For several times Mykola Efimenko asked to replace judge O. Kireev, but the judge rejected the challenges by himself and completed the case. M. Efimenko told that the challenges were caused the fact that some time ago his newspaper published a critical article about judge Kireev describing the case, where the judge demonstrated his incompetence and issued the unjust deci-sion. After all the newspaper turned out to be right: the decision of the judge was cancelled by the oblast court. Yet, the judge acknowledged that his con-flict with the newspaper was not a sufficient reason for the challenge.

Besides, along with the claim of G. Voytok, which has been already satis-fied by the court, there is another claim of the TV company «Obriy» against the same defendants.

So, in such way two cases in Nosivka were completed. Yet, the second case will have the continuation: M. Efimenko handed the cassation against the court decision on G. Voytok’s claim. We will see later whether this cassation will be considered.

The newspaper «Sivershchina» (Chernigiv), from the edition of «Informatsiyny bul-leten» – the newspaper «Svoboda slova», No. 1-3 2003 «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

The case against the newspaper «Veksel» (the Odessa oblast) was closed because of the recall of the claim by the plaintiff On 5 May the town court of Yuzhny (the Odessa oblast) closed the case

after the claim of Oleksandr Zhuravel, the head of the town council, against the editorial board of the newspaper «Veksel». The case was closed because of the recall of the claim by the plaintiff. «It became possible only owing to the support of our edition by other mass media: the case was well-known not only in the Odessa oblast, but throughout Ukraine», said Sergiy Tykhoplav, the edi-tor-in-chief of the newspaper.

2 0 7

The court still considers two other claims against the newspaper handed by Nadiya Shumeyko, the business-manager of the town council.

We want to remind that on 29 January 2002 Oleksandr Zhuravel brought a suit against the newspaper «Veksel» on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation and the compensation of moral damage equivalent to 10 thousand hryvnas. The mayor was offended by the phrase: «A natural question appears: whose interests A. Zhuravel is lobbying? Why he tries to suppress the town? It seems that he has his own interests», which was published in the newspaper on 28 November 2001.

13 June 2003, The Institute of mass information, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Three officials of the executive committee vs. the newspaper «Tretiy sector» (Severodonetsk) Three officials of the executive committee handed the claims on the pro-

tection of honor and dignity after the publication of the article «Referendum-phobia» in the December issue (2002) of the newspaper «Tretiy sector»(Severodonetsk). The total sum of the compensation equals to 13 thousand hryvnas. None of these cases is not completed yet.

At two court sittings on the claims of the executive committee officials against «Tretiy sector», which have been already conducted, the officialshanded the petition to carry out the consideration in Russian. The court rejected this petition and decided to carry out the trial in Ukrainian. Then it appeared that the Severodonetsk officials did not know the state language.

Aleksey Svetikov, the editor of the newspaper «Tretiy sector» «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Will the Poltava TV company «UTA» return to the TV screens? Since 18 June 2003 the Poltava TV and radio company «UTA» stopped

to broadcast on the 24th TV channel, on which it worked for many years. The attempts to destroy the TRC «UTA» began much earlier, when Geor-

giy Chechik, the head of the TV company, «quarreled» with A. Kukoba, the Poltava mayor at that time. At first the subscribers of the cable network of Pol-tava lost the opportunity to watch the transmissions of the TV company: in May 2001 four Poltava operators of cable TV switched off the TRC «UTA». And several days later the TV company «Misto» began to work. The new company was founded by three (out of four) operators of cable TV and one physical person. The goals of the creation of this TV company and the level of its independence are quite obvious from its features. It is widely known that, having the official status of a private company, «Misto» works for the mayor.

The next attack on the TRC «UTA» was realized through the Poltava Fund of communal property. When the TV company, according to the con-

2 0 8

tract, transferred the money for the rent of the building, where it worked, the fund returned the money thrice, until the officials from Kyiv interfered to the situation. After this the campaign began with the purpose to evict the TV com-pany from the building by the address 43 Zhovtneva St., where the company «Poltava plus» was situated. The head of the oblast state administration issued the order to dismount the transmitting antenna. The authorities tried to force the manager of the building (The House of Technique) to cancel the rent agreement with «Poltava plus». The essence of the pretensions of the local sanitary station was that the transmitting antenna located on the roof of the building allegedly radiated the radio waves dangerous for health, although several months earlier the main sanitary physician of Poltava had signed the permission for the work of the TV company.

When the attempts to evict the company from the building were repulsed, the officials began to apply more strict methods.

During the parliamentary election campaign the TRC «UTA» cooperated with Kyiv TV company «TET». After the election, in November 2002, «TET» handed a suit against «UTA» demanding to pay the compensation equal to 9,300,000 hryvnas for violating the conditions of the contract. The sum of the claim exceeded the actives of the TV company more than in three times. By the opinion of Pavel Moiseev, a lawyer of «Internews-Ukraine», to whom the TRC «UTA» turned for the legal aid, the demanded sum and other circum-stances of the case showed that the actions of the claimant were directed at the destruction of the company. By the way, just at that time the National council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting had to announce the competition for the use of the 24th channel, which was used then by the TRC «UTA».

Further events confirmed that the persecution of the TRC «UTA» was «ordered» by some influential persons, since on the next day after the claim was handed to the economic court of the Poltava oblast the court issued the resolution about the arrest of the property and bank accounts of the TV com-pany and sent this resolution to the state executive service. The executors ful-filled the decision quickly: on the next day the accounts of «UTA» were ar-rested (usually this procedure takes 2-4 weeks). As a result, the activities of the company were almost paralyzed.

The TRC «UTA» handed the counter-claim on the acknowledgement of the invalidity of the contract between «UTA» and the TRC «TET».

The economic court of the Poltava oblast approved the decision on the collection from the TRC «UTA» of 9,300,000 UAH of compensation and 17,118 UAH of legal expenses. At that, according to the words of lawyer of «Unternews-Ukraine» Pavel Moiseev, the court ignored all explanations of the TRC «UTA», refused to satisfy its counter-claim and announced a part of the decision in the absence of the parties, thus brutally violating the norms of the material and procedural right.

2 0 9

On 12 March 2003 the Kharkov appeal economic court considered the appeal of the TRC «UTA» and acknowledged the contract between the TRCs «UTA» and «TET» to be invalid. «TET» did not appeal against this decision.

Meanwhile the TRC «UTA» handed the documents for the participation in the competition of the National council for the right to use the 24th channel, since the term of their license had finished by that time. At the first sitting of the National council the votes of eight members of the council divided into two equal parts: 4 members voted «for» and 4 – «against». It is interesting that Lilia Mironovich, the representative of the National council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting in the Poltava oblast and a former referent of P. Shemet, the deputy head of the Poltava oblast administration), who, by logics, had to protect the interests of the Poltava TV company, voted for giving the li-cense… to the Kyiv TRC «TET», loyal to the SDPU (u). The members of the sit-ting ignored the fact that the TRC «UTA» had the most modern equipment in Pol-tava and the many-year experience of work.

In several weeks, at another sitting of the National council, the final deci-sion was taken: the 24th Poltava channel was given to the TRC «TET».

However, there is some hope yet that the TRC «UTA», which became really independent after the numerous ordeals with political censorship, will return to the Poltava air: the company handed the documents for the participation in the compe-tition for another TV channel. Of course, if this competition would be honest…

Ludmila Kucherenko

Claim on the protection of honor and dignity of the manager of the TV company «Krym» was not satisfied 14 July 2003. A court refused to consider the claim on the protection of

honor and dignity handed by Ludmila Khoroshilova, the manager of the TV and radio company «Krym» and the head of the Crimean Republican branch of the National Union of journalists, against Olena Rozhen, the chief-editor of the feature «12 minutes of news» of the same TV company. This decision was taken by Nina Starova, a judge of the Zaliznichny district court of Simferopol. The judge recognized the demands of the plaintiff as contradicting «the norms of the operating laws». Ludmila Khoroshilova was going to collect 80250 hryvnas from her subordinate as the compensation of the moral damage alleg-edly inflicted to her. In her opinion, her honor and dignity suffered the damage as a result of some statements made by Olena Rozhen at a press conference and in several TV features. The statements concerned the low professionalism of Khoroshilova and the censorship introduced by her in the company «Krym». The court acknowledged these statements to be «evaluative judg-ments». So, Rozhen merely realized her right to express her opinion and views, which right is guaranteed by the Ukrainian Constitution and the Con-vention on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

210

Conflict between an official and an editor was settled without turning to court Nikolay Suvorov, the head of the directorate in charge of the questions of

religion, nationalities and migration of the Kirovograd oblast state administra-tion, expressed his discontent about the article «Do not pull and do not push us» by Valentina Bazhan published in the local newspaper «Russkiy blok» (Nos. 5-6, 2003). N. Suvorov stated that he would hand the claim on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation against V. Bazhan, the editor of the newspaper.

The editor resorted to the help of the Monitoring center of the freedom of speech. A lawyer of the center analyzed the publication and came to the con-clusion that there were no grounds for court persecution of the journalist. In order to settle the conflict, lawyer Yuri Denisov took part in the talk between V. Bazhan and N. Suvorov. The conflicting parties stated their opinions con-nected with the publication of the odious article.

It appeared during the talk that there were no legal grounds for bringing V. Bazhan to the civil responsibility after Article 7 of the Civil Code ofUkraine. The editor acted in the framework of Article 34 of the Constitution of Ukraine, which guarantees the rights for the freedom of opinions and the free-dom of speech, as well as the freedom of expression of views.

As a result, N. Suvorov refused from his complaint against the author of the article, and the conflict was settled without turning to court.

Nina Ptashkina, the Association «Public initiatives»

Court of the Galitskiy district of Lviv rejected the claim on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation of busi-nessman Ivan Motrinets against the Lviv oblast state TV and radio company and journalist Ivan Khas Mr. Motrinets demanded from the TV journalists the compensation equal

to 1 million hryvnas for the «stained general’s coat». General Ivan Motrinets, the head of the juridical firm «Feniks», turned to

court in last year, approximately a month after the demonstration of the subject «A criminal at large» in the feature «Visnyk-pidsumki». The essence of the subject was that, after the sudden release, citizen Bogdan S. (who was sus-pected of the attempt at the life of Petro Pisarchuk, a Lviv businessman, now an MP) met with the general. The question was put: «What connects these two people?». That allegedly deprived Ivan Motrinets «of the possibility to live normally, to realize his plans and opportunities». By the words of Ludmila Mayor, the first deputy of the general manager of the TV company, it was MP Pisarchuk, who told the journalists about the meeting of Mr. Motrinets with Bogdan S., and this information was fixed in the materials of the criminal case investigated by the General Prosecutor’s office. The general did not want to have legal proceedings with Pisarchuk.

211

The Zaliznichny district court of Lviv considers now one more claim by Ivan Motrinets: the suit against journalist Ivan Khas and the weekly «Ukraina i chas». The magazine published the same information given by P. Pisarchuk. This time the general demanded 1.5 million hryvnas.

(«Ukraina i chas», Lviv, No. 21, 22-28 May 2003)

212

Decision on the claim against the newspaper «Kievskie vedo-mosti», Oles Buzina and Marina Turovskaya «on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation of T. Shevchenko» came into force after the consideration in the Kyiv appeal court The Ukrainian Themis resolved: «The statement of the claimants that they are the heirs of the creations by

T. Shevchenko is groundless. The court came to the conclusion that, according to the UWU statute, the representatives of the Union of Writers of Ukraine had no right to bring the suit on the protection of honor and dignity of T.Shevchenko. The plaintiffs also demand to collect the compensation for the moral damage from the defendants. The claim may not be satisfied in that part too, since, according to Article 440-1 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, the in-flicted damage is recompensed to the person, whose rights were abused by the illegal actions of other persons. It is seen from the claim of the UWU, that the rights of the plaintiffs were not violated. On the basis of the above-stated argu-ments, the court reckons that the UWU may not be a plaintiff in this case, so the claim must be rejected».

(«Kievskie vedomosti», 28 June 2003)

Shevchenkivskiy district court of Kyiv satisfied the claimsof MPs Vasyl Onopenko and Mykhaylo Pavlovskiy againstthe TV channel «1+1» and Vyacheslav Pikhovshek In November 2002, on the eve of the election of the head of the Supreme

Court of Ukraine, Vyacheslav Pikhovshek, the presenter of the feature «Epit-sentr» at the channel «1+1», referring to his «own source», spread the informa-tion about the bribes equal to 500 thousand, which were allegedly proposed for the support of candidate Vasyl Onopenko. Besides, Pikhovshek communicated that MP Mykhaylo Pavlovskiy, a member of the fraction «Yulia Timoshenko’s bloc» was also involved in this affair. In fact, the publication of this information resulted in the election of Vasyl Maliarenko to the post of the head of the Supreme Court.

According to the court decision, the information published by Vyacheslav Pikhovshek was acknowledged as false and discrediting the honor, dignity and business reputation of Vasyl Onopenko and Mykhaylo Pavlovskiy. The court resolved to collect from the defendants the money compensation of the moral damage to each of the claimants and to oblige the defendants to apologize to Vasyl Onopenko and Mykhaylo Pavlovskiy for the false information in the nearest issue of «Epitsentr».

29 July 2003, Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

213

Nikolayev branch of «Privatbank» handed a claim against the newspaper «Ridne Pribuzhzhia» 19 June 2003. The Nikolayev branch of «Privatbank» handed a claim

against the newspaper «Ridne Pribuzhzhia» published by the Nikolayev oblast state administration and the Nikolayev oblast council. «Privatbank» demands 50 thousand hryvnas of compensation for the publication of untrue (in the opinion of the claimant) information disgracing the reputation of the bank. On 1 February 2003 the newspaper published the information about the meeting of the leaders of oblast trade unions with governor Oleksiy Garkusha. «Privat-bank» was mentioned in the article twice: as the new owner of the plant «Kristal», with the appearance of which the reduction of the staff was ex-pected at the plant, and as the bank, which obtruded the system of plastic cards for paying salaries to the personnel of the Zhovtnevy central district hospital of the Nikolayev. The article read that the services of the bank would cost 130 thousand hryvnas to the hospital. The administration of «Privatbank» insists that the bank has no relation with the plant «Kristal», and that the production and maintenance of the plastic cards are gratis for the hospital.

Tetiana Odintsova, the editor-in-chief of «Ridne Pribuzhzhia», communi-cated to the IMI that the information spread by the newspaper was given by the trade union leaders of the plant «Kristal» and the Zhovtnevy hospital. On 20 June these leaders will be summoned to court as witnesses. The Nikolayev branch of «Privatbank» handed the claim to court on 6 March 2003. Two con-siderations of the case have been already conducted.

The Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», June 2003 «Prava Ludyny», No. 7, 2003 (July)

Okhtyrka town court (the Sumy oblast) decided to satisfythe claim of Mirgorod mayor Oleksandr Pautov against Viktor Kozoriz, the editor of the opposition newspaper «Mir-gorodska Pravda» 23 June 2003. Okhtyrka town court (the Sumy oblast) issued the decision

to satisfy the claim of Mirgorod mayor Oleksandr Pautov against Viktor Kozo-riz, the editor of the opposition newspaper «Mirgorodska Pravda». In the ver-dict the court decreased the compensation sum from 50 thousand hryvnas (de-manded by the mayor) to 600 hryvnas from the editorial board and 1500 hryvnas from Kozoriz. At the same time the court decided to cancel the seizure of Kozoriz’s flat that had been imposed in March «with the aim to secure the claim». The newspaper is also obliged to publish the refutation. Viktor Kozo-riz, who, because of his conflict with the mayor, had, in fact, to move in Kharkov, intends to appeal against the court decision.

214

The mayor was offended by the publication in the December issue of the newspaper, in which Kozoriz called Pautov «an absolutely untalented man-ager», who «has rather vague notion of the economic policy and the principles of managing a modern town». The claimant believes that these words, as well as the phrase: «…he does not understand at all, by whom and for what he was elected, and to whom he must serve», inflicted the damage to his honor, dig-nity and business reputation equivalent to 50 thousand hryvnas.

The Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», June «Prava Ludyny», No. 7, 2003 (July)

Brovary town court (the Kyiv oblast) partly satisfied the claim of the Brovary town council against the newspaper«Brovarskiy kuryer» 25 June 2003. Today the Brovary town court of the Kyiv oblast partly

satisfied the claim of the Brovary town council against the newspaper «Brovarskiy kuryer» and obliged the editorial board to refute the information published in the weekly «Brovarskiy kuryer» No. 9 of 11 October 2002 and No. 10 of 25 October 2002.

We want to remind that Brovary mayor Viktor Antonenko demanded from the editorial board to refute the untrue information and to pay him the compensation of moral damage equal to 40 thousand hryvnas. The publica-tions in the newspaper were devoted to the celebration of the Day of the town. The newspaper published the interview of the head of the budget committee of the town council, who said that 100 thousand hryvnas had to be allotted for the celebration. The budget committee protested against such expenses, but the deputies of the town council approved the program. The opinion was ex-pressed in the editorial comment that it should be more reasonable to allot such great amount of money not for the celebration, but for the salaries of the workers of communal sphere.

The Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», June 2003 «Prava Ludyny», No. 7, 2003 (July)

Court satisfied the claim of IASM and I. Slisarenko against the magazine «Korrespondent», which accused the plaintiffs of racism and anti-Semitism On 1 August 2003 the Pecherskiy district court of Kyiv considered and

satisfied the claim of the Interregional Academy of Staff Management (IASM) and I. Slisarenko, the editor-in-chief of the magazine «Personal», against the company «KP Druk» (publisher of the Russian-language magazine «Korre-spondent») on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation, and on recompensing the moral damage.

215

The court resolution reads that the information made public by «Korre-spondent» discredited honor, dignity and business reputation of the plaintiffs – IASM and Igor Slisarenko. Besides, this information inflicted damage to their interests, since the defendants spread inauthentic data aimed at the detriment of claimants’ reputation.

The company «KP Druk» is owned by US citizen Jed Sanden. In Decem-ber 2000 – February 2003 the editions owned by Jed Sanden, in particular «Korrespondent», conducted the defamation campaign against the IASP, its administration and the scientific magazine «Personal», accusing them of anti-Semitism, «racism», etc. The editorial board of «Korrespondent» refused to re-fute voluntarily the false information spread by the magazine, so the IASM and Igor Slisarenko had to turn to court.

The court obliged the editorial board of the magazine «Korrespondent» to publish the refutation of this information within 30 days and to recompense the moral damage to the claimants: 80 thousand hryvnas to the IASM and 20 thou-sand hryvnas to Igor Slisarenko.

(«Golos Ukrainy», No. 144, 5 August 2003)

Distrainment of property of the Kirovograd TV company «TTV» On 16 July the officers of the court distrained upon the property of

«TTV», a private Kirovograd TV company. They executed the court decision on the claim of Vladimir Yaroshenko about the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation. The Kamenskiy court issued the verdict about the compensation of the moral damage equivalent to 300 thousand hryvnas in-flicted to the ex-candidate to the post of Kirovograd mayor. The appeal court of the Cherkassy oblast approved the verdict.

Yulia Kuchitskaya, a deputy head of the department of state executive service of Leninskiy district, stated that she acted according to Article 63 of the Law of Ukraine «On court execution», since there was no resolution of the Supreme Court on the suspension of the verdict of the local court. The prop-erty was seized and deposited to Viktor Shmidt, who, by the opinion of the court officer, was an unconcerned person. Representatives of «TTV», on the contrary, regard Shmidt as an interested party, since he also had legal proceed-ings with the TV company and won the case.

It is noteworthy that the attempts to seize the property of the company were made formerly, but these attempts failed because of the absence of the manager and chief accountant. On 16 June they were absent too. The journal-ists do not tell where their administration was, and why the collective was left to the mercy of fate in the critical moment.

Now the rooms of the TV company are sealed and the company does not work. This is incomprehensible, since the procedure of distrain does not pro-hibit the use of the property for the work. Another unexpected factor affected

216

the situation: an anonymous person phoned to militia and informed that the rooms of «TTV» were mine-strewn. Militia could not find any explosive.

The center for monitoring of the freedom of speech carries out the expertise of this conflict.

Kirovograd Association «Public initiatives» In what follows we are presenting the comment of Yuri Denisov, a lawyer

of the center for monitoring of the freedom of speech, which works in the oblast with the support of the International foundation «Vidrodjennia»

According to the Law of Ukraine «On executive procedure», a court de-cision, which has come into effect, must be fulfilled by the State Executive service (Article 3, item 1).

Article 5 of the Law obliges a state executor to take the measures for the coercive fulfillment of the decisions, to realize the appropriate actions for the fulfillment of the decision, if it was not fulfilled voluntarily. A state executor has the right to enter the rooms and storehouses owned by the debtors or occu-pied by them, to open these rooms coercively, if needed, in the accordance with the legal procedure (in the presence of witnesses) and to seal up the rooms; to distrain upon the property of a debtor, to confiscate this property, to pass it for storage and to sell it according to the procedure stipulated by law.

The demands of a state executor connected with the fulfillment of court decisions are obligatory for all organs, organizations, officials, citizens and ju-ridical persons on all territory of Ukraine (Article 6).

A state executor, parties, representatives of the parties, experts, specialists and interpreters are the participants of the executive procedure (Article 10). So, the plaintiff may be present during the distrainment of property.

The executor must fulfill the decisions, which are not connected with the sale of property, in two months since the day of obtaining the executive docu-ment (Article 25). The parties and other participants of the executive proce-dure have the right to bring in petitions, to take part in the realization of execu-tive actions and to appeal against the activities (or passivity) of the executor (Article 29).

Representatives of «TTV» declared: «We will complain to court, in par-ticular against the violations during the distrainment procedure. Yet, the main subject of our future complaint is the inadmissible fact that the executive pro-cedure was started, although there was a document in the case materials that confirmed that «TTV» did not own the property, but rented it» («VG», No. 29, 18 July 2003). In the case, where the distrained property is not owned by the debtor, the real owner of the property turns to court with the request to leave it out from the distraint. The court must take the decision on this question within 10 days (Article 33).

«The company appealed against the court decision to the higher instance, the cassation was handed to the Supreme Court» («Ukraina-Tsentr», No. 500, 18 July 2003). The parties and other persons, who participate in the case, have

217

the right to appeal against the decision of the court of the first instance only in the connection with the violation of the material or procedural right, or of the decision of the appeal court. In this case the debtor handed the cassation against the court decision, which had come into legal force, but not against the executive document. So, the mentioned circumstances may not be a reason for the postponement, suspension or cancellation of the executive procedure. Such reasons are envisaged by Articles 32-35 and 37 of the Law of Ukraine «On executive procedure». According to the publications in «VG» and «UTs», the debtor’s advocates are only going to undertake these measures, so the actions of the state executor were legal in the moment of the beginning of the execu-tive procedure.

The distrained property must passed for storage to the debtor or other persons appointed by the state executor on receipt, which is included in the distrainment act (Article 58). Thus, the delivery of the distrained property for storage to Viktor Schmidt was legal.

As to the work of the TV company, there is no decision about its cancel-lation, so there are no circumstances that impede the journalist’s activities. Yet, taking into account the above-mentioned conditions, the founder must discuss the situation with the collective of «TTV» and take the proper meas-ures in the accordance with the statute of the organization (enterprise) and op-erating laws.

Besides, one must remember that the laws envisage not only the right for the freedom of speech and the creative journalists’ activities, but also the re-sponsibility of the violation of laws.

The material sent by Nina Ptashkina

On 23 July the shocking news were made public on the evening news of the TV company «TTV»: editor-in-chief of the company Sergey Poluliakh tried to commit suicide: he cut his veins. Fortunately, he did not succeed, and his state is normal now.

(«Golos Ukrainy», No. 137, 25 July 2003)

On 25 July representatives of the Kirovograd oblast organization of the all-Ukrainian left union «Spravedlivost» picketed the Supreme Court ofUkraine, thus protesting against the decisions of the Kamenskiy local court and the appeal court of the Cherkassy oblast, which had recognized some Ki-rovograd mass media as guilty of spreading false information during the past election campaign. The decisions came into legal force, and the executive pro-cedure began: the state executive service blocked the accounts of the TV com-pany «TTV» and the newspaper «Kirovogradska pravda»; besides, the prop-erty of «TTV» was distrained.

218

We want to remind that the TV company must pay to Vladimir Yaro-shenko 300 thousand hryvnas as the compensation of moral damage, and «Ki-rovogradska pravda» – 50 thousand. In this connection the newspaper de-clared about the reduction of the number of issues: now it will be published one time per week instead of three times. The editorial board hopes that later it will return to the old regime of work.

Viktor Tokarev, the general manager of the «TTV», who had returned af-ter the long absence, made a public statement, in which he connected the sui-cidal attempt committed by editor Sergey Poluliakh with the events around the TV company.

Kirovograd Association «Public initiatives»

General manager of the «TTV» Viktor Tokarev and ex-candidate to the mayor’s post N. Shvets visited V. Maliarenko, the chairman of the Supreme Court of Ukraine. They asked to accelerate the consideration of the cassations against the decisions of the local and appeal courts after V. Yaroshenko’s claim.

The weekly «Ukraina-Tsentr» communicates: «After the talk with Kiro-vograd representatives Vasiliy Maliarenko ordered to suspend the execution of court decisions concerning N. Shvets and the TV company «TTV», and to ac-celerate the consideration of the cassation. The supreme judge of Ukraine is going to scrutinize all cases of the Kirovograd mass media personally and asks «not to equate one judge with the entire Ukrainian justice».

Nina Ptashkina

Claim against Nina Ptashkina, the author of the article about bribe-takersThis trial broke all records in many aspects. Firstly, Nina Ptashkina is

tried for the article published in the newspaper «Vedomosti» almost 6 years ago – on 6 November 1997. Secondly, the trial lasts already for three years. For three times the court of the first instance issued the decisions, and for three times the appeal court nullified these decisions and directed the case for the repeated consideration. One of such decisions was taken several days ago.

The lawsuit was caused by the article about bribe-takers. The article was written by Ms. Ptashkina in the connection with the detention of several lec-turers for taking bribes from students during the summer examinations.

Two and a half years after the publication one of the detained (by that time the criminal case against him had been closed) turned to court with the claim on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation. He demanded from the author of the article to recompense him the moral damage equivalent to

219

500 thousand hryvnas. The court, by its own initiative, prolonged the term of handing the suit (which may not exceed 1 year) and obliged N. Ptashkina to pay 500 hryvnas. Two following considerations resulted in the verdicts in fa-vor of the defendant. Yet, the claimant craves for the punishment of the jour-nalist; today he demands 300 thousand hryvnas.

Kirovograd Association «Public initiatives»

22 0

Claim of the special militia department of the Lugansk oblast against the head of the Lugansk oblast public organization «Postup» and the weekly «Vecherniy Lugansk» On 6 August 2003 the preliminary trial talk was conducted in the con-

nection with the case concerning the publication in the oblast weekly «Ve-cherniy Lugansk» (No. 14, 3 April 2003) of the article written by the head of the Lugansk oblast public organization «Postup».

The claim was handed by the special militia department of the Lugansk oblast militia directorate against Konstantin Reutskiy, the head of the public organization «Postup», and the weekly «Vecherniy Lugansk», where the article by Reutskiy had been published. In the article Konstantin Reutskiy, being an inde-pendent journalist, described the conflict between him and the special militia department.

The prehistory of the conflict is the following. The NGO «Postup» rented a part of former kindergarten No. 110, where the public organization created the rehabilitation center for homeless children. Another part of this building was occupied by the special militia department (SMD). Since January 2003 the rehabilitation center is closed, so the homeless children cannot get the protection and aid there. Konstantin Reutskiy asserted in his article that the center had been closed because of the absence of electricity and the unwilling-ness of major Mishchenko, the head of the SMD, to help the public organiza-tion to solve the problem. The fact of the matter is that the panel, from which the electric power can be switched on, is situated on the territory of the SMD, but it is possible to make the autonomous connection of the rehabilitation cen-ter to the same panel without any financial losses of militia. In spite of this, the commandment of the SMD refused to connect the rehabilitation center to the electric panel.

According to Konstantin Reutskiy, the reason for the refusal was major Mishchenko’s wish to force K. Reutskiy to organize the meeting of the militia officer with the head of the fund «Bereginia», the tenant of the third part of the building. The head of the fund, in his turn, did not want to meet the major. Be-sides, the head of «Postup» supposed in his article: «Either the children center became the hostage of the strained relations between the special militia de-partment and the charity fund «Bereginia», or militia is merely displeased with the vicinity of the establishment that patronize the homeless children».

In the claim major Mishchenko explained that his refusal to connect the center to the electric network was caused by the necessity to agree the techni-cal details of the connection in the «corresponding organizations» and to con-sider the possibility of connecting «Postup» to the energy power system of the SMD or «Bereginia».

221

After several unsuccessful attempts to come to the agreement with the militia department Konstantin Reutskiy expressed his opinion about the situa-tion in the article, after the publication of which he was summoned to court. The militiamen reckon that the opinion of K. Reutskiy on this problematic situation and the way of its description in the newspaper inflicted a serious damage to the honor, dignity and reputation of the SMD. Probably, the commandment of the militia department thinks that the best method to im-prove the reputation is to bring an action against a public organization that patronizes homeless children.

In the claim the head of the SMD demands: 1) to refute the informa-tion, which discredits militia; 2) to oblige Konstantin Reutskiy to apologize to the collective of the SMD.

However, it became obvious that the representative of militia could not explain what facts had to be refuted. The unconvincing arguments of the mili-tia officer, which he adduced in judge’s office, were summed up by the phrase: «This article as a whole is unpleasant for militia».

The judge appointed the court consideration on 12 September 2003. Public keeps the eye on this case. The members of the organization «To-

tal action for the support of human rights and democracy» and local journalists were present at the trial. During the preparation to the trial the head of «Pos-tup» got the legal consultation from the public organization «For professional aid».

The additional materials about this case can be found on the site of «To-tal action for the support of human rights and democracy»:http://totalaction.iatp.org.ua.

P. S. The peculiarities of the work of the judicial system are also inter-esting. Although the suit was brought both against Konstantin Reutskiy and the newspaper «Vecherniy Lugansk», the subpoena was sent only to Reutskiy. And the editorial board of the newspaper knew nothing about the claim until Reutskiy informed them about that.

(«Prava ludyny» (English version), August 2003)

Claim of Mirgorod mayor O. Pautov against the newspaper «Mirgorodska Pravda» and the editor of the newspaper V. Kozoriz, «Mirgorodska Pravda»: The enemies of «Mirgorodska Pravda» began to celebrate their victory

too early. I want to remind that on 23 June 2003 the Okhtyrka town court partly satisfied the claim of Mirgorod mayor Oleksandr Pautov against the op-position newspaper «Mirgorodska Pravda» and Viktor Kozoriz, the editor of the newspaper. The court obliged the defendants to refute the information that had been published in the newspaper and to pay 2100 hryvnas of moral com-pensation. Yet, since the decision was issued with numerous brutal violations

222

of the norms of material and procedural right, I turned to the appeal court of the Sumy oblast, and the decision has not come into force until now.

However, the court decision on this case was rather predictable, because our court system is subordinated to the executive power and religiously fulfills all orders of state authorities. At that the judges, in order to please the officials, resort not only to open violations of laws, but also to manipulations with facts. For instance, I handed to the Okhtyrka town court more than twenty docu-ments confirming the incompetence of town mayor O. Pautov and the authori-tarian style of his work. Yet, the court ignored these proofs. The court referred in its decision only to the proofs, which were favorable for the plaintiff (such as diplomas obtained from the President and oblast administration). Besides, the court wittingly did not separate the facts and evaluative judgments, which were expressed in my article, thus violating not only the Ukrainian Constitution and Ukrainian laws, but also the norms of the international right, which guarantee the freedom of expression to every person. The court saw the malicious intent in the publication of the truth about the activities of town mayor. This malicious in-tent, in the opinion of judge Galina Koroliova, consisted in the fact that the news-paper with the mentioned article had been published on the eve of the Day of lo-cal self-rule, the professional holiday of O. Pautov, thus inflicting terrible moral sufferings to him. Yet, the newspaper was issued ten days after this holiday, and the article was not connected with that day. So, the judge had to have very forcible reasons for coming to the opposite conclusion. I even suppose that she was intimi-dated or bribed. The competent lawyers, who analyzed the decision of the Ok-htyrka town court notices that the decision word for word quoted the argu-ments of V. Pedorich, a representative of O. Pautov, and, maybe, was even written by him. Moreover, for some reasons, the judge issued the decision only four days after the consideration of the case, which is also a brutal violation of the CPC of Ukraine.

So, such is the real face of the modern Ukrainian Themis. («The Poltava oblast media club», No. 40, 7 August 2003)

Cherkassy weekly «Antenna» against the town directoratefor fighting the organized crime 12 August 2003. The Cherkassy weekly «Antenna» won the process

against the head of the Cherkassy oblast directorate for fighting the organized crime (DFOC), and the Appeal court of the Cherkassy oblast did not satisfy the complaint of Oleksandr Mikish, the DFOC head and the first deputy of the head of the oblast militia directorate. O. Mikish complained against the deci-sion of Sosnovskiy district court, which had rejected his claim against the newspaper «Antenna».

The conflict started in the heat of the discussion in the press of the case of militia lieutenant-general Kochegarov, who tried to commit suicide in his

223

office. Kochegarov wrote several short letters before the suicide. In one of these letters he wrote that journalist Valentina Vasilchenko was guilty of his death, in other letter he accused a DFOC officer. These facts generated differ-ent versions (including the attempt at Kochegarov’s life), which were dis-cussed not only in regional, but also in central mass media. The head of the Cherkassy DFOC interpreted the publications in «Antenna» as the accusation of «the unsuccessful attempt to organize the murder of Kochegarov». O. Mikish demanded to recompense him the moral damage equivalent to 80 thousand hryvnas, but the Sosnovskiy district court refused to satisfy the claim.

(Barometr)

* * *

Andrey Lubenskiy: Now, probably, the case DFOC vs. «Antenna» will be passed to the Su-

preme Court. Tetiana Doncheva, a deputy of the editor-in-chief of «Antenna», communicated to a correspondent of ForUm that she had got this information from Mikish’s advocate.

Meanwhile, last week «Antenna» published the material, the author of which quoted the complaint of Cherkassy dweller N., who had been detained by the DFOC officers. In this complaint N. writes that the officers tried to make him to confess to a crime he had not fulfilled, and one of the law-enforcers beat him. On Monday the editorial board received the letter, which was signed: «Commandment of the Cherkassy oblast Directorate for fighting the organized crime». The letter contained the gratitude to the editorial board «for critical articles about the activities of the Cherkassy oblast DFOC and the oblast militia as a whole». Yet, the letter reads, the activities of the DFOC are elucidated by the newspaper one-sidedly. So, in the material about N.’s mis-adventures the newspaper adduced only the arguments of this citizen, which «are ungrounded». At the same time, the newspaper «ignored the facts, on the ground of which the ODA had been conducted: the appeals of citizens, who turned to the DFOC complaining against the extortion of bribes by citizen N.» The author (or authors?) of the letter reckon that in that way «this publication ignored President’s Edict of 13 August 2002 No. 700/2002 «On the additional measures for guaranteeing the realization of constitutional citizens’ right for appeals».

Tetiana Doncheva supposed that the mentioned publication would also become a subject of a claim. «We will not be surprised by that», she said, «we are surprised by other thing: why the letter sent by such respectable agency was, in fact, anonymous?»

(«Ukrainskiy Media Server»)

22 4

Lviv mayor Lubomir Buniak must apologize to «Ekspress» The Galitskiy district court of Lviv obliged Lviv mayor Lubomir Buniak

to refute the information spread by him in August 2002, when he demanded from Lviv newspapers to apologize for the participation in the organization of the aviation show, where the catastrophe of a plane «Cy-27» happened.

Representative of the court informed that the mayor might appeal against this decision to a court of higher instance. He did not give any other details.

We want to remind that in August 2002 the newspaper «Express» turned to court and demanded from L. Buniak to refute the accusations brought by him against the newspapers. The editorial board did not demand any material compensation.

The mayor blamed the mass media, which had been the informational sponsors of the aviation show, because they had not been curious about the safety of this action.

As a result of the catastrophe of the plane «Cy-27» in July 2002 in Lviv 76 persons perished.

(«Ukrainski novyny», 18 August 2003)

Miron Melnik, a journalist of district newspaper «Golos opislia», will be resumed at his job 19 August 2003. Rogatinskiy district court of Ivano-Frankivsk took the

decision to resume Miron Melnik, a journalist of district newspaper «Golos opislia», at his job. The court obliged the editorial board to pay 1893 hryvnas to Melnik for his forced five-month truancy and to recompense him the court expenses. The illegally fired journalist was represented in court by Tetiana Kirichenko, the IMI lawyer. The court established that editor of «Golos opis-lia» Galina Bogun (appointed to her post by co-founders of the newspaper: district and town council) had brutally violated the labor code and illegally dismissed M. Melnik. On 8 April 2003 Miron Melnik turned to the court with the claim about his return to the job. By the words of the journalist, he did not get the proper consultations from state advocates. Moreover, in spite of his re-peated appeals to the oblast organization of the NUJU, he did not get any sup-port from them.

(Barometr)

Ludmila Kucherenko brought an action against «Vechernie zori» (Poltava) We are sure that the Poltava dwellers remember that in 2001 the newspa-

per «Vechernie zori» was published, which actively criticized G. Chechik, the general manager of the TRC «UTA» and a candidate to the mayor’s post, as

225

well as journalists Anatoliy Banny and Ludmila Kucherenko. Judging from the advertising, the tabloid was financed by the bank «Poltava-bank». Almost a half of the newspaper was occupied by the materials under the rubric «Gos-sips and rumors», which smeared the above-mentioned persons. After the elec-tion, when «Vechernie zori» fulfilled its dirty task, it was liquidated.

A. Banny asked E. Stranadko, a co-editor of the newspaper, why he was acting so, thus discrediting the profession of journalist, and Stranadko an-swered that he was earning his living in that way…

Yet, one must be responsible for his actions. Ludmila Kucherenko handed the claim against Natalya Scarlatti, the editor-in-chief of «Vechernie zori», and the editorial board of the newspaper about the protection of honor and dignity and compensation of the moral damage. Yet, nobody wants to be responsible. So, only one court sitting out of eight took place during 18 months because of the alleged diseases of advocate Pavlenko and N. Scarlatti.

At the trial N. Scarlatti could not answer any concrete question of L. Ku-cherenko about the documents confirming the rumors spread by the newspa-per. Besides, Ms. Scarlatti blamed the judge and secretary for jaundice, ani-mus and non-presenting of the case materials. The demur was immediately sat-isfied.

(«The Poltava oblast media club», No. 44, 1 September 2003)

Pikhovshek apologized to MPs Viacheslav Pikhovshek, the presenter of the TV feature «Epitsentr»

apologized to MPs V. Onopenko and M. Pavlovskiy for the distribution of false information about them. In November 2002 V. Pikhovshek informed the viewers of the TV channel «1+1» about the bribes equal to 500 thousand hryvnas, which were allegedly proposed for the support of V. Onopenko, a candidature to the post of the chairman of the Supreme Court of Ukraine.

(«Vecherniy Kharkov», No. 97, 9 September 2003)

Dnepropetrovsk oblast organization of the Rukh will have legal proceedings with the local edition «Populiarnaya gazeta LUXE»The Rukh made this information public in the official statement for mass

media. In particular, it is pointed out in the statement that the issue of«Populiarnaya gazeta LUXE» of 3 September 2003 contained another open li-bel upon the People’s Rukh and the oblast representation of the bloc «Our Ukraine». The Rukh members believe that the newspaper gave the false in-formation that «Sichenko, the head of the oblast branch of the Rukh, did not dare to declare publicly about the creation of the oblast organization of the bloc «Our Ukraine». On the contrary, the party members point out that on 24

226

August, at the meeting near T. Shevchenko’s monument, Viktor Sichenko de-clared about the creation of the oblast bloc.

Besides, the statement for mass media reads that recently the local mass media has spread the inauthentic information connected with the creation of the branch of the bloc «Our Ukraine» in the Dnepropetrovsk oblast. These publications, in the opinion of the Rukh, were organized by Andrey Denis-enko, the leader of the local organization of the PRP, and Ivan Shulik, the head of the local branch of the Ukraine Nationalistic Party, with the aim to provoke the dissent in the bloc.

We want to remind that in August 2003 two oblast organizations of «Our Ukraine» were created almost simultaneously: one – by Ivan Shulik, and an-other – by Viktor Sichenko. So, in spite of the declarations of the both leaders of the oblast organizations, the conflict between them is going on.

(«Politichna Ukraina», 3 September 2003)

Dnepropetrovsk law-enforcers against mass media The claims «on the protection of honor and dignity» handed by law-

enforcers against journalists are not rare in Dnepropetrovsk. Now, for example, the head of the oblast DFOC has the legal proceedings with a correspondent of one of all-Ukrainian weeklies.

(«Komsomolskaya Pravda v Ukraine», No. 174, 20 September 2003)

Viktor Medvedchuk vs. Dmytro Chobit On 29 September the Pecherskiy district court of Kyiv continued the con-

sideration of the civil case «Viktor Medvedchuk vs. Dmytro Chobit». This court process lasts since October 2002, but only recently judge Fadeeva has begun to consider the case, so to speak, in essence: earlier all the time was wasted for various procedural moments.

Now the court analyzes the past of Medvedchuk’s father. In the book «Nartsyss» Chobit told in details about the cooperation of Medvedchuk-senior with German occupants and confirmed his story with archive documents.

The head of President’s chancellery did not agree with these statements, as well as with other 90% of the information expounded in the documentary book by Chobit. The claim of Medvedchuk consists of several tens of pages. The plaintiff denies even those statements, which cannot be denied: some gen-erally known facts of his biography, the official data about his property and the evaluative judgments, which may not be the object of a claim.

Taking into account the fact that Dmytro Chobit confirms his every word with tens of documentary arguments, the trial can last for indefinite time. Be-sides, recently the process has turned to the opposite direction, since in sum-

227

mer the author of «Nartsyss» brought the counter-claim against the head of the SDPU (u). According to the norms of the Criminal-Procedural Code, the claim was addressed to the Pecherskiy district court. The counter-claim was caused by the numerous procedural tricks applied by V. Medvedchuk. D. Chobit de-fines these tricks as «juridical cheating» and «the attempt to get one million hryvnas in a fraudulent way» (this is the sum of the compensation demanded by Medvedchuk from the author and editor of the book).

«Silski visti» more than once wrote that the head of the SDPU (u) made a brutal error in the addresses of the defendants. One of the defendants, accord-ing to the claim, is the non-existing publishing house «Kyiv-Brody: «Prosvita», which is allegedly situated by the address: 8 Muzeyny bystreet, Kyiv. Really, this building is occupied by the Society of Ukrainian language «Prosvita» headed by MP Pavel Movchan. Yet, this society has no connection with the publishing house «Prosvita», which published the book «Nartsyss». This publishing house works in the town of Brody, the Lviv oblast.

The fact that one of the defendants was situated by this address gave Medvedchuk the right to hand the claim to the Pecherskiy district court of Kyiv (where he could figure on the positive result), although both Chobit and his editor lived in Brody. Thus, in fact, the principle of territoriality was vio-lated.

As early as at the first court sitting Mr. Chobit drew the attention to this procedural mistake. Yet, Medvedchuk, as well as judge Fadeeva, ignored any arguments adduced by the defendants. They even neglected the official refer-ence from the unique state register reading that the organization «Kyiv-Brody: «Prosvita»« did not exist.

Dmytro Chobit quitted the attempts to prove the obvious things and turned to court. He valued his moral sufferings and court drudgery at 3 billion 682 million hryvnas (about 700 million USD) and demanded these money from Medvedchuk.

Viktor Medvedchuk, in his claim against Chobit, demanded to prohibit the distribution of «Nartsyss». Chobit, in his turn, demands to sequestrate all Medvedchuk’s property, movable and immovable, of Medvedchuk, including the property situated abroad (in particular, his luxurious apartment in Cyprus). Dmytro Chobit is going to pass the obtained sum to the state budget of Ukraine.

The behavior of judge Fadeeva in this situation was very strange. When the judge obtained the claim by Chobit, she issued the fantastically illogical decision: she recommended Dmytro Chobit to address his claim to theShevchenkivskiy district court of Kyiv. She explained this recommendation by the fact that Viktor Medvedchuk was residing in this district.

228

So, the judge, who had been already considering the case with the brutal violation of the territorial principle, tried to violate the Criminal-Procedural Code for the second time, since a counter-claim must be handed to the same court as the primary claim.

D. Chobit appealed against the actions of judge Fadeeva to the Appeal court of Kyiv. He was lucky: the judges of the Appeal Court regarded his ar-guments as essential and obliged Fadeeva to accept the claim.

(«Silski visti», 30 September 2003)

The Supreme Court satisfied the cassationof Yulia Timoshenko connected with her suit against the National TV company and the feature «Kazna derzhavy» Yulia Timoshenko turned to the Shevchenkivskiy district court of Kyiv

with the claim on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation and on the compensation of moral damage equivalent to 5 million hryvnas. She brought the claim against the National TV company and the feature «Kazna derzhavy». Ms. Timoshenko also demanded to refute the inauthentic informa-tion about her, which was made public by the TV channel «YT-1».

According to the decisions of the Shevchenkivskiy district court and the appeal court of Kyiv, the claim was not satisfied.

On 18 September the Supreme Court of Ukraine acknowledged that these decisions were illegal and had been issued with the violations of the norms of material and procedural laws of Ukraine. The decisions were cancelled, and the case was sent for another consideration.

The party «Batkivshchina» informs that, in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court, the National TV company and the feature «Kazna derz-havy» «will have to appear in court, to answer for the distribution of false in-formation about Yu. Timoshenko and to recompense her the moral damage».

«Batkivshchina» calls the feature «Kazna derzhavy» an official mouth-piece of the tax administration of Ukraine and «a tool for the informational war against the opposition».

(«Ukrainska Pravda», 22 September 2003)

Some general data According to the latest data, in 2002 courts got 770 claims against mass

media on the protection of honor and dignity and the compensation of moral damage. 223 claims (62%) were satisfied. Other cases either were closed, or are still considered. The total amount of the demanded compensations was 171,543,591 hryvnas. Yet, only 1,191,047 hryvnas were collected from mass media after numerous trials.

(«Bez tsenzury», No. 31, 10 October 2003)

229

Persecution of disobedient press is going on in Ukraine According to the UNIAN information, on 24 September the appeal court

of the Khmelnitskiy oblast obliged «Chernivetska gazeta» to pay 25 thousand hryvnas to an official, who recognized himself in a feuilleton published by the newspaper. In April 2003 this official won the case in the Pershotravnevy court of Chernivtsy. Then he demanded 50 thousand hryvnas. So, the appeal court partly satisfied the appeal of the editorial board of the newspaper. This information was communicated by Petro Kobevko in his interview to the UNIAN agency.

In April 2003 the Pershotravnevy court of Chernivtsy issued the guiltyverdict on the claim handed by Oleksandr Simenko, a former head of the Di-rectorate for fighting the organized crime and corruption of the Chernivtsy oblast state administration, against the newspaper «Chas». The court obliged the newspaper to pay 50 thousand hryvnas of compensation and to publish the refutation of the article «How Oleksandr and Volodymir went to a bath-house». This publication described (in a satirical form, without the surnames) an episode from the life of an authority, who «went to a bath-house with a briefcase containing 300 thousand USD». The former official of the oblast administration demanded 200 thousand hryvnas from the newspaper. He also demanded to block the accounts of the newspaper and to seize its property, but the court did not satisfy this part of the claim. Local journalists and repre-sentatives of the Institute of mass information were present at the April court sitting.

The editor-in-chief of «Chas» told that he had been disappointed with the decision of the appeal court, since «the matter concerned the moral values». By his words, the judge in Khmelnitskiy, as well as his colleague in Cherniv-tsy, did not apply Article 10 of the European Convention on human rights and fundamental freedoms, thus «some violations were committed». The editor stated that, in spite of the decrease of the compensation sum, this sum was still «too large» for the edition. Yet, he is sure that «the newspaper will be pub-lished all the same, regardless of the wishes of some authorities». P. Kobevkoinformed that «Chas» would appeal against the new decision to the Su-preme Court of Ukraine, and, if it would be necessary, to the European court of human rights. He also pointed out that all accounts of «Chas» were blocked after the decision of the Khmelnitskiy court.

(UNIAN, 25 September 2003) («Prava ludyny» (English version), Kharkov, October 2003)

Volodymir Yaroshenko vs. the newspaper «Ukraina-Tsentr» (Kirovograd)Court proceedings are lasting now in Kirovograd. Last week the Supreme

Court resolved to exact 15 thousand hryvnas from Kirovograd journalist Yuri

230

Mikhaylovich and 50 thousand hryvnas from the local weekly «Ukraina-Tsentr» in favor of Volodymir Yaroshenko, the head of Kirovskiy district court of Kirovograd. The conflict was caused by the publication in the news-paper «Ukraina-Tsentr» of the information based on the materials of the press conference held on 12 June in the UNIAN agency, when four Kirovograd journalists discussed the situation, which had formed during the election of the mayor. Yuri Mikhaylovich, one of the participants of the press conference, stated that ex-candidate to the mayor’s post Volodymir Yaroshenko ordered to murder him. The agency UNIAN made this information public. On 14 June the newspaper «Ukraina-Tsentr» reprinted this message referring to the UNIAN.

Mr. Yaroshenko believes that the mass media got the remuneration «for publication of the inauthentic information». By the way, earlier Mr. Yaro-shenko had the proceedings with the majority of Kirovograd mass media («Narodne slovo», «Kirovogradska pravda», the oblast TRC). Besides, soon his claim against the TV company «ICTV» is going to be considered, in which claim the plaintiff demands to pay him 300 thousand hryvnas of moral com-pensation.

(«Bez tsenzury», No. 31, 10 October 2003)

* * *

6 October 2003. The Supreme Court of Ukraine rejected the cassation connected with the claim of Kirovograd judge Volodymir Yaroshenko against the weekly «Ukraina-Tsentr» and journalist Yuri Mikhaylovich on the protec-tion of honor and dignity. The consideration of this case in various court in-stances lasted for 16 months.

«The court decision shocked the advocates, journalists and human rights protectors, who were present in the courtroom», said Efim Marmer, the editor-in-chief of the weekly. «We exhausted all opportunities for defense. We are law-abiding citizens, so we must fulfill this court decision. However, we could see the level of judge’s sincerity, when he said that he was interested not in money, but in the moral satisfaction».

Volodymir Yaroshenko stated: «The case is finished. The decision may not be appealed. There would not be any case, if the journalists understood what they wrote».

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

Weekly «2000» vs. Mykola Tomenko Weekly «2000» lose the suit after the claim against Mykola Tomenko, the

head of the Parliamentary Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information. The resolution of the Appeal Court of Kyiv on the claim of the private company «Newspaper complex «Internet-media»« (founder and pub-

231

lisher of «2000») against the MP came into force on 14 October. The plain-tiff demanded to acknowledge as inauthentic some theses of deputy’s re-quest on verification of the information about the violation by Viktor Med-vedchuk, the head of the Presidential Administration, Grigoriy Surkis, an MP, and Igor Surkis, the president of the soccer club «Dynamo», of the anti-monopoly legislation: they were the founders of the TV companies «1+1», «TET» and «Alternative», radio company «Shanson», newspapers «Kievskie vedomosti», «Den», «2000» and «Business». The request was read out in April 2003 at a sitting of the Supreme Rada.

On 5 June the Obolonskiy district court of Kyiv resolved that nobody had to be responsible for the evaluative statements, which did not contain factual information. It was recognized that the request about the check of some persons by law-enforcing organs might not be regarded as an en-croachment on their rights and legal interests.

The Appeal Court approved the decision of the local court and ac-knowledged that, contesting the right for deputy’s requests, the claimant called into question the freedom of the activities of people’s deputies.

(«Yuridichny visnyk Ukrainy», No. 42, 18-24 October 2003)

Internet-edition «Obkom» brought a suit against the informational-publishing group «Telegraf» 21 October 2003. The Internet-edition «Obkom» brought a suit to the

Shevchenkivskiy district court of Kyiv against the informational-publishing group «Telegraf». The journalists demand to refute the information given in the article «Puppeteer Todiychuk» published in the Internet-newspaper «Ver-sii» (6 October 2003).

«We ask to make Vasyl Tur and the group «Telegraf» to refute in the newspaper «Versii» the above-mentioned false information and… to apolo-gize publicly to the journalists of the Internet-edition «Obkom». This refuta-tion should be published on the same place, where the article «Puppeteer Todi-ychuk» was printed», reads the claim. «This article contains obviously false and slanderous statements about the edition «Obkom», believe the journalists. In particular, «Obkom» was accused of the publication of ordered articles and black PR.

«We will act after the obtaining of the writ. If we are guilty, we will try to regulate the conflict, else we would do everything we can to prove our case», de-clared the representatives of the newspaper «Versii». It is not known yet when the first court consideration of this case will be carried out.

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

232

Claims against the authors of publications in mass media:case of A. Zarvovskiy (Severodonetsk) From June to December 2003 the all-Ukrainian organization «Voters’

committee of Ukraine» realizes the pilot program of public consultations. The program is realized in five oblasts, including the Lugansk oblast, with the sup-port of the Mott foundation. The goal of the project is rendering free legal aid to voters. One of the priority tasks of the program is the protection of political rights, first of all, the rights envisaged by Articles 10 and 11 of the Interna-tional Convention on human rights.

The claim against A. Zarvovskiy, the superintendent of Severodonetsk secondary school No. 11, was handed by the Severodonetsk town education department and the head of this department. The claimants reckon that Zar-vovskiy discredited their honor and dignity in the publication «How the Ukrain-ian people is robbed». The moral sufferings were valued at 5 thousand hryvnas. In our opinion, the information, which the plaintiffs demanded to refute, contained the evaluative judgments of the author concerning the collection of payments from parents for school needs. As to the negative information contained in the material, there were no objections to it. On 22 October 2003, in the course of the court con-sideration, the claim was withdrawn by the plaintiffs.

(«Voters’ committee of Ukraine», the Lugansk oblast branch)

Judge of the Kyiv Appeal court O. Shevchenko broughta suit on recompensing the moral damage againstthe newspaper «Vecherni visti» and journalist S. Rechinskiy 22 October 2003. The claim, in particular, reads: «During spring-autumn

of 2003 the newspaper «Vecherni visti» published the series of articles under the common title «How to become a prosecutor?» and with the subtitle «Pecu-liarities of the Ukrainian investigation». The publications described the arbi-trary actions of law-enforcing organs, which were called «prosecutors’-militia-judges’ group». The main personage of the materials, prosecutor of Bila Tserkva Oleksandr Lupeyko, is represented by Stanislav Rechinskiy, the au-thor of the articles, as a «monster», who fabricates criminal cases, takes part in «robbing during searches», «murders the incarcerated», applies torture and «is an insatiable and absolutely non-squeamish man».

Besides, judge Shevchenko declares in his claim that his business reputa-tion was undermined as a result of making public by Rechinskiy of the com-plaint of convict Georgiy Yanev, which contained a number of unpleasant statements about the judge. Shevchenko believes that the journalist made pub-lic the statements, which insulted him. O. Shevchenko also considers as erro-neous the words of the journalist, who wrote that the judge had phoned him and

233

threatened him with a suit «for the sum of about 50 thousand» and «the intensive attention».

In general, the judge asks the court to collect 50 thousand hryvnas of moral compensation from the journalist and the same sum – from the newspa-per. The first sitting had been appointed on 30 October of the current year, but the consideration of the case was postponed till 24 November 2003 on the ba-sis of the petition of «Vecherni visti».

(Monitoring of the Institute of mass information)

234

Head of the Poltava media club Ludmila Kucherenko protects the independent editions Ludmila Kucherenko, the head of the Poltava media club: «We believe that the protection of independent editions and journalists is

our primary duty. We take part in tens of court cases; some of them are lasting for years. For instance, the consideration of the claim of a daughter of Anato-liy Kukoba, the ex-mayor of Poltava, who is an MP now, against the newspa-per «Privatnaya sprava» and editor Anatoliy Bannykh lasts almost for four years. The plaintiff demands 180 thousand hryvnas from the edition. The es-sence of the case is very simple. Anna Kukoba was heading the local TV and radio company «Anna». The necessity emerged to create the Internet site about Poltava. This important task was entrusted to Anna. The newspaper wrote about this in the section «Chronicle of high society». The author of the article did not blame anybody, he merely wrote that one of banks gave 5 thousand USD for the creation of the site. And it was not the guilt of the newspaper, if the facts appeared to be so demonstrative. So, since 1999 the newspaper un-dergoes the court proceedings...»

(«Zerkalo nedeli», No. 41, 25-31 October 2003)

Court process Chobit vs. Medvedchuk Viktor Medvedchuk, the head of the Presidential Administration of

Ukraine and the leader of the SDPU (u), cancelled 12 items of his claim about the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation against the author and publishers of the book «Narcissus. The political portrait of Viktor Medved-chuk». Copies of the application were distributed by claimant’s attorneys among journalists. The application reads: «For the purpose of making our de-mands more exact, we ask to exclude items 56-67 from the claim».

By the words of Dmytro Chobit, the author of the book, all deleted items concerned the section «Political businessman». Viktor Medvedchuk demanded to recognize 99 episodes as inauthentic and to levy from the author, publisher and publishing house the compensation of moral damage equal to 1 million hryvnas.

(«Vechernie vesti», No. 182, 2 December 2003, «Slovo Prosvity». No. 49, 3-9 December 2003)

Newspaper «Press-shans» (Krasny Luch, the Donetsk oblast) won a legal action The newspaper «Press-shans» won an action brought against the edito-

rial board by former MP Dmitriy Petrenko. This information was given by Sergey Voloshin, the editor-in-chief of «Press-shans».

235

The collegium of judges of the court chamber in charge of civil cases of the Supreme Court of Ukraine did not satisfy the cassation of the MP against the decision of the Krasny Luch town court on his claim about the protection of honor dignity and business reputation, and the compensation of moral dam-age against Leonid Glukhovskiy, the manager of the company «Pressa», and Sergey Voloshin, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Press-chans».

Dmitriy Petrenko demanded to recompense him the moral damage equiva-lent to 100 thousand hryvnas inflicted with the phrase: «Our town, as well as the Perevalskiy district, did not derive any benefit from the election of Dmitriy Petrenko to the Parliament four years ago. Mr. Petrenko heads the Supreme Rada sub-committee in charge of coal-mining industry, and four mines in Krasny Luch were closed during these years».

Courts of various instances acknowledged this phrase to be true. («Kontekst-Media», Lugansk, 2 December 2003; «Den», No. 222, 6 December 2003)

Lviv officials want to prohibit free reprinting of materials from foreign sources Oleg Onisko, Andriy Pavlishin: Newspapers, radio and TV can disappear in Ukraine in the near future.

This is not an overstatement. The Lychakivskiy district court of Lviv is going to deprive journalism of one of its bases – the right for reprinting and quoting of other mass media. And this will mean the end of Ukrainian journalism.

The claim of Taras Kozak, the head of the Western regional customs, against «Lvivska gazeta» seemed to be, at first, a strange misunderstanding. We even sup-posed that some enemies of the customs head instigated him to bring in this suit.

The affair is very simple. On 16 October the newspaper «Lvivska gazeta» reprinted the article of journalist Petr Koscinski from the Polish weekly «Rzecz Pospolita», which article described the situation in Lviv. We based on the right envisaged by the Constitution: the freedom of speech and the right for distribu-tion of information.

Our rights are also confirmed by the Law of Ukraine «On printed mass media (the press) of Ukraine», which clearly reads: «editorial board and jour-nalist are nor responsible for publication of the information […], if […] this in-formation is a verbal quotation of the materials published by other mass me-dium, with the reference to it […]».

Yet, it seems that the Lychakivskiy district court neglects this law. The town, which is proud of the freedom of the press (on the background of the en-tire situation in Ukraine), can become a burial ground of the freedom of speech.

On 28 November we had the opportunity to make sure of that. Advocate O. Kalishevich, who «specializes» in rendering of the legal aid

to the «offended» representatives of the SDPU (u), justified our worst expecta-

236

tions. The tactics used by him carried the letter of the law to the point of ab-surdity. The claim ignored the fact of reprint until the moment, when the judges produced officially the original of the Polish edition with the vexed ar-ticle. Then the advocate somewhat changed his tactics: he tried to persuade the court that «Lvivska gazeta» has published not verbal quotation, but the literary translation.

All in all, the advocates of T. Kozak are ignoring the fact that the publica-tion in «Lvivska gazeta» was the verbal translation of the material from «Rzecz Pospolita». This is confirmed by the reference to the source, use of the logo-type of the Polish newspaper and the special font used by «Lvivska gazeta» for reprints from other mass media. Eventually, Petr Koscinski, a well-known Polish journalist, who specializes in Ukrainian problems and frequently visits Lviv and Kyiv, gave his oral consent to the reprinting and is ready to confirm that.

Head of the Lychakivskiy court Mr. Goretskiy, who chaired this trial, re-jected all petitions presented by the lawyers of «Lvivska gazeta», in particular, the petitions about the summon of the translator to court and the conduction of textual expertise.

Instead of this the judge endorsed the proposition of Kalishevich to sum-mon to the next court sitting the specialist in Polish language, who would prove that the translation was not exact. Yet, this peculiarity is very demon-strative. An author of expert conclusion would be strictly punished for its fal-sity, and a specialist, who testifies in court, has much more opportunities for casuistry and his amenability is less serious.

By the way, judge Goretskiy is notorious among Lviv journalists. On 31 March 2000 he approved «one of the most absurd decisions in the history of legal proceedings against mass media in the independent Ukraine. The case was connected with the publication by the newspaper «Ekspress» of a small (12-lines) critical note on the page «Culture». The judge obliged the newspa-per to pay 150 thousand hryvnas of the moral compensation» (citation from «The official appeal of the newspaper «Ekspress»« published, in particular, on the Internet page «Action of independent journalists»). This decision, which was reconsidered later by the courts of the higher instance, evoked the decisive and active protest of Ukrainian journalists, who, on 13 April 2000, started the action of civil disobedience called «The wave of free-dom».

The court process, which concerns three phrases containing, in the Pol-ish original, only 36 words, seems nonsensical. Yet, the resolution against the newspaper «Lvivska gazeta» may become a precedent with far-reaching and very unpleasant consequences.

The right to reprint (quote) is a key concept of journalism. This right is exercised by everybody – from the agency Reuters to village newspapers. TV-

237

men throughout the world transmit the films shoot by BBC or other companies, radio stations cite newspapers and on the contrary.

The court prohibition of reprinting from the editions published in the Polish, Russian, English or Chinese language, or the demand to check the authenticity of such sources, will nullify all achievements in the sphere of the freedom of speech in Ukraine. Yet, nobody cancelled the juridical norm, which prohibits to restrict the legal rights of citizens. Maybe judge Goret-skiy wants to activate the struggle of Ukrainian people for the freedom of speech?

(«Lvivska gazeta», 3 December 2003)

Kyiv Appeal Court satisfied the claim of advocates A. Fedur and V. Ageev against former General ProsecutorS. Piskun and the newspaper «2000» On 12 December 2003 the Appeal Court of Kyiv read out the resolution

on the appeal of advocate Andrey Fedur against the court decision on the suit of Fedur against former General Prosecutor S. Piskun and the newspaper«2000».

We want to remind that the case was instituted in the connection with the following events. In an interview to the newspaper «2000» (issue of 6 Sep-tember 2002) General Prosecutor of Ukraine Sviatoslav Piskun, who is known as a very truthful man, answered a question about the grounds for the deten-tion of A. Fedur in Lugansk. Piskun said: «He was driving a stolen car, which had been hijacked and was wanted by militia».

Besides, Piskun told in the same interview: «It is known that judges more than once sent the appeals to the collegium of advocates about the deprivation of Fedur and his colleague Ageev of the licenses for advocate activities be-cause of the disrespect for the court showed by them during the trial. Both ad-vocates used to insult the judges. And, if the judges wanted to remove Fedur and Ageev from the trial, they could do it much earlier. Yet, the advocates were not deprived of the licenses, they only were summoned to the collegium twice and warned about the necessity to keep within the law».

These statements by Piskun were absolutely mendacious. Fedur never drove a stolen car, and his Jeep was never hijacked or wanted by militia. Ad-vocates Fedur and Ageev never committed the violations of advocate ethics or showed disrespect to court, they got no warnings from either the collegium of advocates or other advocate organizations.

Immediately after the publication of this interview Andrey Fedur turned to court. The advocate demanded the publication of the refutation by the Gen-eral Prosecutor’s office and apologies.

The court attached the issue of the newspaper «2000» with the mentioned interview of Piskun to the materials of the case. By the way, another defen-

238

dant, the newspaper «2000», has already published the refutation of the infor-mation spread by S. Piskun.

However, Zhanna Bernatskaya, a notorious judge of the Pecherskiy dis-trict court, rejected the claim of A. Fedur, since, according to the court deci-sion, THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT PROVE THAT THE DEFENDANT REALLY SPREAD THE ABOVE-MENTIONED INFORMATION.

So, the judge «did not notice» the facts that the newspaper was attached to the case materials as a proof, that a representative of the newspaper con-firmed the fact of publication and that the newspaper even had time to publish the refutation of this information.

The Appeal Court agreed with the arguments adduced by A. Fedur in his ap-peal and acknowledged that judge Bernatskaya brutally violated the legislation. The Appeal Court resolved to pass the case to the court of the first instance for consideration by another composition of judges.

On 1 July 2003 advocate A. Fedur sent the appeal to the Supreme Rada, in which the advocate stated: the activities of judge Zhanna Bernadska evidenced that she was unworthy of being elected to judge’s post for term of life.

(Lawyers company «Ageev, Berezhnoy and partners», http://www.ageyev.org) («Prava ludyny» (Ukrainian version), Kharkov, No. 34, 1-15 December 2003)

Claim against the Poltava media club and Ludmila Kucherenko The Appeal court of the Poltava oblast rejected the appeal of the center of

cable TV «Satelit» (managed by Yu. Tsomartov) and upheld the decision of the local Poltava court, which declined the claim against the Poltava media club and Ludmila Kucherenko on recompensing the moral damage. The com-pany «Satelit» wanted to collect 21 thousand hryvnas from the plaintiffs, but failed: the court did not recognize the statements in the newspaper «Novy Den» as ones that discredited his business reputation.

(«The Poltava media club», No. 59, 2 December 2003)

Oleksiy Svetikov. Court protection of the freedomof speech (Lugansk) In 2003 the juridical service of the Lugansk oblast branch of the Voters’

Committee of Ukraine took part in eight legal actions (5 – in Severodonetsk and 3 – in Rubezhnoe local courts). We represented the interests of mass me-dia and citizens, against whom the claims had been handed for the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation after publication of their materials in newspapers. Four cases were completed (all of them – in favor of mass media) and court decisions came into force; the consideration of two more cases is still lasting; the appeal was handed against one decision of the Rubezhnoe local court; one decision of the same court was reversed and the case was returned to court.

239

Some results and conclusions: The great part of the legal proceedings, in which we took part (7 out of

8), was caused by critical publications in mass media directed against the power or political opposition. At that both the power and opposition used the same tricks in their claims: strained complaints and demands on recompensing the moral damage exceeding the limits of common sense. So, the total sum of the demanded moral compensation in these 8 cases was 1121400 hryvnas. However, the motivation of the demands is different: representatives of the power try, in that way, to bankrupt the disloyal mass media, and representatives of the opposition – to inform the public about their «abused rights». The most in-teresting from this viewpoint is the claim of K. Koziuberda, the leader of the Rubezhnoe organization of the PSPU, against the editorial board of the com-munal newspaper «Rubezhanski novyny» and the editorial board of the news-paper «Visnyk barvnyka». The demanded sum of moral compensation was 1 million hryvnas. The claim was handed in the connection with publication (verbal) in these newspapers of the open letter of the MP with his signature.

As a rule, the sums of moral compensation in the claims in mass media are substantiated by the arguments that the publication allegedly inflicted damage to health; sometimes these arguments are confirmed with medical cer-tificates presented by the plaintiffs to court. We believe that it is impossible to prove the cause-effect relation between the fact of publication and the exacer-bation of a chronic disease. Yet, it is also impossible to prove the opposite. So, even if such certificates were issued as a result of the disease (but not got for money or by knowing the right people), the arguments about the illness must be regarded as the manipulations, a priori evidencing about the dishonest in-tentions of the claimants. And if the court takes the decision about the levy of moral compensation grounding on the exacerbation of a disease of the plaintiff as a result of the considered publication, the appeal should be handed against such decision.

In any of the cases the plaintiffs did not use properly the opportunity to regulate the conflict extrajudicially in accordance with Article 37 of the Law of Ukraine «On printed mass media». We reckon that this fact evidences that the protection of honor was not the main goal of these claims. Two claims handed by the authorities against the editorial board of the newspaper «Tretiy sector» are very demonstrative from this point of view. After the publication in the December issue of this newspaper of the critical material, these persons sent a letter to the editorial board with the demand to publish the refutation, but they did not wrote what information had to be refuted. The editorial board immediately directed the response, in which they asked to specify what infor-mation they had to refute or to give them the text of refutation. The editorial board guaranteed that this text would be published. Instead of that the authori-

2 4 0

ties turned to court with the demand to recompense them the moral damage equal to 5 thousand hryvnas for every article. We want to point out that, ac-cording to part 1 Article 17 of Law of Ukraine «On state support of mass me-dia and social protection of journalists», the court has the right to reject the de-mand about the moral compensation, if the authorities did not use the opportu-nity of extrajudicial regulation of the conflict.

In our opinion, extrajudicial regulation in accordance with Article 37 of the Law of Ukraine «On printed mass media» and Article 43 of the Law «On TV and radio broadcasting» is the most civilized way of settling conflicts con-nected with the balance of the rights to the freedom of speech and to the protec-tion of honor, dignity and business reputation. Such form of regulation is, by its form, compensative, but not repressive, it gives the opportunity of rehabili-tation to the victim not only in the case of distribution of information, but also in cases of distribution of ungrounded evaluations. Besides, such practice gives the opportunity to mass media to avoid the excessive risk connected with mistakes. Unfortunately, this form of regulation almost is not applied in our country now.

The latter fact does not seem very strange, since the majority of the claims against mass media, in which our organization took part, had the re-pressive character and were directed not at the protection of honor or business reputation violated by spreading of some concrete information, but at persecu-tion of mass media. One of such claims was the claim of Ms. Protopopova, the head of the Severodonetsk executive committee department of the reception of citizens, against the newspaper «Tretiy sektor». The plaintiff demanded to re-fute the information, made public by the newspaper, that she had refused to accept the notification about a public meeting. According to Protopopova’s claim, on 19 November some people really brought a notification about public meeting to her, but she did not know how to accept it. While she tried to learn how to do that, the woman, who brought the notification, allegedly went away. So, Protopopova asked the court to recognize the information that she did not accept the notification as untrue. Naturally, she wanted to get the compensa-tion of moral damage equal to 3000 hryvnas.

In our opinion, it was clear from the writ that the information published by the newspaper was true. In the course of court session it was established that Protopopova refused to accept the notification for three times. Of course, the court did not satisfy the claim.

Another problem is the ascertainment of distinction between the evalua-tive judgments and spread information. According to part 2 Article 47-1 of the Law of Ukraine «On information», an evaluative judgment (except insult or libel) is a statement that does not contain the factual data, in particular criti-cism or estimates of actions, as well as the statement, which may not be re-garded as containing the factual data because of using the hyperboles, allego-

2 4 1

ries or satire. Evaluative judgments must not be refuted and their authenticity must not be proved. Besides, judges not always take into account the fact that, according to Article 7 of the Civil Code, not all information concerning the claimant must be refuted, but only the information discrediting his honor and dignity. So, the appeal was handed against the decision of the Rubezhnoe court on the claim of the leaders of one of town party organizations against the newspaper «Rubezhanski novyny». The matter is that, in our opinion, 3 out of 7 statements, which had to be refuted according to this decision, were evalua-tive judgments and 3 more did not discredit honor and dignity.

We also more than once observed the cases, where the plaintiffs took per-sonally the information, which was not connected with them directly. Twice the department heads of the organs of local self-government handed the claims in the connection with publication of critical materials about their departments (the names or posts of these persons were not mentioned in the materials). We believe that a physical person may not be the claimant in such cases, but in the both cases the court did not agree with this.

The methods of the protection of mass media has essentially improved af-ter 13 May 2003, when the Law of Ukraine «On introduction of changes into some legal acts of Ukraine in the sphere of guaranteeing and unimpeded reali-zation of citizens’ right to the freedom of speech» came into effect. Another important change is the introduction of the progressive scale of due for bring-ing in the claims on recompensing the moral damage; introduction of the re-strictions of the opportunity of collecting the compensations on the claims handed by power organs and state officials; definition of the concept «evalua-tive judgment» and some other terms. This law should protect mass media from the arbitrary actions directed, in fact, not at the protection of honor or business reputation, but at persecution of mass media

The work of our organization in courts evidence that the opportunities for the protection of mass media from unjust claims have improved during last year, but mass media still need the assistance of competent lawyers. Another serious problem is not solved yet: there is no mechanism of protection of mass media from the expenses connected with their participation in trials. Therefore such claims can be used as a tool for creating obstacles in the work of mass media, even if journalists would win these cases.

(«Politichna Ukraina», 13 December 2003, www.polit.com.ua)

2 4 2

RIMINAL CASES

A partner of the publishing house «Taki spravy» is still staying behind the bars On 21 December the judicial chamber in charge of criminal cases of the

Appeal court of Kyiv considered the complaint of advocates Bogdan Ferents and Valeriy Kornilov against the verdict of the Solomenski court of Kyiv con-cerning Valentin Romanov, a partner of the publishing house «Taki spravy». The court satisfied the complaint partly. «We are not contented with the deci-sion of the Appeal court», said V. Kornilov, «and we are going to lodge the cassation. In our appeal complaint we asked to change the verdict by closing the criminal persecution of V. Romanov according to Articles 27 part 5, 212 part 3, 336 part 2 and 205 part 1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine because of the absence of corpus delicti». The court decided that Romanov’s actions were committed after the preliminary agreement with a responsible representative of the publishing house «Taki spravy». «This is an absurd. This court decision will be the basis for the retrial», V. Kornilov stated.

V. Romanov was condemned to six and a half years of incarceration. His advocates believe that the verdict of the district court contradicts the demands of Article 323 of the Criminal-Procedural Code, is illegal and groundless. It happened because of the narrowness and imperfection of the investigation, dis-crepancy between the actual context of the case and the conclusions of the court, serious violations of the criminal-procedural laws, incorrect use of the criminal legislation, disproportion between the gravity of the offence and the imposed penalty.

22 January 2003, LIGA ONLINE «Prava Ludyny», No.1, January, 2003

Criminal case was started after the fact of spreading the infor-mation about the crime committed by governor Kartashov The prosecutor’s office of Zaporozhye started the criminal case after the

fact of spreading the evidently erroneous information about the commitment of a grave crime by governor Evhen Kartashov, a candidate to the post of Zaporozhye mayor.

A UNIAN correspondent communicated that this information was made public by Zaporozhye prosecutor Oleg Skidanov at the last briefing. According to the words of the prosecutor, the reason of starting the criminal case after Ar-ticle 383 part 2 of the Criminal Code was the distribution in Zaporozhye of a leaflet titled «A point of honor: who killed general Poliak?». The leaflet had the form of a newspaper without dateline. It read that governor of the Zaporoz-

2 4 3

Zaporozhye oblast E. Kartashov had the connection with the murder of Zaporozhye mayor Oleksandr Poliak.

O. Skidanov commented the situation: «After the death of Oleksandr Po-liak the prosecutor’s office of the Zaporozhskiy district of Zaporozhye con-ducted the check. As a result the decision was issued to refuse the institution of the criminal case because of the absence of corpus delicti. Later this deci-sion was approved by the Zaporozhye oblast prosecutor’s office and the Gen-eral Prosecutor’s office of Ukraine. So, the data contained in the leaflet must be regarded only as spreading the evidently erroneous information and the use of black PR in the struggle for mayor’s post».

Now the law-enforcing organs of Zaporozhye realize the measures for uncovering the initiators of spreading the leaflet «A point of honor…».

06 June 2003, UNIAN, http://www.unian.net/ukr/news «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

Criminal case of Raylesku-Vidinski (Odessa) 27 August 2003. The court of the Tsentralny district of Odessa released

journalist Paraskoviya Raylesku-Vidinski on the basis of her appeal and am-nestied her. The court considered two questions: on the cessation of the coer-cive treatment in the special psychiatric clinic of Dnepropetrovsk and on with-drawal of the case after Article 6 item 4 of the CPC of Ukraine. As early as on 3 February 2003 the commission of psychiatrists headed by psychiatrist of higher category Mr. Chinchik, the director of the Center of medical-social re-habilitation and psychological aid, came to the conclusion that «Raylesku-Vidinski does not need the coercive psychiatric treatment».

The criminal case of Ventseslav Raylesku-Vidinski was instituted in winter of this year. The Odessa oblast court did not issue the sanction for his arrest. This case is now considered by the investigation department of the Odessa oblast militia.

The criminal case of Paraskoviya Raylesku-Vidinski was started in May 2002 on the basis of the Criminal Code of 1961. Advocates of P. Raylesku-Vidinski are now preparing the claims about the compensation of material and moral damage inflicted to Raylesku-Vidinski by law-enforcing organs of Ukraine.

(Barometr)

Lithuatian publishing and polygraphic center «Taki spravy» will turn to the European court 19 August 2003. The daughter enterprise of the Lithuatian publishing

and polygraphic center «Taki spravy» decided to turn to the European court of human rights with the claim on the protection of rights of Valentin Romanov, the manager of the company «Rembudproekt», who had been condemned in No-

24 4

vember 2002 by the Solomyanskiy court of Kyiv to six years with the confiscation of all property for benefit of the state. The interests of Valentin Romanov will be defended by Swedish law firm «Glimshted», which will hand the claim to the European court.

(Barometr)

Criminal case of Yaroslav Tkachivskiy The Institute of mass information got the response from G. Baydashchuk,

the acting head of the department of internal safety of the militia directorate of the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast. The IMI request concerned the ODA connected with the case of Yaroslav Tkachivskiy, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Tyzhnevik Galytchiny».

Mr. Baydashchuk informs that «now the law-enforcing organs of theIvano-Frankivsk oblast conduct no ODA connected with the case of citizen Tkachivskiy».

Besides, the response reads that the Ivano-Frankivsk town militia precinct sent the requests to the Tysmenitsa district court about Tkachivskiy’s criminal case in order to obtain the information for the introduction of proper changes into the statistical data.

We want to remind that the IMI got the information that Yaroslav Tka-chivskiy, the representative of the Institute in the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast, was shadowed by law-enforcing organs. On 29 July the Institute directed the in-formational request to the militia directorate of the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast.

In May-July 2003 the Ivano-Frankivsk town militia directorate, referring to the Laws of Ukraine «On the ODA» and «On militia», sent the requests to the Tysmenitsa district court about the consideration of the criminal case of Tkachivskiy. This is confirmed by letters No. 2117 of 5 May 2003 andNo. 3673 of 17 July 2003, which are contained in the case materials.

The IMI puts the following questions in its request: do the law-enforcing organs of the Ivano-Frankivsk conduct the ODA concerning Yaroslav Tka-chivskiy; with which purpose and on the basis of which normative acts the town militia directorate needs the information about the consideration of the mentioned criminal case?

The chronology of the investigation of the criminal case of Yaroslav Tka-chivskiy:

14 February 2002. The court of Ivano-Frankivsk took the decision about the additional investigation of the criminal case against Tkachivskiy, the edi-tor-in-chief of the newspaper «Tyzhnevik Galytchiny». The criminal case against him had been instituted on 7 November 2000. The editor was accused of the misuse of power, larceny on an especially grand scale, dodging from taxes. The Ivano-Frankivsk prosecutor’s office appealed against the decision on the additional investigation. On 29 April the appeal court of Ivano-

2 4 5

Frankivsk accepted the appeal, thus continuing the consideration of the case. On 14 June 2002 the case was considered by the Tysmenitsa district court. The next court sitting was carried out on 26 June. On 16 August 2002, during a court sitting, Ya. Tkachivskiy and his advocate Valeriy Kornilov lodged the petition about the audio and video recording of the trial. On 1 September 2001 new Criminal Code of Ukraine came into force. In spite of that the organ of the pre-trial investigation did not bring the accusations in correspondence with the new Code, in particular Article 148-2 part 2 (the Code of 1960) was not removed from the accusation materials, thus violating Article 5 of the Criminal Code (of 2001), which abolishes the criminality of the action.

«Tyzhnevik Galytchiny» is an independent oblast weekly that was regis-tered on 30 December 1993. The weekly was founded by the editorial board of the newspaper «Galytchina». On 11 January 1996 the editorial boards of «Tyzhnevik Galytchiny» and «Galytchina» concluded a treaty about coopera-tion. According to the order of the editor of «Galytchina» of 12 October 2000, the newspaper «Tyzhnevik Galytchiny» was liquidated. The collective of the weekly tries now to appeal against this decision.

On 30 July 2002 the European Court of human rights registered the claim about the liquidation of the weekly handed by Yaroslav Tkachivskiy.

(The Institute of mass information, 23 August 2003)

Kherson judge Golovko issued the resolution on the claimof Alena Rotova against the town newspaper «VIK» On 6 November a sensational event occurred in Kherson. Judge Golovko

considered the claim of Alena Rotova, the vice-mayor of Kherson, against the local newspaper «VIK» and issued the following resolution:

«Being governed by Articles 152, 156 and 157 of the Civil-Procedural Code of Ukraine and with the aim of guaranteeing the independence of court, the court RESOLVED:

To prohibit the company «TV and radio company «VIK», the editorial board of the civil-political weekly «VIK: chas, podii, ludy», Sergiy Kirichenko and others to publish in mass media any information on the activities of A. Ro-tova, … on the violation by her of the demands of the Constitution and Laws of Ukraine until the court decision would be taken on the claim.

The decision must be immediately fulfilled according to the legal proce-dure of execution of court decisions».

However, Alena Rotova (she is a deputy of the town council) rented al-most all town cemeteries and became the monopolist in this sphere. She dic-tates the rules, and nobody can resist, because the deceased cannot wait until their relatives will defend the rights violated by Rotova.

2 4 6

(A communication to the Kharkov group for human rights protection)

* * *

According to the information given by journalist Vladimir Aleksandrov, Alena Rotona, the vice-mayor of Kherson, handed a claim against the weekly «VIK» about the compensation of the damage inflicted to her honor, dignity and business reputation by the publications in the newspaper. The demanded sum was 15 thousand hryvnas. The vice-mayor also asked the court to prohibit the weekly to publish any information about her until the court decision would be taken.

In the opinion of the journalist, the court decision means that henceforth none of the newspapers or TV channels has the right even to hint to the read-ers or viewers at the fact that A. Rotova, a co-founder of the company «Polis», earns money by managing the town cemeteries, thus combining this business and the work of vice-mayor.

Editor-in-chief of the newspaper Sergey Osolodkin stated that the edito-rial board would appeal against the verdict of Aleksandr Golovko.

Kherson vice-mayor Alena Rotova and her daughter businesswoman Jana Rotova handed the series of claims on the protection of honor and dignity against the newspapers «VIK» and «Grivna». All in all, the Rotovs demand to pay them 130 thousand hryvnas of compensation. One of the claims, on 50 thousand hryvnas, had been already satisfied by judge Golovko.

* * *

The editorial board of «VIK» handed the complaint against the decision of judge Golovko to the appeal court.

Besides, the fact that it was prohibited «to other persons» to write about the violations of the Constitution and Ukrainian laws exasperated many local journalists. The Kherson town association of journalists «Pivden» proposed the legal aid to all representatives of the «fourth power», who were going to fight for their right for the freedom of speech in court. As a result, 23 corre-spondents of local editions appealed against the court decision to the higher instance.

On 4 December the Appeal Court of the Kherson oblast expressed its atti-tude to the actions of judge A. Golovko: «The conclusion of the court… about the prohibition of the publications, connected with the case, by the defendants and other persons contradicts the demands of Articles 149 and 152 of the CPC of Ukraine».

It should be noted that the Kherson journalists have never been so soli-dary in protecting their rights in court. That became possible thanks to the pro-

2 4 7

ject «Legal aid to journalists of the Kherson oblast» realized by the Kherson town association of journalists «Pivden».

(Ukrainian media server, «Pivden», 11 December 2003)

Head of President’s Administration of Ukraine Viktor Med-vedchuk handed the claim on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation and on the compensation of moral damage against Oleksandr Moroz and Socialist Party According to the information of UNIAN, Viktor Medvedchuk, the head

of President’s Administration of Ukraine, handed the claim on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation and on the compensation of moral damage against Oleksandr Moroz and the Socialist Party. The claim was caused by demonstration, in autumn 2002, of the film «Digitized truth», in which Medvedchuk was accused of the cooperation with the Soviet KGB. The authors of the film referred to the records of major Melnichenko.

O. Moroz, the leader of the Socialist Party, turned to Vasyl Maliarenko, the head of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, and Sergiy Kivalov, the head of the Supreme council of justice, with the official letter, in which he asked «to inter-fere in the situation and to give the legal assessment of the decision of the Kyiv Appeal court about the consideration of the case in the Pecherskiy dis-trict court instead of the Shevchenkivskiy court». The text of the letter was passed to the UNIAN agency. In his letter O. Moroz reminds that «firstly, ac-cording to the norms of the Civil-Procedural Code, the consideration of cases is carried out in the district, where the defendant stays, and, secondly, the Shevchenkivskiy court almost finished the consideration of this case and dis-closed the facts of falsifying proofs by the claimant».

So, the leader of the SPU expressed the belief that «such tricks, which are incompatible with the norms of justice, are the result of the pressure exerted on the court by the top officials from President’s Administration».

(«Silski Visti», No. 130, 6 November 2003)

Editorial board of «Vechernie visti» is the defendant in 13 cases on the total sum of more than one million hryvnas Stanislav Rechinskiy: The number of claims against our newspaper and the sums, which the

plaintiffs exact from us for the moral damage, can have two meanings: either the journalists of «VV» are utterly unprofessional or the newspaper is perse-cuted by somebody’s order. I believe that the professionalism of the newspa-per should be estimated by our readers.

The majority of the claims against our newspaper concern not the facts, but the evaluative statements. For example, a former head of the DFOC has

2 4 8

brought a suit recently, in which he demands to recognize as «ungrounded and insulting» the following fragments of the article «Snake’s nest and dead scape-goats», which article concerned the case of Gongadze and the activities of the DFOC: «Nikolay Dzhiga is a master of illegal special operations», «They will kidnap, torture and murder» and «… they were brought up in the menagerie of Leonid Kuchma» (two latter quotations were devoted to the DFOC. – Editor’s note)

It is interesting that in his writ Nikolay Dzhiga acknowledges: «The men-tioned statements are the evaluative judgments, which are ungrounded and in-sulting both by form and by substance». Yet, nobody may be brought to re-sponsibility for evaluative judgments!

One more claimant, a judge, wants to obtain 100 thousand hryvnas for the moral damage. The judge declares in his claim that his business reputation was undermined as a result of making public by «VV» of the complaint of convict Georgiy Yanev, which contained a number of unpleasant statements about the judge. The judge believes that the journalist permitted himself a number of pronouncements, which insulted him. For instance, the judge is displeased by the fact that he was called «a brother-in-arms» of Aleksandr Lupeyko, the no-torious Bila Tserkva prosecutor. Maybe, the journalist had to call him «an ac-complice»? This case promises to be very interesting. At the fist court sitting the journalist asked to summon some witnesses. However, he did not specify, who were these witnesses, since the judge asked him to present this petition at the next sitting. On the next day a stranger phoned to one of the witnesses and threatened him. The judge wants to get 50 thousand hryvnas from the journal-ist and the same sum – from the editorial board. 100 thousand is a great sum. Yet, the moral damage was, perhaps, significant too.

(«Vechernie visti», 10 November 2003, «Ukraina kriminalnaya», 3 November 2003)

Tatiana Korobova’s case in the European Court According to the words of Zoriana Bortnianska, the representative of the

government in the European Court, the first consideration of the case was closed, so the representative of the defendant refused to give the detailed com-ments.

«This is the case of the newspaper «Den», told journalist Tatiana Koro-bova, now a correspondent of the newspaper «Grani+», in her interview to«Telekritika». «Two my articles, about Natalya Vitrenko and Petro Si-monenko, published in 1999 in «Den», became the subject of considera-tion in the Ukrainian court. The essence of the articles consisted in the versions and assessments. Yet, the position of our court is traditional: if a statement is negative, then it is not true».

According to the court decision, the newspaper «Den» and the jour-nalist were obliged to recompense the moral damage. Dmitry Kutakh, the

2 4 9

advocate representing the defendants, prepared the complaint to the European Court of human rights, and the complaint was accepted for consideration.

Dmitry Kutakh, a lawyer, the Russian advocates’ group (RAG): – We have not received yet the notification about the consideration of the

case. We really prepared the complaint to the European Court, and it was accepted.

The Ministry of Justice is the defendant in this case: it represents Ukraine in the European Court. If the Court directed the materials on this case to the Ministry of Justice, it, most probably, evidences about the preparation of the materials for objections or about the preparation to the peaceful settlement of the conflict. Such procedure is envisaged by proper rules.

– What is the essence of the complaint? – The suit of Tatiana Korobova and the association «Ukrainian press-

group» to the European Court consists of two items concerning the viola-tion of the norms of the European Convention on human rights and free-doms. Firstly, the article contained the evaluative judgments, but the Ukrainian court acknowledged these statements to be the untrue informa-tion. Secondly, Article 4 of the European Convention on human rights and freedoms, which envisages the right for fair court, was violated.

(Oksana Lysenko, «Telekritika», 14 November 2003, www.telekritika.kiev.ua)(«The Poltava oblast media club», No. 55, 17 November 2003)

Head of the Western regional customs Taras Kozak wants to obtain 86000 hryvnas of compensation from the newspaper «Lvivska gazeta» for reprinting a material from the Polish weekly «Rzecz Pospolita» Kozak believes that the facts adduced in the article are not true. As a result, the head of the Western regional customs turned to the Ly-

chakivskiy district court with the demand to oblige «Lvivska gazeta» to refute the inauthentic information and to recompense him the moral damage equiva-lent to 86 thousand hryvnas. In his claim Kozak quotes a fragment of the arti-cle by Polish journalist Petp Koscinski, which caused damage to his image:

«The tax service of the Lviv oblast is now headed by three persons. The most important figure is Sergiy Medvedchuk, a brother of Viktor Medved-chuk, the head of President’s Administration of Ukraine. The brothers help to each other. Any requests on the case of Sergiy Medvedchuk, even the request of the Polish government about the case of «Credit-bank» (Ukraine), do not evoke any response either of the President or of the Prime-Minister of Ukraine. The second person is Mykola Khomiak, a deputy head of the oblast tax administration, the head of Lviv tax inspection. The third member of this

250

triumvirate is Taras Kozak, who heads the custom service. Recently he fired from his service gun in one of Lviv restaurants, but nobody punished him».

The collective of «Lvivska gazeta» doubts that Mr. Kozak will manage to obtain these money, since the Ukrainian legislation does not envisage the re-sponsibility for reptinting any materials from other editions.

The article had been published in «Rzecz Pospolita» on 15 October 2003 and was reprinted by «Lvivska gazeta» on 16 October.

(The Institute of mass information, 19 November 2003, www.imi.org.ua)

Another court consideration of the claim of «Lvivska gazeta» against Sergiy Medvedchuk began in the Syhivskiy district court of Lviv The Syhivskiy district court of Lviv started another court consideration of

the claim of «Lvivska gazeta» against Sergiy Medvedchuk, the head of the tax administration of the Lviv oblast. Two weeks before, at the previous sitting, the newspaper turned to the court with the petition to make the audio record of the sitting. There was no needed equipment in the court, so the sitting was postponed until 17 November. The newspaper demands from Medvedchuk to refute publicly the false information, which he made public on 17 July during the press conference, and to pay to the newspaper 20 thousand hryvnas of moral and material compensation.

The matter of the fact is that, after the check of the newspaper by the tax administration, Medvedchuk stated that he had «several questions to «Lvivska gazeta». «Firstly, the newspaper declared that its run was 10-16 thousand, but the real number was only 4000. Besides, there were some problems with ad-vertising. During a year the newspaper had been unprofitable, but it, by some miracle, became profitable, when the tax check began».

After this Oleg Onisko, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper, said at a press conference that Medvedchuk gave the information that did not represent the facts and, so, went beyond his commission.

(«Obozrevatel», 17 November 2003, www.obozrevatel.com.ua)

Kirovograd TV and radio company «TTV» got the resolution of the Supreme Court on the compensation of moral damage equal to 300 thousand hryvnas This information was communicated by general manager of «TTV» Vik-

tor Tokarev. The claim against the TRC «TTV» was handed by Volodymir Yaro-

shenko, the head of the Kirovograd town court. His claim was connected with the elucidation by the channel «TTV» in June 2002 of the meeting, at which one of the participants brought an accusation against Yaroshenko

251

«Context-media» informs, referring to Tokarev, that the resolution was issued on 20 October, and the TRC got this document only yesterday. «Our representatives were not present at the trial. We cannot agree with the deci-sion, so we will turn to the international court instances», declared Viktor To-karev.

(ForUm, 2003-11-27)

* * *

Judges won 3:0. This is the result of the legal proceedings between Volo-dymir Yaroshenko and Kirovograd mass media. Along with «Ukraina-Tsentr», the list of debtors was supplemented with the TRC «TTV» and the newspaper «Kirovogradska Pravda».

General manager of «TTV» Viktor Tokarev told this to journalists on the past Tuesday: «We are sure that we are right and that we did not violate any legal norms. Naturally, we are going to continue to strive for justice in the European Court. Unfortunately, in the European Court we will have to present a claim against Ukraine…»

(«Ukraina-Tsentr», Kirovograd, No. 48, 28 November 2003)

Claims of Yulia Timoshenko against the TV company «1+1» On 28 November the Shevchenkivskiy district court of Kyiv satisfied the

claim of Yulia Timoshenko against the TV company «1+1» on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation. LIGABusinessInform got this in-formation from the press service of the party «Batkivshchina».

The court acknowledged the information made public by Dmytro Kor-chinskiy, the presenter of the feature «Prote», as inauthentic and discrediting honor, dignity and business reputation of Yu. Timoshenko. This information concerned the work of Ms. Timoshenko as the head of the corporation«EESY».

According to the court decision, the channel «1+1» must give to Yu. Ti-moshenko the opportunity to go on the air for refutation of the untrue informa-tion about her.

This is not the first suit of Yulia Timoshenko against «1+1». All previous claims were satisfied by courts too, pointed out the representatives of the party.

(Ukrainian network of business information, www.liga.net)

Journalist vs. the Crimean mafia: who will win? The court process against Evpatoria journalist Vladimir Lutyev is coming

to the last stage: the appeal court of Sevastopol started to consider the case per se. Vladimir Lutyev is accused of the premeditated attempt on the life of

252

Mykola Kotliarevskiy, an MP from the Crimean Autonomous Republic, made on order; deliberate false evidence, forcing witnesses to refuse from evidence and a number of economic crimes. We are continuing our own investigation of this case, since some circumstances and events testify that Kotliarevskiy, as well as some officers of the Crimean DFOC, who allegedly found the guilty of the attempt on the MP’s life, were personally interested in accusation and con-demnation of the journalist.

(The Institute of mass information, 17 November 2003, www.imi.org.ua.)

Criminal case of Vladimir Boyko (Donetsk) On 7 November the consideration was carried out in the Voroshilovskiy

district court of Donetsk of the suit of Vladimir Boyko against the prosecutor’s office of the Donetsk oblast, State Tax Administration of Donetsk and the Do-netsk city militia directorate. The claimant demanded to recompense him the damage inflicted by the illegal detention in the office of the newspaper and holding in custody during 10 days under the inhumane conditions.

The oblast prosecutor’s office recognized that, since V. Boyko had not commit any crimes, the criminal case instituted against him by the prosecutor’s office was closed because of the absence of corpus delicti. In August 2002 the Appeal Court of the Donetsk oblast acknowledged the detention of Boyko to be illegal. Yet, the tax service (which is, by the way, headed by Oleksandr Vasylyev, a younger brother of G. Vasylyev, the first vice-speaker of the Su-preme Rada) did not agree with this. The Donetsk oblast STA sent to the trial its representative I. Dziuba, who declared that the tax administration did not recognize the suit and reckoned that it was correct that Mr. Boyko had spent 10 days in the preliminary prison. When the surprised judge reminded that the court acknowledged the detention to be illegal, the tax officer answered: «Any court decisions mean nothing to us».

We want to remind that on 25 June 2002 V. Boyko was detained at his workplace in the office of the newspaper «Salon». The prosecutor’s office insti-tuted the criminal case against the journalist after the publication of his article «General-purpose prosecutors» in the Internet edition «Ukraina kriminalna» (http://www.cripo.com.ua/stati/rub-2/r2-s24.htm). In this article the journalist told about the criminal business of Gennadiy Vasylyev’s close circle. Officers of the General Prosecutor’s office were immediately sent to the Donetsk oblast for the check of the facts stated in the publication. The facts appeared to be true. Yet, in-stead of punishing the uniformed criminals, the workers of the oblast prosecutor’s office began to threaten V. Boyko with prison. This information was also made public by «Ukraina kriminalna» (http://www.cripo.com.ua/stati/rub-1/r1-s38.htm). The threat was realized quite soon: the prosecutor of the Kuybyshevskiy district of Donetsk, by the order from the oblast prosecutor’s office, instituted the criminal

253

case against Boyko for dodging from paying taxes and misuse of power. The prosecutor directed the case to the investigation department of the Donetsk STA, but they did not inform the journalist about the case during six weeks. Probably, they hoped to close this case secretly, since they understood that the case could raise a great scandal.

However, when Boyko wrote an article about the corruption in tax ser-vices (adducing as the example the activities of a son of the then head of the oblast STA), the measures were taken: the article was withdrawn from the page-proof, and, on the next day, Boyko was detained. Later the court ac-knowledged the detention to be illegal, and the case was closed in accordance with Article 6 item 2.

The public indignation about the detention of the journalist was so active that even Leonid Kuchma gave his assessment of the activities of tax militia and prosecutor’s office. On 6 July 2002 he denounced these actions. Yet, the Vasylyevs have different viewpoint. Apparently, the head of the Donetsk oblast STA, inspired by the hope that his younger brother will become the General Prosecutor soon, decided to demonstrate the attitude of his family to laws, common sense, image of the country and court decisions that had come into force.

(«Maydan», 10 November 2003, maidan.org.ua)

* * * Vladimir Boyko, Donetsk: In the evening of 7 November a stranger phoned me and stated: «You

have already been in prison, and now we will to beat your brains out». For two days I could not understand, with which publication these threats were con-nected. Yet, the last week my acquaintance from Kyiv told me that Vasylyev had ordered to V. Pshonka, the prosecutor of the Donetsk oblast, to take the immediate measures towards me and those persons, who had given the inter-views for my article. Everybody knows that the Donetsk oblast prosecutor’s office is, in fact, headed by G. Vasylyev. V. Pshonka is a nominal figure ne-glected even by district prosecutors, and the heads of great subunits, for exam-ple, Donetsk city prosecutor A. Olmezov, get the orders directly from G.Vasylyev, omitting the oblast prosecutor’s office. Vasylyev ordered to arrest the former officers of militia and USS, who had told me about the commercial-criminal activities of the first vice-speaker of the Supreme Rada, and to seize the documents and other proofs (for instance, audio records) that compromised him.

(www.razom.org.ua)

254

* * * Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of

the freedom of speech and information, sent the letter to S. Vinokurov, the first deputy of the General Prosecutor of Ukraine. The letter reads that the Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information continues to receive complaints about the facts of impediment to the legal professional ac-tivities of journalists.

For example, on 7 November 2003 a stranger phoned to Donetsk inde-pendent journalist Vladimir Boyko and threatened him with physical violence. According to the information of mass media, there are no doubts that the threats were connected with the professional activities of the journalist. That happened after the publication in several mass media of a series of critical ma-terials by V. Boyko about the events in Donetsk on 31 October 2003.

M. Tomenko points out in his letter that Article 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine envisages the responsibility for impediment to the legal profes-sional activities of journalists. Besides, the Criminal Code envisages the re-sponsibility for threatening with murder (Article 129) or physical violence of an official or a citizen, who fulfills the civil duty (Article 350).

According to the Criminal-Procedural Code of Ukraine, the pre-trial in-vestigation of the cases connected with Articles 171 and 350 of the Criminal Code must be carried out by the organs of prosecution. So, Mykola Tomenko asks the first deputy of the General Prosecutor to conduct the urgent check of the information adduced in the complaint and to take the appropriate measures.

When the Donetsk newspaper «Ostrov» started to publish the article of V. Boyko about the criminal business of G. Vasylyev, somebody began to threaten the journalist by phone. Besides, some strangers tried to get to Boyko’s flat, where the documents were stored that proved the participation of the workers of the Donetsk prosecutor’s office in the creation of the criminal group under the direction of the first vice-speaker. The editorial board of «Os-trov» had to change the place of its work.

On 11 November the editorial board got the phone call from the publish-ing house «Donetchina», where the weekly was printed. Representative of the publishing house informed that the newspaper would not be printed, if it would contain the end of V. Boyko’s article about the criminal activities of G. Vasylyev and his assistant R. Kuzmin. The head of the technological depart-ment of the publishing house said that the workers of the editorial board had to show her the typographical films, that she would check the films and only then would give the permission to print the issue. Evhen Talyshev, the editor-in-chief of «Ostrov», refused from the censorship.

On the next day, 12 November, at 9:40 a.m., tough young men came to the building, where the editorial board had been located several days before.

255

Their car has the state registration number 512-38 . When the uninvited guests learned that the editorial board had moved, they drove away.

Two hours later Volodymir Diatlovskiy, the main technologist of the pub-lishing house «Donetchina», informed the editorial board that Vasyl Kovaliov, the head of the board of this joint-stock company, ordered to stop the printing of the newspaper. At that the publishing house was ready to give back the money paid for printing and to pay the forfeit envisaged by the contract. How-ever, the editorial board managed to print the newspaper in another printing shop. Yet, the newspaper was got by none of 900 post-offices of the oblast, which had to distribute the education according to the contract with the Do-netsk branch of «Ukrposhta»: at night R. Kuzmin bought all the run.

Now the editorial board of the newspaper tries to solve the question about printing of the additional run of the issue with V. Boyko’s article. The full text of this article is published on the Internet site: http://www.cripo.com.ua/?sect-_id=2&aid=1609

(13 November 2003, www.maidan.org.ua)

New General Prosecutor Gennadiy Vasylyev ordered to insti-tute the criminal case against journalist Volodymir Boyko For the third time during last 18 months the Donetsk journalist became the

accused in the criminal case, which had been closed more than once because of the absence of corpus delicti.

The criminal case against Boyko was instituted by V. Boychuk, the prose-cutor of the Kujbyshevskiy district of Donetsk, on 10 May 2002 after the publication in the Internet edition «Ukraina kriminalna» of Boyko’s article, in which the author told about the morbid interest of MP G. Vasylyev to other's property. The order to punish the journalist was given to tax inspection. The of-ficers of tax militia detained Boyko in the office of the Donetsk newspaper «Sa-lon» and sent him to custody for 10 days on suspicion of dodging from paying taxes. Yet, on 9 August the law-enforcers had to close the case because of the ab-sence of corpus delicti in the actions of V. Boyko. A week later the Appeal court of the Donetsk oblast recognized that the detainment of journalist was il-legal, and after several more days Boyko got the certificate from tax inspection about the absence of the criminal event.

Two months after these events Boyko made the series of reportages from Lugansk, in which reportages he elucidated the course of «Feldman’s case» fabricated by Piskun. The General Prosecutor’s office, headed by the main «per-sonage» of these publications, reversed the decision about the closure of the case and passed it for investigation to tax militia of the Lugansk (!) oblast. In spite of the tremendous efforts of the investigating officer, in March 2003 the case was closed again. And again because of the absence of corpus delicti.

256

Yet, the journalist did not draw the proper conclusions and published in «Ukraina kriminalna» and in the Donetsk newspaper «Ostrov» the article about the illegal business of Gennadiy Vasylyev. At once after the publication of the article, on 7 November a stranger phoned to Boyko and promised «to beat his brains out» for his professional activities. On 10 November several tough young men came to the building, which had been rented by the editorial board of «Ostov» several days before, and asked about the new address of the edition. On the next day the head of the technological department of the pub-lishing house «Donetchina, which printed the newspaper, informed the editor-in-chief that the next issue of the newspaper would be printed only after the deletion of Boyko’s article from it. The editor refused from the censorship. On 12 November the publishing house refused to print the edition. The issue was printed in other printing shop, but at night the part of the run, which had to be distributed through post offices of the Donetsk oblast, was bought by strang-ers.

The militia did not inform V. Boyko on the results of consideration of his complaint about the threats, and MP Yu. Lutsenko had to interfere in the situa-tion. After this interference, 20 days after the threats, the law-enforcers refused to start the criminal case. Yu. Lyshenko, the head of the Kyivskiy district mili-tia precinct of Donetsk, informed the journalist that there was no corpus delicti in the actions of the stranger, since the threats «to beat the brains out» were connected with journalist’s professional activities, and Article 129 of theCriminal Code (threatening with murder) did not envisage any responsibility for this.

However, G. Vasylyev resolved to complete the case of V. Boyko. At first his elder brother, the head of the tax administration in the Donetsk oblast, declared, through his representative, that he did not acknowledge the court de-cision about the illegality of Boyko’s detention and reckoned that the prosecu-tor’s office and tax militia were absolutely right holding the journalist in the prison. On 27 November 2003 it became known that the General Prosecutor’s office for the umpteenth time cancelled the resolution about the closure of the criminal case started 18 months ago against V. Boyko. This means that the journalist became an accused again, and can be sent to custody at any moment. By the way, he was not even informed about the repeated opening of the case.

It is noteworthy that, as early as in February 2003, Boyko appealed to court against the resolution about the institution of the criminal case, but the decision on this appeal is not issued until now, although such cases must be considered immediately. The journalist complained to the council of judges, to O. Kondratyev, the head of the Appeal court of the Donetsk oblast, and to the General Prosecutor’s office. Yet, V. Boyko gets the answers that the court can-not consider his complaint and to solve the question about the illegality of

257

institution of the criminal case because the prosecutor’s office refuses to pre-sent the materials of the case.

(«Svoboda», No. 47, 2-8 December 2003)

258

CONFLICTS CONNECTED WITH LICENSINGOF ELECTRONIC MASS MEDIA

Mykola Tomenko: Presidential administration and govern-ment are working towards the liquidation of state TV channels According to the words of Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Parliamen-

tary Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, the Presi-dential administration and government are working towards the liquidation of state TV channels. To put it more exact, the state officials are doing their best «to bankrupt all state TV and radio companies in order to sell them to the oli-garchic structures». As an example, Tomenko describes the situation, which exists now in Chernivtsy. The Chernivtsy oblast TV and radio company re-fused to take part in the competition for broadcasting at the 60th frequency. As a result, the TV channel was given to the TRC «TET» owned by Igor Surkis. Similar situation arose in Ternopil. The oblast TRC unexpectedly quitted the participation in the competition, and the company «TET» won again. To-menko also informs that the government proposed the evidently understated budget of state television for the next year.

Until now the power has not approve any concrete decision concerning the communal mass media. Although the Parliament approved the law on communal TV companies, this law has not revealed itself yet.

(«Bez tsenzury», No. 33, 24-30 October 2003)

«Tax inspection will block the accounts of my company,the communication committee will disconnect us from the fre-quency, at which we are working. I do not know what methods of struggle with me the law-enforcers will invent» Some days ago Sergiy Sholokh, the general manager of the radio com-

pany «Kontinent», stated that he had got the information from the trustworthy source that the Presidential Administration allegedly «issued the unofficial or-der to law-enforcing organs, structures of the State communication committee and tax organs to apply the appropriate measures for cessation of the work of «Kontinent».

259

«Most probably, the tax inspection will block the accounts of my com-pany, the communication committee will disconnect us from the frequency, at which we are working. I do not know what methods of struggle with me the law-enforcers will invent», said S. Sholokh.

«Kontinent» is an independent radio company, it excels as a mass media, which makes public the acute materials criticizing the power. In particular, ra-dio «Kontinent» transmits the features of foreign informational services: «The Voice of America», «BBC», «Deutche Welle» and «Polske Radio».

Nobody knows whether the source mentioned by Sholokh is really trust-worthy, but the radio company had the conflict with state agencies before. In the beginning of 2001 the National Council in charge of TV and radio broad-casting took the decision about the deprivation of radio «Kontinent» of the right to broadcast. The radio station remained in the air because it handed the appeal against the decision of the National Council to the European Court of human rights. According to international legal norms and obligations, «Konti-nent» has the right to broadcast until the end of consideration of the case in the European Court.

In the connection with the latest information Sergiy Sholokh turned to President Leonid Kuchma with the open letter, in which he pointed out that «the pressure on mass media will evoke the negative reaction of Western countries and will be advantageous, first of all, to Russia».

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 203, 1 November 2003)

Poltava TV company «UTA» was an alternative to state TV. Now it does not exist Ludmila Kucherenko, the President of the Poltava oblast media club: Since 18 June 2003 the Poltava TV and radio company «UTA» stopped

to broadcast on the 24th TV channel, on which it had worked for many years. During the parliamentary election campaign the TRC «UTA» cooperated

with Kyiv TV company «TET». After the election, in November 2002, «TET» handed a suit against «UTA» demanding to pay the compensation equal to 9,300,000 hryvnas for violating the conditions of the contract. The sum of the claim exceeded the actives of the TV company more than in three times. By the opinion of Pavel Moiseev, a lawyer of «Internews-Ukraine», to whom the TRC «UTA» turned for the legal aid, the demanded sum and other circum-stances of the case showed that the actions of the claimant were directed at the destruction of the company. By the way, just at that time the National council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting had to announce the competition for the use of the 24th channel, which was used then by the TRC «UTA».

Further events confirmed that the persecution of the TRC «UTA» was «ordered» by some influential persons, since on the next day after the claim was handed to the economic court of the Poltava oblast the court issued the

260

resolution about the arrest of the property and bank accounts of the TV com-pany and sent this resolution to the state executive service. The executors ful-filled the decision quickly: on the next day the accounts of «UTA» were ar-rested (usually this procedure takes 2-4 weeks). As a result, the activities of the company were almost paralyzed.

The TRC «UTA» handed the counter-claim on the acknowledgement of the invalidity of the contract between «UTA» and the TRC «TET».

The economic court of the Poltava oblast approved the decision on the collection from the TRC «UTA» of 9,300,000 UAH of compensation and 17,118 UAH of legal expenses. At that, according to the words of lawyer of «Unternews-Ukraine» Pavel Moiseev, the court ignored all explanations of the TRC «UTA», refused to satisfy its counter-claim and announced a part of the decision in the absence of the parties, thus brutally violating the norms of the material and procedural right.

On 12 March 2003 the Kharkov appeal economic court considered the appeal of the TRC «UTA» and acknowledged the contract between the TRCs «UTA» and «TET» to be invalid. «TET» did not appeal against this decision.

Meanwhile the TRC «UTA» handed the documents for the participation in the competition of the National council for the right to use the 24th channel, since the term of their license had finished by that time. At the first sitting of the National council the votes of eight members of the council divided into two equal parts: 4 members voted «for» and 4 – «against». It is interesting that Lilia Mironovich, the representative of the National council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting in the Poltava oblast and a former referent of P. Shemet, the deputy head of the Poltava oblast administration), who, by logics, had to protect the interests of the Poltava TV company, voted for giving the li-cense… to the Kyiv TRC «TET», loyal to the SDPU (u). The members of the sit-ting ignored the fact that the TRC «UTA» had the most modern equipment in Pol-tava and the many-year experience of work.

In several weeks, at another sitting of the National council, the final deci-sion was taken: the 24th Poltava channel was given to the TRC «TET». By the way, one of the members of the National Council, who took part in the voting, said: «Sorry, but I shall vote for «TET», although I like your company more. Yet, a person, who had financed my election campaign, asked me to vote so. I cannot refuse.»

However, there was some hope yet that the TRC «UTA», which had be-come really independent after the numerous ordeals with political censorship, would return to the Poltava air, and the Poltava dwellers would have the TV channel alternative to state ones. Yet, the results of the competition for another frequency were the same as the previous time: the competition was won by the Donetsk TV company…

(«Prava ludyny» (English version), Kharkov, November 2003)

261

Commentary of Vitaliy Shevchenko, a deputy head of the Na-tional Council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting: «This story is lasting for many months. The competition, in which

«UTA» took part, was one of tens of competitions that were held at that time. And if one would ask a member of the National Council why he had voted for this or that TV company, he would answer that he did that on the basis of the current understanding of the situation. I, for example, voted for «UTA», but it was useless because there were only two votes for this company. Naturally, I comprehend that the attitude to «UTA» at the previous competition was unfair. Yet, theoretically, that was a quite new competition, and it was won by one of the pretenders.

(«Telekritika») («The Poltava oblast media club, No. 56, 21 November 2003)

262

VIOLATION OF PRIVACY

Publication of the lists of debtors in the press In winter 2003 the newspaper «Vgoru» (No. 8 of 20 February 2003) pub-

lished the article by Aleksandr Burmagin, which told about the methods ap-plied by Skadovsk authorities and the newspaper «Chernomorets» for the struggle with the people, who did not pay for communal services. The news-paper «Chernomorets» regularly published the lists of debtors with their sur-names, addresses and sums of the debt.

Probably, the officials of the Kherson mayor’s office liked the illegal practice of their Skadovsk colleagues: they also began to publish such lists in the newspaper «Khersonskiy visnyk». It is beyond belief that the workers of the newspapers did not know that they were violating the Ukrainian laws!

(«Vgoru», Kherson, No. 30, 24 July 2003)

Family «cassette scandal» (Lviv) Galina Tereshchuk, radio «Liberty»: Recently the Galytskiy district court of Lviv has begun to consider the

case, which can be called a family «cassette scandal». Natalya Zdorova turned to court with the claim against her former husband and his mother, who, as the ex-wife suspected, illegally wiretapped her phone talks.

There is nothing extraordinary in this story except one detail: the former mother-in-law works in the oblast USS directorate as an office-cleaner. The ex-husband brought to N. Zdorova the copy of his application about divorce and the audiocassette with the record of her phone talks. Natalya Zdorova turned to the oblast prosecutor’s office with the demand to start the criminal case after the fact of illegal wiretapping of her private phone talks. She ex-pressed the suspicion that the mother of her husband had organized the wire-tapping. The plaintiff also turned for the explanations to the oblast USS direc-torate and got the response that her former mother-in-law even had no service certificate of the USS.

The investigating officer of the prosecutor’s office did not establish the fact of the violation of confidentiality of phone talks of N. Zdorova. The claim was rejected because of the absence of corpus delicti. This conclusion was

263

drawn on the basis of the explanations of the former husband and mother-in-law of Natalya.

The woman turned with the complaint to the General Prosecutor of Ukraine. She informed that the cassette really existed, but the oblast prosecu-tor’s office had not even listened to the record. The case was passed from Kyiv to the oblast prosecutor’s office again for the additional investigation.

Ms. Zdorova turned with the complaint to the Galytskiy district court of Lviv. At the first court sitting the representative of the prosecutor’s office told that he was sure that the USS had no connection with this story. Yet, the claimant continues to demand from the prosecutor’s office to find the persons, who wire-tapped her talks. Now the court consideration is suspended and the prosecutor’s office proceeds with the investigation of this unexampled case.

However, I want to point out that, according to the Criminal Code, the viola-tion of the confidence of correspondence, phone talks or electronic correspon-dence is punished with the fine from 50 to 100 minimum untaxed wages, or the reformative works for the term up to two years, or the restriction of liberty for the term up to three years. The obtaining of information is punished with the fine from 100 to 200 minimum untaxed wages, or the restriction of liberty for the term up to four years, or the incarceration for the same term.

(«Prava ludyny» (Ukrainian version), No. 22, 1-15 August 2003)

The USS wants to know the public opinion about the draftof the law on the monitoring of telecommunications «Interfax-Ukraina» informs that the Ukrainian Security Service proposes

to all interested parties to express their opinions on the draft of the law devel-oped by the USS on the creation of the special system of the monitoring of telecommunications.

On 27 August the USS press service spread the statement, which read that the text of the draft was placed on the official site of the USS, that the se-curity service hoped «to receive the comments, remarks and suggestions from all interested organizations and persons» and that these comments and sugges-tions would be taken into account in the process of discussing the draft.

The document presented to the Parliament envisages the creation of the unified monitoring system for the secret collection of information during the ODA, intelligence and counterespionage activities.

The USS declares in its statement that this draft does not extend the au-thorities of law-enforcing organs, but envisages the technical and organiza-tional measures for the conduction of the monitoring on the legal grounds. Be-sides, the adoption of the law will not require from the state any additional ma-terial or other expenses.

«The monitoring of telecommunications realized on the legal grounds is a demand of our time caused by the complicated criminal situation that has formed in the world», declares the USS.

264

Representatives of the special service point out that the development of informational technologies and improvement of the telecommunication infra-structure of Ukraine with its gradual integration into the international informa-tional space result in the necessity of the adequate alteration of the legislation concerning the protection of the rights of the people, community and state in the informational sphere.

«This problem becomes especially significant, if to take into account the increase of the number of the cases of cybernetic crimes and the use of the in-formational technologies by terrorist groups», the USS representatives reckon.

The unified monitoring system, according to the law draft, will be cre-ated and maintained by the USS. The right to use this system will be rendered to the organs that will have the right, on the basis of the corresponding laws, for the secret collection of information from the communication channels.

By the information of Korrespondent.net, the Cabinet of Ministers has already presented the draft «On the monitoring of telecommunications» for consideration by the Parliament.

Now, according to the law on the ODA, the right for the secret collection of information (approved by court) is rendered to some units of militia, the USS, frontier troops, Directorate of state guard, special units of tax militia, State tax administration, Penitentiary Department and the intelligence service of the Ministry of Defense.

For the introduction of the monitoring system all operators of telecom-munications will have to purchase (at their own expense) the equipment for the monitoring and to install it on their territory. The technical maintenance of the equipment will be also realized at the expense of operators. The tools for the system control will be situated on the territories occupied by the USS.

Igor Diadiura, the head of the executive committee of the all-Ukrainian public organization «Ukrainian Internet community», criticized this law draft. He believes that the Parliament must reject the draft and to direct it for revi-sion, in particular because of the great number of the conditions of the work of the monitoring system, which are not concretized in the draft.

(www.korrespondent.net 27 August 2003, «Prava ludyny» (English version), August 2003)

Again about the monitoring Igor Diadiura, Kyiv: I want to continue the discussion concerning the monitoring, so I am go-

ing to state my attitude to the new draft of the law «On the monitoring of tele-communications».

The Cabinet of Ministers introduced this law draft to the Supreme Rada. The draft was developed in the framework of the fulfillment of «anti-terrorist» normative acts (the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers and the Edict of the

265

President) adopted at the end of 2001 after the events of 11 September in the USA.

Since the question of the monitoring is closely connected with citizens’ right for privacy, in particular, for the confidentiality of phone talks and corre-spondence, the presented law draft must be essentially recast.

I reckon that this recast should mainly consist in the concretization of the following principal conditions of the introduction and exploitation of the monitoring system.

1. PERMISSION TO CONDUCT THE MONITORING The draft (Article 5) states that the monitoring is realized after a court de-

cision. Yet, in practice, many organs, which carry out the ODA, as well as counterespionage and intelligence activities, get the permission for the access to the monitoring system not from court, but from the special organ: the Secu-rity Service of Ukraine (Article 9 of the draft). So, the Security Service gives the permission to itself promising «to be honest».

In my opinion, a terminal of the monitoring system must be placed in a court organ, and the access to the system must be rendered only from this ter-minal, only to the precisely determined officials, for the precisely determined term and with obligatory log-keeping. The system of the monitoring must the projected and realized in the way that should make impossible the access to any data about any person, except the data that were inputted from the court terminal and logged.

2. CONTROL OVER THE LOG Article 5 of the draft envisages keeping the log, but it is known only that

the log-keeping will be realized «by means of new informational technolo-gies» and «the procedure of keeping and storage of the log of the monitoring of telecommunications will be established by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine».

I think that such vagueness is inadmissible, as well as the reduction of the role of such important question as the independent control over the use of the monitoring system, which is extremely dangerous for human rights.

The concrete procedures of the control over the monitoring must be stipu-lated in details by this Law. The technical equipment for keeping the log must be placed in the prosecutor’s office, and the ombudsperson must have the ac-cess to the log.

3. ACCESS TO DATA AFTER THE CLOSURE OF A CASE Article 12 envisages the right of citizens «to obtain, in the accordance to

the legal procedure, the written explanations concerning the restriction of their rights and freedoms during the monitoring of telecommunications and to ap-peal against these activities», but the law stipulates neither the concrete proce-dure of obtaining the explanations, nor the duty of the officials to give the ex-

266

planations, nor the corresponding right for apatrides, foreigners and (espe-cially!) juridical persons and groups of persons, who also, according to Arti-cle 1, are «the objects of monitoring».

In my opinion, after the closure of a case and after the end of the term of the monitoring established by court, as well as in all other cases of stopping the monitoring, «the physical or juridical person (or a group of persons)» must obtain the detailed log of the monitoring concerning them for the further ap-peal to court (if needed) against the activities of the «anti-terrorist» organs. Strict criminal responsibility of the officials and the compensation of the in-flicted damage by the Ukrainian state should be envisaged, if such log would not be presented or would be incomplete.

4. TECHNICAL MEANS FOR THE MONITORING AND LOG-KEEPING

The draft does not contain any provisions concerning the technical means, except «the purchase or development after the agreement». Such «de-velopment», «certification» and «meeting the requirements» result, in fact, in the appearance of one provider of the overpriced «certified systems and ser-vices» or in the necessity of establishing friendly, but not free of charge rela-tions with the inspectors. Another problem is the software for the monitoring system, which contents are unknown, but in which one must confide, since it was created by «honest people». I believe that the hardware, which is mounted in the providing companies, should have the unified computer base, which can be bought anywhere. The software must have the open code, from which the algorithm of the monitoring should be comprehensible. The checksum of the compiled code should be accessible from outside for tracing the uncertified access.

I want to point out that the access should be provided to the source code of the software and the checksum, but not to the identification codes of sub-scribers, service data or the contents of the communication sessions (terminol-ogy of the law draft). This will not impede the competent organs to conduct the legal monitoring, but this will create the opportunity to other, not less competent, organs to control the use of the monitoring systems and to protect the rights of «the objects of monitoring».

5. ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE MONITORING I reckon that the introduction of the monitoring systems is economically

expedient only for great providing companies, who have thousands or ten of thousands of customers. It is senseless to install the expensive monitoring sys-tems in the local networks, in small providing companies, at village telephone stations, etc. It is quite enough to use in such cases the existing practice of ob-taining information from the operator (provider). By the way, we do not know

267

about any attempt of a Ukrainian operator or provider to disobey the legal de-mand of the competent organs connected with obtaining this information.

Such practice will liquidate the financial problem – the cost of the moni-toring system is not very onerous for a great providing company, but the at-tempts to introduce the monitoring in small networks will hamper the devel-opment of telecommunications in the remote and sparsely populated districts.

The draft must be analyzed more thoroughly, but even now I think that the Ukrainian Internet Association should turn to the committees and fractions of the Supreme Rada with the following propositions:

– to reject the draft of the law «On the monitoring of telecommunica-tions» presented by the Cabinet of Ministers and to direct the draft for the re-vision;

– to create (a) transparent, (b) open and (c) competent deliberative organ of the Supreme Rada in charge of the questions of information and telecom-munications; representatives of the real business circles and the real public or-ganizations (and not «tame» ones) should take part in the work of this organ.

(«Prava ludyny» (English version), Kharkov, October 2003)

Internet Association of Ukraine states that problem existsin Ukraine concerning the observance of citizens’ right for the privacy of correspondence The Internet Association of Ukraine (IAU) delivered the alternative

speech at the conference conducted by the Organization for security and coop-eration. The conference was held on 6-17 October 2003 in Warsaw. A repre-sentative of the Internet Association stated that there were some problems con-cerning the observance of citizens’ right for the privacy of correspondence.

This information was given in the press release of the IAU. The press re-lease reads that the report on the violations of privacy in the Internet, which was prepared by the IAU with the support of the International Foundation «Vidrod-jennia», contained the analysis of the role of the professional approach in the realization of state regulation in the sphere of the Internet. In particular, the question is considered in the report, which worries now the Ukrainian Internet-providers: Order No. 122 of the State committee of communications of 17 June 2002, which, among all, introduces the demand to install the equipment for monitoring in all companies providing the electronic communication ser-vices, although the Ukrainian legislation does not envisage the monitoring of information and restriction of the right for the privacy of correspondence. It is pointed out in the press release that such monitoring is illegal. The monitoring will result in the absolute and uncontrolled access of the Security Service to the informational flows in the Internet, including the confidential information

268

and private correspondence. The IAU regards as inadmissible such violation of the declaration on human rights.

The report of the IAU also reviews the legislative processes in the Internet sphere in Ukraine. In particular, in the opinion of the authors of the project, who refer to the experts working in this sphere, the adoption of the law drafts «On the monitoring of telecommunications» and «On the protection of per-sonal data» will result in negative consequences concerning not only the de-velopment of the Ukrainian segment of the Internet, but also other spheres of so-cial life.

(«Yuridichny Visnyk Ukrainy», No. 42, 18-24 October 2003; «Maydan», 15 October 2003)

MPs did not endorse the draft of the law on the UnifiedRegister of personal data The Supreme Rada Committee in charge of state structure and local self-

rule did not endorse the law on the Unified Register of personal data. The law draft stipulates the organizational, juridical and economic grounds of the crea-tion and maintenance of the unified system of the registration and identifica-tion of the persons, who permanently reside in Ukraine.

The draft establishes the procedure of forming the informational fund of the Unified Register and the procedure of the registration of the information about a person: the data obtained from the corresponding state organs and di-rectly from the persons will be recorded in the electronic form by the registra-tion organs. At that a physical person will have the right to register the information about his/her residence on his/her own, and this will not be obligatory, communi-cates the Informational directorate of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine.

So, the adoption of the law will create the conditions for the complete re-alization of the constitutional right of physical persons, who stay in Ukraine on the legal grounds, to reside where they want. This is the main difference be-tween the proposed principle of registration, which has the «informative» character, and the «permissive» propiska institute that exists now.

The members of the Committee believe that one of the essential draw-backs of the draft is the absence of distinct definition of rights and duties of the organs of registration of personal data and the administrator of the Unified register, of the mechanisms of the cooperation of these organs, the procedure of the renovation of the data in the Register and the procedure of the appoint-ment to the post of the administrator of the Unified Register.

The draft also ignores the acute problem of registration of the homeless. Definitions of some terms, which are used in the draft, are absent, for example, «personal data» and «unique program-technical key-identifier». The defini-

269

tions of such terms as «apatrides» and «foreigners» differ from the definitions given in the Law of Ukraine «On the Ukrainian citizenship».

It is also noteworthy that the realization of the draft provisions will de-mand the expenditures from the State Budget of Ukraine, but the accompany-ing documents to the draft do not contain any propositions concerning its fi-nancing, and this is a violation of the Regulations of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine. Besides, the MPs pointed out that the necessity existed to regulate legislatively the activities connected with the collection of personal data and guaranteeing the purposeful use of these data in the interests of human rights and national security.

The adoption of the discussed law draft is necessary now, since we need the mechanism, which would effectively promote the realization of citizens’ rights and would be directed at the harmonization of the system of registration of physical persons in the compliance with European norms.

Secretariat of the Council of Ukrainian human rights protecting organizations www.rupor.org

«Prava Ludyny», No. 10, 2003 (October)

Round table for discussing the problems of passport system in Ukraine was held in the Committee in charge of human rights, national minorities and interethnic relations On 21 October Gennadiy Udovenko, the Head of the Committee, an-

nounced that the Committee was discussing the problems connected with the reform of the passport system. On 16 December 2002 the round table on the questions of the reform of registration system was held in the committee with the support of the OSCE Bureau of Democratic Institutes and Human Rights, and on 31 March 2002 the round table «Legislative settlement of the questions of the freedom of movement and free choice of the place of residence» was conducted with the support of the same organization. The increase of interest in these problems is caused, first of all, by the intensification of the legislative activities in this sphere. The progressive solution of this problem is one of the decisive factors of the development of democratic civil society in Ukraine and the provision of citizens’ rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.

The head of the committee pointed out that the Committee was continu-ing the work in this direction. One of the additional stimuli for the considera-tion of the question of reforming the passport system at the «round table» was the elaboration by the Committee of the draft of the law on the introduction of changes to some laws on Ukraine concerning the improvement of the guaran-tees of citizens’ right for the freedom of movement (author of the draft – MP D. Zhvzniya). The majority of the Committee members endorsed the concep-tion of this draft. At the same time, the members made a number of proposi-

270

tions both of organizational and conceptual character. In particular, the MPs expressed their anxiety about the exchange of passports envisaged by the law draft.

G. Udovenko pointed out that, organizing the round table and the discus-sion of the reform of the passport system, they wanted to promote the devel-opment of the proper legislative base on guaranteeing the constitutional rights and fundamental freedoms of citizens in conformity with the principles of de-mocratic law-abiding state and universally recognized international standards.

O. Perov, the manager of the State department in charge of the questions of citizenship, immigration and registration of physical persons, delivered the report about the constitutional rights of citizens for the freedom of movement and for the free choice of the place of residence, as well as about bringing the legal norms of Ukraine into accord with the international standards.

G. Udovenko dwelled on some key questions of legislative regulation of the problems of the passport system in Ukraine. In particular, he stated that, during the consideration of the main goals of the introduction of registration of physical persons, it would be necessary to attend to the following demands to the basic draft:

– complete agreement with the Ukrainian Constitution and other laws; – concordance with the international legal mechanisms concerning this

sphere; – creation of the mechanism for the protection of the right of physical

persons for the freedom of movement and for the free choice of the place of resi-dence;

– guaranteed use of personal data only in the interests of human rights protection and the protection of national security;

– creation of the automatized system of personal registration of physical persons;

– monitoring and prognostication of the demographic situation in the state; – maximal simplification of the procedure of issuing the documents that

identify physical persons and confirm the Ukrainian citizenship; – providing the guaranteed services to citizens at the places of their regis-

tration. The participants of the round table discussed many actual problems con-

cerning the passport system in Ukraine. Taking into account the constitutional right of citizens for the freedom of movement and for the free choice of the place of residence, the participants emphasized that a number of legislative, organizational and practical measures were realized in Ukraine in the sphere of citizenship, migration and the development of the corresponding state institu-tions for guaranteeing the permanent juridical relations between the state and citizens for the fulfillment of mutual rights and duties.

271

In the concluding remarks Head of the Committee G. Udovenko said that the presented information would be extremely useful for the further work on the problems of reforming the passport system in Ukraine and the questions connected with these problems.

MPs, representatives of the Presidential Administration, Cabinet of Min-isters of Ukraine, ministries and agencies, as well as representatives of the international organizations accredited in Ukraine, took part in the round table.

Secretariat of the Council of Ukrainian human rights protecting organizations www.rupor.org

«Prava Ludyny», No. 10, 2003 (October)

272

Legal principles of the monitoring of telecommunications Evhen Zakharov, the Kharkov group for human rights protection (Report at the public hearings of the draft of the Law of Ukraine «On the

monitoring of telecommunications», Kyiv, 26 November 2003):Article 31 of the Constitution guarantees the confidence of correspon-

dence, telephone talks, telegraph and other correspondence. The exceptions may be permitted only by court and only in the cases envisaged by law «with the aim to prevent a crime or to learn the truth during investigation of a crimi-nal case, if there are no other ways to get the information».

The procedure of realization of such exceptional measures is regulated by the Law of Ukraine «On the ODA», which was adopted on 18 February 1992 (with numerous amendments and changes introduced in 1992-2003) and Arti-cle 187 of the Criminal-Procedural Code (version of 21 June 2001).

According to part 1 Article 5 of the draft, the monitoring «is realized with the aim of search and fixation of factual data about the unlawful actions of separate persons and groups, espionage and subversive activities of foreign special services and organizations, as well as getting the information con-nected with the security of citizens, society and state». This vague and indis-tinct definition is made more accurate owing to the remark that the monitoring is realized exceptionally as a method of the ODA, intelligence and counteres-pionage activities on the basis of corresponding laws. Part 5 Article 9 of the Law on the ODA reads: «The violation of rights and freedoms of physical and juridical persons during the ODA is prohibited. Some concrete cases of the re-striction of these rights and freedoms have the exceptional and temporary character and may be applied only after a corresponding court decision and only to a person, whose actions contain the features of a grave or especially grave crime, or, in the cases envisaged by the Ukrainian legislation, for the protection of rights and freedoms of other persons and the security of the soci-ety». Thus, the monitoring may be realized only after a court decision in the cases, where a grave or especially grave crime was committed.

It is noteworthy that part 14 Article 9 contains somewhat different defini-tion: «The ODA connected with the temporary restriction of human rights are carried out with the aim to prevent grave or especially grave crimes, their stoppage and disclosure, search of the persons dodging from criminal respon-sibility or missing, protection of life, health, dwelling and property of the workers of court and law-enforcing organs, struggle with espionage and sub-versive activities directed against Ukraine. If the necessity exists to realize these measures immediately, then the detective department must, within 24 hours, inform a court or a prosecutor about the realization and grounds for the application of these measures». We want to point out that part 5 mentions only the ODA applied to a concrete person, whereas part 14 – the ODA that are ap-

273

plied not only to concrete person. In the opinion of Sweden professor Dennis Tellborg1, the main goal of the secret supervision is not the search of a crimi-nal, but the establishment of the very presence of the crime. When special ser-vices carry out the detective activities directed against the organized crime, drug traffickers, etc., they work before the commitment of the crime, and the aim of these ODA is to collect the information about a criminal, criminal group of possible violence actions (for instance, a terrorist act). In other words, it is frequently impossible to concretize the aim of the supervision on the stage, when the appeal is handed to court about the permission for this su-pervision. In such cases the obtaining of the permission becomes senseless, and the special services, in fact, can organize the supervision without any court control. So, the procedure of obtaining the court sanction must be dis-tinctly defined by laws, and the formulation of the guarantees against the mis-uses becomes the most important question.

Unfortunately, the procedure of issuing the court permission is still based on Letter of the Supreme Court No. 16/6 of 19 November 1996 «On the tem-porary procedure of consideration of the materials about issuing permission for getting into dwelling or other estate of a person, seizure of correspondence and the collection of information from communication channels (telephone talks, telegraph and other correspondence)». The letter contains only general principles of issuing the permission for realizing the ODA. Neither the maxi-mal term of validity of the permission nor the term, for which the permission may be prolonged, are stipulated. The corresponding laws of other countries clearly stipulate the period of the action of such permission: 4 months in France, 3 – in Germany, 1 – in Finland and Sweden, 1.5 – in Hungary, 6 – in Russia, etc. Earlier this term in Ukraine was equal to 6 months, since the norm existed about the destruction of case materials, if any data confirming the commitment of a crime by the person, whom the ODA concerned, had not been found. Yet, this norm was abolished.

Items 6 and 7 of the Letter of the Supreme Court are also rather doubtful. However, we will not analyze the provisions of this letter. I can understand the Supreme Court, which had to issue this document within a very short time. But I cannot understand the legislators, who still have not regulated the procedure of issuing and prolonging the sanction for realization of the ODA restricting the constitutional rights of citizens. Yet, the Law on the ODA was changed 11 times since 1996! It is noteworthy that the procedure of issuing the permission for seizure of correspondence and the collection of information from commu-nication channels during the investigation of criminal cases is described in de-tails in Article 187 of the Criminal-Procedural Code, but this Article also does

1 Wiretapping in international right and legislation of eleven European countries. – Kharkov: «Fo-lio», 1999. – 152 p.

274

not contain either the maximal term of the action of this permission or the pro-vision on regular court control. And the procedure of issuing the permission for getting into dwelling or other estate is not regulated by the CPC at all.

Thus, the courts apply Letter No. 16/6, the juridical validity of which is very doubtful. This letter is not related to normative legal acts, it may not even be called a quasi-source of right, as, for example, the recommendations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Ukraine. This letter is absent in the system «LIGA-Zakon», and that is very strange, since this system contains all norma-tive acts registered by the Ministry of Justice. I turned with the request to input the Supreme Court letter into the system, but received the following response: «It is impossible to input this document of the Supreme Court to the system, since it was not made public. Besides, judging from the title, it is an internal document, so we will not be able to obtain it». So, the considered letter was not registered in the Unified register of normative acts of Ukraine. As a result, the letter may not be regarded as valid, because, according to Article 57 of the Constitution, «laws and other normative legal acts, stipulating the rights and freedoms of citizens, which were not made public in compliance with legal procedure, are invalid». I believe that this situation visually illustrates the real, and not declarative, attitude of the Ukrainian state power to human rights. At that, the scale of the secret surveillance in Ukraine is astonishing: according to the information given by a judge of the Supreme Court at a recent conference, more than 40000 permissions for collecting the information from communica-tion channels were issued in 2002, among them 4000 – in the Kharkov oblast. It should be interesting to compare these data with the number of persons ac-cused by Ukrainian courts in 2002 for the commitment of grave and especially grave crimes: 412112. So, it is logical to suggest that the ODA were, first of all, directed at the disclosure of organized groups and criminal organizations. In 2002 the law-enforcers disclosed 722 groups consisting of 3205 members, who had committed 6467 crimes. 653 persons were condemned for the crimes committed by organized groups. In 2002 in Kharkov oblast 51 or-ganized groups and 237 members of these groups were disclosed. All in all, 3793 persons were convicted. So, for what 4000 permissions for collecting the information from communication channels were issued? In my opinion, these numbers are incommensurable. Thus, it is necessary to publish the annual re-ports containing the data about the number of issued sanctions, number of re-fusals, kinds of crimes connected with the sanctions, average duration of the collection of information from the communication channels, the quantity of criminal case started after the results of the ODA, etc.

There is one more problem. The Internet ignores the state frontiers and, intercepting the correspondence of a Ukrainian citizen, the law-enforcing or- 2 These and other statistical data: «Visnyk Verkhovnogo Sudu Ukrainy», 2003, No. 3 and No. 4.

275

gans will interfere in the process of his information exchange with citizens of other countries, although they have no right to do that. Today neither the law draft nor the Law on the ODA take this into account. It is also obvious that the monitoring is something more than «the collection of information from com-munication channels» applied to concrete persons, which is stipulated by the Law on the ODA. It is seen from the demands to the monitoring system that the entire traffic would be traced, not only the traffic of the person suspected of a committed or prepared crime. That resembles the actions of a fisher, who tries to catch a fish with sweep-net. It is clear that the real goal of the monitor-ing is not to disclose a concrete criminal, but to find him, to obtain the infor-mation about the preparation to a crime or about an already committed crime. Yet, the court sanction becomes senseless under such conditions, and the op-portunities for misuses are limitless. Neither the law draft on monitoring nor the Law on the ODA consider the traffic as an object of legal regulation and, correspondingly, the question does not emerge about the guarantees of law ob-servance. However, this question is extremely important in the context of the observance of the right for privacy.

Moreover, even the guarantees that are envisaged by the draft are very unreliable, and the independent control of law observance is absent at all. Ar-ticle 10 orders to destroy the messages collected by mistake; there are no other instructions on the storage of information except the remark that the procedure of keeping, storage and use of the protocols of monitoring is stipulated by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. Article 12 reads that the information concern-ing private life, honor and dignity of citizens, which became known in the course of monitoring, may not be divulged. Article 9 of the Law on the ODA contains more serious guarantees of law observance during the ODA; these guarantees should be also applied to the monitoring system, when the monitor-ing is regarded as a method of the ODA. If the grounds for realizing the ODA exist, then a case must be instituted, otherwise the ODA are prohibited. The resolution is issued, which contains the following data: the place and time of the issue, post and surname of the person, which signed it, grounds and aim of the institution of the case. In the cases of violation of the rights and freedoms of physical or juridical persons in the course of the ODA or in the cases, where the connection of the person, to whom these actions were applied, to a crime was not confirmed, the units realizing the ODA must immediately restore the abused rights and recompense the moral and material damage. Ukrainian citi-zens and other persons have the legal right to obtain from the organs, which realized the ODA, the written explanations about the restriction of their rights and freedoms and to complain against these actions. The information concern-ing private life, honor and dignity of citizens, which became known in the course of ODA, must be destroyed, if it does not contain the information about the illegal actions (parts 1, 8, 10 and 12 of Article 9). Unfortunately, the norm

276

was removed from part 3 Article 9 about the destruction of the case materials, if the data confirming the commitment of a crime by the person, which was the object of the ODA, were not found within 6 months.

Naturally, the guarantees of law observance in the draft and in the law on the ODA must be agreed. Yet, these guarantees provide very ineffective pro-tection from the misuses, especially if to compare them with the guarantees in German of Hungarian laws, which envisage the parliamentary supervision over the legality of the interception of correspondence with the assistance of supervision organs. Everyone, who reckons that his correspondence is illegally controlled by special services, may turn to these organs. It is interesting that the German committee G-10 is informed by the minister about all restricting measures permitted by him before the beginning of the interception of corre-spondence. The committee has the right to cancel the minister’s order, after which the interception must be stopped immediately, if it has been started be-fore getting the permission because of urgency. After the end of the intercep-tion the person, whose correspondence has been controlled, must be informed about these actions «if that will not harm the investigation». All unneeded in-formation must be destroyed.

In my opinion, both the draft on the monitoring of telecommunications and the more generalized law on the ODA are unsatisfactory from the view-point of guaranteeing the right for privacy and contradict the international standards in this sphere, since they contain the latent opportunities for the vio-lation of Article 8 of the European Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Let us sum up. The draft of the law on monitoring of telecommunications envisages the excessive authorities of the USS, lays the financial burden con-nected with the introduction of monitoring system on the providers, does not give the clear and correctly formulated legal grounds for the introduction of monitoring system and does not contain the reliable guarantees against mis-uses. The draft can cause the violation of human rights and fundamental free-doms, first of all, of the right for privacy. So, it should be advisable to compile this draft anew, taking into account the norms of the draft on the protection of personal data (similar changes must be introduced into the law on the ODA) and the following recommendations.

1. The list of the crimes, in the connection with which the collection of the information from the communication channels is permitted, must be de-creased; this list must be included to the law.

2. The law must be supplemented with the description of the procedure of obtaining and prolonging the sanction for the interception of correspondence and with the norm on the limitation of the term of action of this sanction. It is also desirable to pass the court decision from the computer of the judge, who is empowered to issue the permission, directly to the monitoring system, as

277

well as to provide the receiving by judge of the results of the monitoring di-rectly from the system for consideration of the question about the prolongation of the sanction.

3. The law must be supplemented with the rules of storage, use and de-struction of the collected materials, in particular, the rules of the interchange of the materials between various organs, and the rules of compiling the conclud-ing reports. Special attention should be paid to the legal regulation of the con-trol over the traffic.

4. The procedure of collecting the information from the communication channels should be more transparent, the norm must be introduced about the obligatory informing of the person, whose correspondence was intercepted, af-ter the end of the interception, and familiarization of the person with the ob-tained materials, which does not contain the information related to state secrets (similar norms exist in the laws of Germany, Austria and other countries). Un-der such conditions it will be possible to put into practice the provisions on the appellation against the illegal actions of the agencies, which carry out the ODA.

5. In order to inform the public about the scale of the secret interception of correspondence, the norms must be introduced on the publication of annual reports, which should contain the information about the number of issued sanctions for interception and the kinds of crimes, in the connection with which the decision on interception was taken, the number of the refusals to is-sue the sanctions and other information. Such practice exists in the USA and many European countries.

6. It is necessary to create the institute of independent surveillance over the legality of monitoring, which, on the one side, would receive automatically the copies of all intercepted information, and, on the other side, would con-sider the complaints against the illegal collection of information from the communication channels. These functions can be given, for instance, to the department of the secretariat of the ombudsperson in charge of the observance of the right for the protection of personal information.

7. The questions concerning the financing of the development and intro-duction of the monitoring system must be considered on the basis of the agreement between the USS and the providers, taking into account the anti-monopoly laws and the practices of the European Court concerning Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

8. The entry code of the monitoring system software and the algorithm of the monitoring must be open (by the way, the entry code and other peculiari-ties of the similar system in the USA – Carnivore – were published in autumn 2000, approximately 6 months after it became known about the work of the system).

278

«The constitutional right of citizens for privacy of correspon-dence is violated, and the guilty must be punished» The agency «Interfax»: There are about ten Internet-hosts in Ukraine that are equipped with the

monitoring facilities, stated Anatoliy Gerasimov, a deputy head of the USS, at the public hearings on the draft of the Law «On monitoring of telecommunica-tions», which was held on 26 November 2003. Among them four Internet-hosts are owned by registered providers, who have the right to render services to state organs («GlobalUkraine», «Infokom», «Elvisti» and «UkrSat»).

According to Order No. 122 of the State communication committee of 17 June 2002, one of the conditions of inclusion of a provider in the register is the installation of the equipment for monitoring.

At the same time, the expert evaluations were stated during the discus-sion. The experts assert that there are about 50 Internet-hosts with such equipment.

Aleksey Bursuk, the head of the Internet-providing company «Relkom-Ukraina», believes that installation of the monitoring equipment on the Inter-net-hosts is illegal, since the law «On monitoring of telecommunications» is not adopted yet. «Thus, the constitutional right of citizens for privacy of corre-spondence is violated, and the guilty must be punished», he reckons.

The human rights protecting organizations and the Internet association of Ukraine (IAU) expressed the similar opinions.

«We have already drew the attention of state organs to the fact that Order No. 122 contradicts the Ukrainian Constitution and international agreements, and got the answer that this situation must be studied in details», said Igor Diadiura, a member of the board of the IAU.

About 400 Internet providers are working in Ukraine, and the great pro-viding companies own several Internet-hosts.

(«Podrobnosti», 27 November 2003, 13:16)

* * *

International human rights protecting organization «Reporters withoutfrontiers» expressed its anxiety about the attempts of the USS to control the activities in the Internet and to control the electronic correspondence.

The value of everything private is not quite understandable to us, the people, who lived in the Soviet Union. Maybe, this is the reason, why almost nobody protests against the preparation of the new law draft, owing to which the USS will have the opportunity to wiretap phones and to control the elec-tronic correspondence. Yet, the inert reaction of our citizens is also caused by the incomprehension of the terms «monitoring» and «register of the Internet

279

users», as well as the undisguised indifference to this question of the majority of Ukrainian population.

Meanwhile, the IAU complained to the OBCE and presented the alterna-tive report at the conference in Warsaw. It is obvious that some state structures are interested in the creation of the system of total control.

In the opinion of Robert Menar, the general secretary of «Reporters», the Internet became the main target of the USS activities. He mentioned the at-tempts of the state organs to deprive the company «Hostmaster» of the right to administer the Ukrainian domain.ua and the activities of the USS for the le-galization of monitoring.

If the providers and telephone stations would install the equipment for in-formational monitoring and would register the Internet users, then the freedom of speech would be extirpated soon. Such control by special services is not only a violation of ethical norms and constitutional rights, but also a violation of the main principles of business, in particular, the principle of commercial secret. The special services always tried «to take the preventive measures», but even in Soviet times the prosecutor’s warrant was needed for realization of such initiatives, and the control was not so total as now. It is strange, why the special services want to interfere legally in our private life now, when Ukraine is striving for democracy?

Even if the providers would break the agreements with their clients, which agreements restrict the right to control the users, and would begin to re-alize the monitoring, this would need much time and serious financing.

Yet, some informational control in the Internet may be carried out even now: several commands from the provider’s server are enough for reading an electronic message. The search system can be used, which would find the mes-sages by key words. If a letter contains some words from the special list, then a copy of this letter would be sent to the monitoring center. At that, nobody guarantees the protection from correction, i.e. changing the contents of e-mail: the messages can be changed or lost.

(«Podrobnosti», No. 43, 6 November 2003)

Parliament started to regulate the Internet The Supreme Rada of Ukraine adopted in the third reading the Law «On

telecommunications». Along with the cancellation of the rule about free in-coming calls, which is very important for the customers, this law stipulates the opportunity for the permanent monitoring of the Internet.

In particular, Article 39 of the Law «on telecommunications» reads: «4. Operators of telecommunications must (at their own expense) install on their telecommunication networks the equipment for realizing the ODA by compe-tent organs, guarantee the proper work of this equipment, assist in the ODA and the measures for preventing the divulgence of the organizational and tacti-

280

cal methods of these activities. The operators also must guarantee the protec-tion of the equipment from the unauthorized access».

We believe that this provision will become a legal ground for the USS to make all providers of telecommunications to install the monitoring equipment, owing to which the security service would be able to control every user, in-cluding his electronic correspondence.

Thus, from the moment when the President will sign this law, every user should know that his every step in the Internet and all electronic messages will be permanently traced by special services.

The providers, in their turn, will suffer essential losses (tens of thousands dollars, according to the preliminary assessment), which will inevitably result in the growth of cost of their services.

So, in fact, the special services will spy on us at our own expense for, al-legedly, our own safety. Well, this is a real Soviet logic!

The law was adopted almost unanimously: 296 MPs voted for this law and nobody voted against.

Some time before the MPs adopted in the first reading the draft of the law «On the activities in the sphere of informatization», which regulates the Inter-net and other similar systems. 269 MPs took part in the voting, all of them supported the draft. So we see that no right for privacy exists for the MPs…

Secretariat of the Council of Ukrainian human rights protecting organizations («Prava ludyny» (English version), Kharkov, November 2003)

Dnepropetrovsk oblast: 200 Pavlograd dwellers refusedto get the identification codes 200 inhabitants of the Zapadnodonbasskiy district turned to tax inspection

with the appeal. The appealers stated that they refused to get the identification codes because of the religious views.

According to the amendment to the law «On state register of physical persons – payers of taxes and other obligatory payments» (1999), the excep-tion is made for the believers, who may not get the identification code because this action contradicts their religious views. According to the amendment, this procedure is not obligatory for such persons.

However, the experts believe that the believers, who may not get the identification code because of their religious views, but carry on the commer-cial activities, must accept the demands of the state.

There are no alternatives of the identification code. Today the passport services refuse to put some marks to passports. There

have been several cases, where court issued positive decisions on this ques-tion. For example, a dweller of Donetsk won her case: the court acknowledged the actions of tax inspection to be illegal.

281

7 November 2003 «Prava Ludyny», No. 11, 2003 (November)

282

Open appeal of human rights protectors to the President of Ukraine

To President Leonid Kuchma APPEAL

Respected President! We are turning to you in the connection with the approval of the Law of

Ukraine «On telecommunications» by the Supreme Rada of Ukraine. The hu-man rights protecting organizations reckon that this law endangers the rights of Ukrainian citizens, contradicts the interests of the society and the Ukrainian state as a whole. We have to state that, unfortunately, neither the representa-tives of parliamentary majority nor the representatives of opposition were guided by the interests of the society during the consideration of the draft.

The Law of Ukraine «On telecommunications», which was approved by the Supreme Rada, contains the norm that obliges the operators of telecommu-nications to install at their expense the equipment, which would allow the law-enforcing organs to collect the information from the communication channels. We understand that law-enforcing organs must resort to such measures for protecting the national security and guaranteeing the public order, but we also reckon that this norm will have the consequences negative for the Ukrainian society.

First, coming into force of this law in the present version means the mo-nopolization of the market of telecommunication services by several great companies; this will hamper the development of the market and competition, will impede the development of the Internet in small settlements.

Secondly, even the USS officers admit that they does not know how much the installation of the monitoring equipment will cost to the providers of the telecommunication services (and, ultimately, to the users). We are sur-prised by the willingness of the members of the Ukrainian Parliament to bur-den the Ukrainian citizens with the expenses, which amount is even unknown yet.

Thirdly, the measures for guaranteeing the state security and public order are taken in interests of all Ukrainian society, so they must be financed by all tax payers, but not only the users of telecommunications.

Fourthly, coming into effect of this law will result in the increase of the tariffs for the telecommunication services. As a result, the majority of the Ukrainian citizens will not be able to pay for these services.

Fifthly, as the Supreme Rada Main scientific and expert bureau correctly pointed out in its conclusion, the idea to install the equipment for collecting the information from the communication channels at the expense of telecom-munications providers contradicts to the norms of the operating Law of Ukraine «On entrepreneurial activities» (parts 2-3 Article 12 and part 2 Arti-

283

cle 13), in particular in the part concerning the guarantees of property rights of businessmen.

Sixthly, the Supreme Rada of Ukraine has not considered yet the law draft «On monitoring of telecommunications», which envisages the procedure of collecting the information from the communication channels. So, we think that the introduction of the norms about the installation of the monitoring equipment must be postponed until the legislation would regulate the questions of adequate protection of the constitutional right of citizens for the privacy of correspondence, the extent of the authorities of law-enforcing organs and the procedure of carrying out the monitoring.

Seventhly, the attempts of the Security Service of Ukraine to introduce its control over the access to the Internet, distribution of information, access to informational resources and domain names are realized in the drafts, prepared with the participation of the USS, such as «On telecommunications», «On monitoring of telecommunications», «On the activities in the sphere of infor-matization», and these drafts have already evoked the negative reaction of many international organizations.

We hope for your sincere intentions to promote the development of in-formatization in Ukraine and the access of the Ukrainian citizens to the Inter-net, which intentions are reflected in Edict No. 928 «On the measures for the development of the national component of the global informational network Internet and guaranteeing the broad access to this network in Ukraine» of 31 July 2000. Thus, we are asking you to use your constitutional authorities and to return the Law of Ukraine «On telecommunications» to the Supreme Rada with the proposition to introduce the proper changes.

Secretariat of the Council of Ukrainian human rights protecting organiza-tions

Sevastopol human rights protecting group Kharkov group for human rights protection Podilsk center of human rights Center of juridical and political research «SIM» Public committee of national security of Ukraine

(«Prava ludyny» (English version), Kharkov, November 2003)

Global monitoring in telecommunication networks Human rights protectors and politologists point out the inconsistency be-

tween the propositions of the USS about the introduction of the global system of monitoring in telecommunication networks and human rights, in particular, the right for privacy of correspondence. The draft of the law does not mention this right at all, it only reads that the rights and freedoms are guaranteed by the state. The document envisages neither the conditions, under which the moni-toring may be realized, nor the maximal permissible term of such monitoring. This is, allegedly, envisaged by other laws. Indeed, the draft contains the norm

284

that the permission for the collection of information from telecommunication channels must be issued by court. Yet, the experts reckon that this procedure is not regulated properly.

Now the court warrant for the collection of information from telecommu-nication channels is issued on the basis of the Letter of the Supreme Court of 1996, where only general principles of giving such permissions are stipulated. Besides, this letter may not be regarded as valid, since it was not registered in the Ministry of Justice.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian courts actively apply this doubtful, from the ju-ridical point of view, document. More than 40 thousand warrants for the col-lection of information from telecommunication channels by law-enforcing or-gans were issued during 2002. According to human rights protectors, this is much more than the similar number in Western countries.

Politologists mention one more possible purpose of the USS initiatives: to control the political activities. Representatives of the opposition are partly right in their opinion that the interception of information from the Internet and telephone lines will be used in the interests of concrete political forces, and this is especially important on the eve of Presidential election.

(«Pervaya Krymskaya», 5-11 December 2003)

More than 40 thousand permissions for the collection of infor-mation from telecommunication channels were issuedby Ukrainian courts in 2002 This number is much more than the similar number in other countries.

These data were made public by Evhen Zakharov, the head of the Kharkov group for human rights protection, at the public hearings of the law draft «On monitoring of telecommunications», which was held on Wednesday. The maximal number of such permissions (about 4000) were issued, by his words, in the Kharkov oblast.

«722 criminal groups were disclosed in 2002. These groups included 3.2 thousand persons, who committed 6.5 thousand crimes. 653 persons were con-demned for organization of crimes committed by criminal groups. All in all, 41 persons were brought to criminal responsibility. 51 criminal groups (237 persons) were uncovered in the Kharkov oblast. The number of the condemned in the oblast during the year was 3793, and the number of issued permissions for the col-lection of information was 4000. This is incomprehensible», said the human rights protector.

Mr. Zakharov reminded that the monitoring might be realized only after the court decision for the investigation of grave or especially grave crimes.

According to E. Zakharov, the procedure of issuing the court permission is realized on the basis of Letter No. 16/6 of the Supreme Court of 1996. This let-ter does not envisage the maximal period of the monitoring, and this is one of the main elements of similar legal documents in other countries. Moreover, the

285

letter was not registered in the Ministry of Justice, so, according to Article 57 of the Constitution of Ukraine, it may not be regarded as valid. Thus, the courts apply the document of doubtful political validity.

(«Zerkalo nedeli», No. 46, 29 November-5 December 2003)

286

Be careful! You are monitored! On 26 November the public hearings «On the monitoring of telecommu-

nications» was held. The adherents and opponents of the control over the users of the Internet and other telecommunications met at the hearings for the dis-cussion.

The public hearings were opened by the speech of the USS deputy head Anatoliy Gerasimov. In his speech he dwelled on the basic provisions of the law draft. In the main, he spoke about the technical aspects of monitoring and remarked that human rights were guaranteed by other laws. In particular, he pointed out that he did not see any effective system of civil control over the process of monitoring of telecommunications, which system could be introduced in Ukraine. So, the logical question appears: would somebody develop such sys-tem? Mr. Gerasimov also expressed his uncertainty whether this law would be adopted at all, since, he said, some of the provisions of the draft had been already stipulated in the recently adopted Law «On telecommunications».

«The development of the national system of monitoring and the means of the access to all operators of telecommunications is realized by the USS, to-gether with otherlaw-enforcingorgans, for many years; all in all, there exist 28 owners of licenses for the development of the means and systems of monitoring», said Anatoliy Gerasimov.

Besides, the right for using the monitoring system is rendered to seven subjects of the ODA, among them three structures with the right to control.

The second speech was delivered by Evhen Zakharov, a co-chairmanof the Kharkov group for human rights protection (the resume of the speech is given be-low. – The editor's note), who turned the attention to the fact that human rights in this sphere were not guaranteed by laws and the legislation did not corre-spond to the international standards.

For example, the procedure of issuing the sanctions for collecting the in-formation from the communication channels does not agree with the European standards. Courts still apply one legal document: Letter of the Supreme Court No. 16/6 of 19 November 1996 «On the temporary procedure of consideration of the materials about issuing permissions for getting into dwelling or other es-tate of a person, seizure of correspondence and the collection of information from communication channels (telephone talks, telegraph and other corre-spondence)». This letter was not registered either by the Ministry of Justice or in any legislative base. According to Article 57 of the Constitution of Ukraine, it is invalid. So, there exist no legal guarantees of human rights. So, what «other laws» the representatives of special services meant?

The necessity of legal guarantees of human rights is also confirmed by the fact that in 2002 more than 40000 permissions for the collection of information from communication channels were issued, and this number

287

significantly exceeded the number of the convictions for grave and especially grave crimes. So, whom the Ukrainian special services control?

Volodymir Malinkovich, a representative of the Ukrainian branch of the International Institute of humanitarian and political research, also told about the necessity of the introduction of legal guarantees of human rights into this law, in particular, by adding the special section that would regulate these ques-tions. Yet, he believes that this law is not needed in our country, because the restrictions of human rights, which have been recently introduced in the West-ern countries, are connected with the menace of terrorism, but such menace does not exist in Ukraine. At the same time, the lack of the freedom of speech exists in Ukraine, so the expediency of the adoption of this law seems to be very doubtful.

In the opinion of many participants of the hearings, this law is needed, but the main goal of this law must be the guaranteeing of human rights in the connection with the monitoring. The state, represented by the state organs,is interested only in the monitoring procedure and its introduction at the ex-pense of the telecommunications users, and not the state budget. Under the conditions, when the parliamentary majority exists, which approves the laws needed to the state, but not to the society, the adoption of some recent laws looks quite logical, as well as the assurances of the special services that the monitoring system will be created.

It should be also noted that to date, according to the information of the State committee of communications, 4 providers have already installed the monitoring equipment. A. Gerasimov affirms that there are already 10 such providers, and, by the assessment of the representatives of business circles, this number is about 50. However, we want to remind that there exists no legal base for the infringement on the personal right for privacy and confidence of correspondence. So, on which grounds the special services control the users of these providers?

Secretariat of the Council of Ukrainian human rights protecting organizations «Prava Ludyny», No.12, 2003 (Desember)

288

INFORMATION SECURITY AND INTERNET

The USS tries to control the Internet The USS developed the draft of the resolution «On the re-delegation of

the rights to administer the domain.UA». In several days this draft will be con-sidered by the Cabinet of Ministers. The analysis of the text shows that if this resolution would be adopted, the special services would obtain the control over the domain «UA».

The adoption will also have a number of other consequences: – the precedent will be created of presentation by the USS of incomplete

and false information for grounding the decisions of state level; – the attempt of the coercive nationalization of the self-ruled public re-

source, which is now the domain «UA»; – the attempt of the regulation by the sublegal acts of the legal relation-

ships, which concern the world system of domain names that was created and is indirectly controlled by the USA government;

– the attempt of the receiving of the finances from the state budget for the creation of the structure, the goals and tasks of which are not properlygrounded;

– the direct meddling of the Ukrainian government to the economic ac-tivities of several thousands of subjects of the entrepreneurial activities – reg-istrars of domain names in the domain «UA»;

– the direct danger on the side of the USS to the constitutional rights and freedoms of the Ukrainian citizens connected with information exchange and protection of personal data;

– a step to the complete monopolization of the sphere of communications and the USS control over this sphere.

www.maidan.org.ua«Prava Ludyny», No.5, May, 2003

The open letter to President Kuchma from the all-Ukrainian public organization «Ukrainian Internet community»

Respected President! The Security Service of Ukraine prepared the draft of Resolution of the

Cabinet of Ministers «On the re-delegation of the rights to administer the do-main.UA» No. 1818-4897 of 21 April 2003.

289

The text of the mentioned draft of the Resolution and the explanatory note to this draft contain numerous mistakes, inauthentic and sometimes com-pletely false information.

The draft envisages the creation of the enterprise «The Ukrainian network informational center» managed by the USS. At that the explanatory note con-tains references to the recommendations of the GAC ICANN, which are inter-preted erroneously. According to these recommendations of the GAC ICANN, «the role of the state consists in guaranteeing the administration of the geo-graphic domain in public interests taking into account the national laws» (item 5.1), but not in the creation of state enterprises controlled by special services. Item 5.2 of the discussed draft reads that the government is responsible for the transparency of its activities that concern the processes connected with the administering of the domain.

We want to turn your attention to the fact that the special services, which prepare the state documents in the closed regime, may not be the guarantors of public interests and the model of transparency, and that the creation of such enterprise has no relation with public interests.

We also want to point out that the adoption of this Resolution will not only require a significant amount of state finances and will give no real profit, but also will essentially deteriorate the international image of Ukraine and will exert the negative influence upon the confidence of millions of Ukrainian citi-zens in the President and government.

We inform you that on 30 January 2003 the Opened Public supervision council in charge of the question of administering the domain.UA was created in Ukraine in the absolute correspondence with the demands of the I ANNand the best international practices. The operating administration of the do-main, the greatest independent union of Ukrainian Internet-companies and the all-Ukrainian public organization «Ukrainian Internet community» signed the corresponding multilateral agreement. All questions, which were potentially interesting for state organs (adjustment of the rules of registration of domains, compilation of standard agreements, control over software and even financial audit), were related to the competence of this supervision council. Some represen-tatives of state organs have been already invited for the work in the council.

The subordination of the domain.UA to the special services creates the conditions for violating the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens, which are stipulated by Article 15, 31, 32, 34 and 42 of the Constitution of Ukraine.

We ask you to interfere personally in this situation and to stop the brutal and non-transparent meddling of the Ukrainian special services into the reform of administering the Ukrainian public resource – domain.UA. We also believe that it should be expedient to conduct the public investigation of the circum-stances of preparing the draft of the Resolution and the explanatory note to it.

290

We ask you to give the commission to the corresponding state organs to define what is the legal state interest in the problems of the domain and to send a state representative to the Public supervision council in charge of the ques-tions of administering the domain.UA.

We hope that you will protect legal rights and interests of Ukrainian citi-zens – the Internet users.

Sincerely yours, the Head if the Executive council of the all-Ukrainian public organization «Ukrainian Internet community»

Igor Diadiura 13 May 2003

«Prava Ludyny», No.5, May, 2003

«Ukrainian Internet community» invites for cooperation in the questions of administering the domain.UA Press release, 15 May 2003 The all-Ukrainian public organization «Ukrainian Internet community»

(UIC, uic.org.ua), in the accordance with the decision of the executive council of 2 April, invited for the work in the Opened Public supervision council in charge of the questions of administering the domain.UA the state agencies, the activities of which are connected with the development of the Internet in Ukraine. The invitations were sent to the Supreme Rada of Ukraine (for the Head of the profile committee), the Security Service of Ukraine, the State Committee in charge of the questions of regulatory politics and business, the State Committee of communication and informatization of Ukraine, the State Committee in charge of the questions of technical regulation and consumer politics, the State Department of intellectual property and the Anti-monopoly Committee of Ukraine.

The UIC expressed the protest in the connection with the publication on 13 May on the official site of the President of Ukraine (www.president.gov.ua) of the public letter by K. Siniavskiy, the former head of the board of directors of the Association of the participants of the Ukrainian Internet market(www.auriu.org). In particular, this letter states: «It is inadmissible situation… when one private structure and one public organization «Ukrainian Internet community» try to obtain the full control over the all-national telecommunica-tion resource – the domain of highest level.UA without taking into account the interests of other organizations». The UIC turns the attention of all interested persons to the fact that the multilateral agreement on the creation of the Opened Public supervision council in charge of the questions of administering the domain.UA was signed on 30 January 2003 not only by the UIC, but also by the greatest union of Internet providers – the Internet Association of Ukraine (www.inau.org.ua) and the operating administrator of the domain. This will guarantee the consistency and logicality of the reforming process. This agreement has the open character, and the UIC is sure that other public

291

organizations, associations of enterprises and state agencies, which are inter-ested in the steady development of the Internet in Ukraine, will join the agree-ment soon.

The UIC denounces the attempts of certain interested persons to create the impression that the process of administering the domain.UA is non-legitimate and non-transparent. The domain is a public resource and it must be controlled by public. The UIC is ready to cooperate with any state and non-state organizations. The process of the creation of the efficient and transparent system of public control is going according to the plan, and nobody can stop it.

ReferenceThe all-Ukrainian public organization «Ukrainian Internet community»

was founded on 15 March 2002 by the initiative congress, it was registered on 16 July 2002 by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine (certificate No. 1812). The organization has 17 regional branches in the oblasts of Ukraine and in Kyiv.

The goal of the public organization «Ukrainian Internet community»,which is stipulated in its statute, is the promotion of the development of the Ukrainian constituent of the worldwide network Internet as one of the methodsof forming the civil society in Ukraine, and the promotion of technological, busi-ness and intellectual progress in Ukraine. The UIC believes that the evolution of the Internet in Ukraine is an important factor for the development of freedom and democracy, market economy and informational society, it is an essential step to-wards the integration of Ukraine into the world community. The more detailed in-formation you may found in the Internet: http://www.uic.org.ua/.

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 May, 2003

Representatives of mass media will be brought to responsibility for divulging the information with the restricted access By the words of the USS head Vladimir Pristayko, several days ago the

Supreme Rada adopted the law, which would extend the authorities of the USS in the sphere of the protection of state secrets. According to this law, editors of mass media will be brought to responsibility for divulging the information with the restricted access. This provision aroused the negative reaction of the representatives of the International federation of journalists.

In 2001-2003 the USS officers investigated 28 criminal cases connected with the violation of the law on the protection of state secrets. In the current year two officials have been brought to responsibility for similar offences. 19 cases more were connected with the loss of objects and documents related to state secrets.

Representatives of mass media have not been involved in such cases yet. («Fakty», No. 124, 15 July 2003)

292

Appeal of public organizations and Internet-editions about the draft of the Law of Ukraine «On the activities in the sphere of informatization» 01 July 2003. The Institute of mass information and a number of public

organizations and Internet-editions made public their appeal about the draft of the Law of Ukraine «On the activities in the sphere of informatization», which had been registered in the Supreme Rada. «In fact, the norms of the draft are directed at the increase of the influence on the national component of the Internet, local networks and all other objects of modern automatized informa-tional technologies, including the personal data carriers. The analysis of the draft give the reasons to state that its realization will result in the total control over the «objects of the sphere of informatization» (first of all, over the na-tional component of the Internet) on the side of law-enforcing and other state organs», the appeal reads.

Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

Internet mass media, as well as other informational computer networks, became rather customary element of our life and occupied the proper place in the sphere of gathering and distribution of the information. Although there are several operating laws, which regulate and control this sphere, they are, to put it mildly, imperfect. That is why the law draft «On the activities in the sphere of informatization» was developed. However, in spite of all positive motives, this draft evoked the categorical protest of the Ukrainian Internet-community.

It should be noted that this document does not regulate the relations in the sphere of mass media activities. Maybe, this very fact became the main reason of the aversion to the draft, because most of the Internet-resources represent mass media. Yet, according to the draft, they will turn from mass media and journalists into simple information providers.

Sergey Morgulin, a co-founder of the Internet-newspaper «UAToday», points out: «If the law would be adopted, then the Internet-editions would be-come the objects of informatization, which would be controlled. And the jour-nalists would turn into informants and lose their social role». Under such con-ditions the work of the Internet-newspapers will become very difficult, and, maybe, they will even have to leave the market. Our country «will lose its Internet-resources cultivated in the infertile Ukrainian legislative soil».

All in all, the majority of the representatives of the Internet-community reckon that this draft was created mainly for the suppression of Internet mass media in Ukraine in the interests of the authorities. Explaining this opinion, Oleksandr Paliy, a representative of the Public council in charge of the ques-tion of the freedom of speech and information, refers to one of the provisions of the draft: it is possible to apply sanctions against mass media, if they «spread the information, which can inflict damage to honor, dignity and busi-

293

ness reputation of some persons or meddle into personal life of citizens». So, the main goal of the draft is the restriction of the freedom of speech in the Internet-editions. O. Paliy points out that the Ukrainian power made the Inter-net-editions very popular «driving» there the freedom of speech from TV and printed mass media, and now the power tries to restrict this freedom.

(«Yuridichny visnyk Ukrainy», No. 28, 12-18 July 2003)

294

Pressure upon the Internet-edition «Obkom» 15 July 2003. The official appeal of Sergey Sukhobok, the head of the

social-analytical movement «Grupa gromadian» («Group of citizens»), and Aleksey Mironov, the editor-in-chief of the Internet-edition «Obkom», com-municate that during the last week the officers of the Directorate for fighting the economic crimes (DFEC) demanded from counteragents and partners of «Grupa gromadian» the information, which represented the confidential part of contractual relationship. «At that the officers groundlessly referred to item 24 Article 11 of the Law of Ukraine «On militia»… These actions are illegal, since no criminal case was instituted either against «Grupa gromadian», or members and workers of the edition «Obkom», on the basis of which case the militia would have the right to collect this information», the appeal states. The authors of the document regard the actions of the DFEC and of «the authori-ties, who approved these actions» as «moral, psychological and, maybe, physi-cal pressure on the publishers of the Internet-newspaper «Obkom» and their partners».

Institute of mass information, «Barometr svobody slova», July 2003

Aleksey Mironov, the editor-in-chief of the Internet-newspaper «Ob-kom», asserts that he has the information that the illegal actions of the DFEC were caused by the publications in «Obkom» and were approved by the General Prosecutor’s office. «That is why we regard the current situation as the con-tinuation of the criminal activities of Sviatoslav Piskun directed towards the destruction of «Obkom», writes A. Mironov in his appeal.

(«Svoboda», No. 30, 29 July-4 August 2003)

Problems of the Ukrainian domain The Ukrainian government managed to solve the problem with the ad-

ministration of the Internet domain.ua, believes Oleg Prozhivalskiy, a deputy head of the State Committee of communications and informatization ofUkraine. «The special organization was created, which would administrate the domain. The votes in this organization are shared as follows: state structures have 50% of votes, another half is given to the associations of the Internet pro-viders». At the same time, Mr. Prozhivalskiy points out that not all providers endorse the idea of the creation of the company «Ukrainian network informa-tional center» by the governmental structures. Some providers stay in the op-position, but the majority have already joined the association. «We do not want to usurp the power, but the government must participate in this process. We are going to control the situation taking into account the common inter-ests», said the head of the State Committee.

Naturally, the company «Hostmayster», the present administrator of the domain, does not support the decision. This company handed the appeal to the

295

Kyiv economic court with the demand to acknowledge as invalid the resolu-tion of the Cabinet of Ministers (Decree No. 447 of 22 July «On administra-tion of the domain.ua»). Other powerful non-state operators also reckon that the domain must not be controlled by the state. A representative of one of the Internet-companies declared that the Internet had not to be subordinated to the USS and power structures. Besides, the international organization RIPE, which manages the European address space of the Internet, is not going to change the conditions of administration of the resource too.

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 189, 14 October 2003)

18 November is the doomsday of the Ukrainian Internet Thanks to the laws, which were adopted on 18 November, Ukraine

swiftly joins the ranks of such countries as Saudi Arabia and China, where the control over the Internet is very strong.

All MPs, who voted for the drafts of the laws «On the activities in the sphere of informatization» and «On telecommunications», made a splendid present to the power. The Internet, one of the not numerous spheres, where the independent mass media can exist, becomes less and less free.

According to the first law draft, every existing mass media may be recog-nized as violating laws and may be closed.

According to the second draft, the total monitoring of the Internet users is introduced by means of special equipment installed in the providing compa-nies (naturally, at the expense of the providers).

All this, together with the successful attempts of the state to put the do-main.ua under the control of special services, confirms that the power prepared well for the pressure on the Internet-editions during the coming election. So, we want to give our compliments to the oppositional MPs, who voted for these drafts.

(maidan.org.ua, «The Poltava oblast media club», No. 56, 21 November 2003)

* * * Today, on 18 November, the Law of Ukraine «On the activities in the

sphere of informatization» has been adopted in the first reading. We have already written about this law. On 3 July the conference «Con-

trol and censorship endangers the Internet in Ukraine» was held, at which the representatives of Internet mass media explained why this law might not be adopted even in the first reading.

Alas, the communists and the Socialist Party of Ukraine almost unani-mously ignored all warnings and voted for this law, which would give the op-portunity to the power to suppress the Internet-editions. The behavior of com-munists is not very surprising: for instance, the committee of communistKriuchkov, use to promote the laws that help the power to destroy its oppo-

296

nents, and recently this fraction cooperates with the pro-President majority. Yet, the actions of socialists are strange.

However, there is a slender hope that the law draft will not be adopted in the present reactionary version.

If the law «On telecommunications» would be adopted today too, then this day would become the doomsday of the Ukrainian Internet.

(«Maydan», 18 November 2003, maidan.org.ua)

Company «Hostmaster» lost the case in the Economic courtof Kyiv On the past Friday the company «Hostmaster», the acting administrator of

the domain.ua, handed the appeal against the decision of the Economic court of Kyiv. The Economic court had rejected the suit of «Hostmaster» and ac-knowledged the governmental decree of 22 July «On administration of the domain.ua» to be valid.

This information was communicated to the agency «Interfax-Ukraine» by the manager of the company «Hostmaster».

The government endorsed the initiative of the USS and the State commu-nication committee and passed the administrative functions to the Ukrainian Network Informational Center (UNIC). «Hostmaster» appealed against this decree, because, in its opinion, the government had no right to meddle into the economic activities of the enterprise.

On 7 October the Economic court of Kyiv considered the claim of «Hostmaster» and refused to satisfy the demands stated in the writ. The judge resolved that the decree did not violate the rights of «Hostmaster», since the company could work together with the UNIC.

The court also pointed out that the rules of the ICANN were not regarded as a source of right in Ukraine and could not be applied by court.

The domain.ua was rendered by the international organization IANA (which is called ICANN now) to Ukrainian citizens Dmitriy Kokhmaniuk and Igor Sviridov in 1992. Before 2001 the domain was developed by several en-thusiasts, who had created the Ukrainian network coordination group (UANCG). In 2001 they founded the company «Hostmaster», which concluded the agreement with D. Kokhmaniuk and I. Sviridov and began to administer the domain. The Ukrainian government started to claim their rights to the domain since 2001.

Initially it had been planned that the state share in the enterprise, which was called the UNIC, would be 25%, but later this share increased to 50%.

The creation of the UNIC was accompanied with a scandal: the greatest providers’ association «Internet-Association of Ukraine», which united 70 par-ticipants of the market (including the large-scale providing companies) and took part in the negotiations on the creation of such center, refused from mem-

297

membership in the UNIC, since «the UNIC did not reflect in full the interests of the state and society».

The state registration of the UNIC was completed the last week. In the end of October the international human rights protecting organiza-

tion «Reporters without frontiers» spread the appeal, in which this organiza-tion expressed its anxiety about the attempts of the USS to take control of the domain.ua. In particular, the human rights protectors mentioned the endeavor of state organs to take away the administration of the domain from the com-pany «Hostmaster». «Reporters without frontiers» sent a copy of the appeal to the ICANN.

(«Interfax-Ukraine», 17 November 2003, www.interfax.kiev.ua) (http://www.for-ua.com/news/2003/11/08/162547.html)

Struggle for the domain.ua continues: «Hotmaster» appealed against the decision of the Kyiv economic court The company «Hotmaster», Ltd. appealed against the decision of the

Kyiv economic court, which, in the beginning of October, had rejected the claim of the company against the Cabinet of Ministers with the demand to ac-knowledge as invalid the governmental Decree «On administration of the do-main.UA». This information was communicated by Boris Mostovoy, the head of «Hotmaster». According to him, «Hotmaster» handed the appeal to the Kyiv appeal court. On the basis of the Decree of the Cabinet of Ministers (No. 447-p, of 22 July 2003) «On administration of the domain.UA», the gov-ernment sustained the proposition of the State committee of communication and informatization about the creation of the association of enterprises «Ukrainian network informational center» for the purpose of management of the address space of the Ukrainian segment of the Internet, maintenance and administration of the system register and the domain names of the in the do-main.UA. In particular, the State committee of communication, jointly with the participants of the Internet market and the interested central organs of state power, got the errand to realize the organizational measures for the creation and registration of such association, as well as to guarantee the membership in the association of the enterprises, which were subordinated to them.

The company «Hotmaster» handed the claim to the Kyiv economic court in the end of July 2003. The claim states that the above-mentioned Edict groundlessly deprived «Hotmaster» of the right to administer the domain, and that is a violation of the Ukrainian legislation. The claim also reads that the operating laws of Ukraine do not contain any regulations on such kind of en-trepreneurial activities as the administration of the domain.UA.

Since 1992 the administration of the address space of the Ukrainian seg-ment of the Internet is realized by physical persons Dmytro Kokhmaniuk and

298

Igor Sviridov. The company «Hotmaster» carries out the technical mainte-nance.

UNIAN«Prava Ludyny», No.11, 2003 (November)

299

The authorities got the legal opportunity to close the Internet editions «for terrorism and menace to the state» The Law «On introduction of changes into some laws of Ukraine» intro-

duces changes to the Laws of Ukraine «On information», «On printed mass media (the press) in Ukraine» and «On publishing activities», informs Olena Gromnitska, the press-secretary of the Ukrainian President.

The Law, which was approved by the Supreme Rada on 18 November, took the effect from the day of its publication. The document forbids the dis-tribution, with the use of the objects of informatization sphere, of the appeals aimed at capture of state property, coercive change of the constitutional re-gime, infringement of territorial integrity and inviolability of Ukraine.

Besides, it prohibits to spread the information containing the propaganda of terrorism, war, genocide, violence and cruelty, as well as the information, which discredits people by race, political, religious and other views, sex, eth-nic or social origin, property status, language, etc.

The law prohibits to spread the information, which can inflict damage to honor, dignity or business reputation of individuals, the information contain-ing the coarse invectives and the information of the pornographic character.

Besides, it is banned to use printed mass media for the appeals to the commitment of terrorist acts.

The activities in the sphere of informatization are determined as the ag-gregate of actions connected with creation, distribution, use, storage, collec-tion and processing of the objects of informatization sphere (informational technologies, products and resources), as well as rendering of services con-nected with the use of these objects.

(«The Poltava oblast media club», No. 61, 11 December 2003)

30 0

SELF-REGULATION

Kyiv independent media trade union initiates the discussionof the criteria of obtaining press-cards This decision was taken at the sitting of the committee of the trade union.

The media trade union informed that the committee had several opinions about the criteria of obtaining press-cards. In particular, one part of the committee believes that the membership in the trade union must be the only criteria. Other members of the committee believe that to get such card a member of the trade union must practice journalism professionally.

The UNIAN informs that Kyiv independent media trade union (KIMTU) develops the procedure of giving special IDs (press cards) to independent journalists. These cards will confirm the professional status of the journalists. The press-cards will be used for the accreditation in the organs of state power.

The KIMTU pointed out that the independent journalists, who have no editorial IDs, have the problems with accreditation, as well as the workers of Internet-editions, who are not regarded as subjects of legislation on mass me-dia.

The members of the trade union committee explained that the legislation envisages, in particular, the accreditation of a journalist in the presence of the documents confirming his professional status or by the recommendation of a professional union of journalists.

Thus, the KIMTU is going to propose to the workers of Internet-editions and independent journalists to obtain the press-card of the trade union, which would confirm their personality, status of journalist and meet the requirements of operating laws and press-services of power organs. Such card would be consid-ered as recommendation of journalists’ union and confirm the professional spe-cialization of its owner. The procedure of issuing the press-cards and the list of the documents needed for getting the cards is now developed.

The trade union is also going to agree with proper state organs the form and procedure of giving the press-cards to independent journalists, as well as the pro-cedure of permanent or temporary accreditation.

30 1

The Poltava oblast media-club. Electronic bulletin «The freedom of speech. The Poltava oblast», No. 23, 30 April 2003

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 May, 2003

30 2

Special account is created for the support of Bukovinanewspaper «Chas» 05 May 2003 Bukovina independent newspaper «Chas», which lost the case started af-

ter the claim of Oleksandr Semenko, a former head of the directorate for fight-ing organized crime and corruption, announced the whip-round for the support of the edition that, according to the court decision, must pay compensation equal to 50 thousand UAH.

Leontiy Sanduliak, a former Ukrainian ambassador in Romania, and Oleg Panchuk, a professor of the Chernivtsy national university, who initiated this action, told that the idea to open the special account appeared when the readers began to bring money to the office of the newspaper.

The action will last from 8 to 25 May. During this time the decision will be appealed in the oblast Appeal court. If the court of higher instance would cancel the decision, then the collected money would be stored on the special account of the fund, which would be controlled by the supervision council. These money will be used for the support of independent mass media – news-papers, radio and TV companies, which will undergo some punitive sanctions for their work.

The Institute of mass information, http://imi.org.ua/ «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 May, 2003

«The Forum of journalists of Ukraine. Legal self-protection» will be conducted in Kyiv on 10 June «The Forum of journalists of Ukraine. Legal self-protection» will be con-

ducted on 10 June 2003 at 11 a.m. by the address: 57 Volodymirska St., Kyiv. Organizers: the Institute of mass information jointly with the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of the questions of the freedom of speech and informa-tion. The action is supported by the Foundation «Vidrodjennia».

The following topics will be considered at the forum: – struggle against the impediment to legal professional activities of jour-

nalists, including censorship; – guaranteeing the right for information; – struggle against the claims against mass media and journalists; – struggle against the economic pressure on journalists and mass media. The booklet «Legal self-protection of journalists» published with the sup-

port of the International Foundation «Vidrodjennia» will be presented at the forum. The booklet concerns the questions of practical protection of the rights of journalists and mass media under the conditions of the legal system existing in Ukraine.

30 3

You can obtain more detailed information by phones: (044) 212-12-26, 461-90-23

The Institute of mass information, imi.org. «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

What were the conclusions of the Forum of journalists «Legal protection» that convoked the representatives of more than 170 Ukrainian regional mass media? The first conclusion was that the pressure on mass media still exists in

Ukraine, such as attacks on journalists, claims against mass media with the as-tronomic recompensing sums, refusals to render information, refusals in ac-creditation of independent mass media, supplanting of labor collectives from the lists of owners of mass media by the organs of state power and local self-rule, pressure on the owners, dumping the prices for the subscription and advertis-ing on the side of state editions, pressure on the advertisers, etc.

The existence of the censorship at state TV was corroborated by the speech of journalist Igor Rutich, the ex-editor of the feature «Territoria bezpeki» prepared by the Ministry of Defense for the First National Channel. Rutich told about the shameful practice of issuing the features prepared by state agencies. Oleksandr Savenko, the head of the National TV company of Ukraine, also spoke about this practice. The style of these features, according to the words of Savenko, is wooden; moreover, they are permanently censored by the special officials from the interested agencies, not to mention the anonymous «temniks».

Yet, here the author of the «temniks» is known: the Directorate of educa-tional work of the Ministry of Defense. The journalist stated that on 6 May the speeches of MPs Viktor Yushchenko («Nasha Ukraina») and Georgiy Kriuch-kov (CPU) were cut out from the feature about the military cooperation with the NATO after the order of the Ministry. The journalist informed about this fact only after he was fired. Yet, he affirms that such practice existed before and still exists. At that the Directorate of the Ministry of Defense has the right to summon journalists and to reprimand them.

However, the organizers of the Forum (the Institute of mass information, the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of the questions of the freedom of speech and information, the Public Council) did their best to create the oppor-tunity not only for discussing the problems of mass media in the country, but also for obtaining the practical knowledge about the methods of protection. According to Maria Sambur, a lawyer of the IMI, the level of legal knowledge of journalists has essentially increased during recent two years. Yet, sometimes the journalists make compromises on the basis of the theses about the inefficiency and long duration of court proceedings for protecting the right for their professional activities.

30 4

Thus, the corporative education will become an important step towards the improvement of the existing situation. The organizers of the Forum plan to organ-ize such educational actions regularly. The Forum must become a tradition, and the next sitting of the Forum will be held in September.

A special booklet «Legal self-protection of journalists» was prepared before the Forum. The booklet contains some practical recommendations: from the in-structions how to compile a writ, petition or cassation appeal to the useful advices on the tactics of defense in court.

At the Forum the journalists had the opportunity to get the consultations of lawyers, to discuss the successful examples of self-protection. Alas, such experi-ence had been rather bitter for everybody, who managed to complete the affair. The journalists say that such situation is caused not only by the absence of the suf-ficient legal knowledge, but also by the persistent neglect of operating laws by the officials and the absence of the corporative solidarity among journalists.

It is obvious that the time of strikes and protests has not passed yet for the re-gional press, this is the very beginning, and such activities are necessary. The effi-ciency of protests was demonstrated by Bukovina journalists. «Telekritika» al-ready wrote about the picket organized by 200 journalists in May. The journalists, together with their families, came to the building of the oblast state administration to protest against the administrative methods of governor Teofil Bauer. This ac-tion has some positive results: Pavlo Kobevko, the editor of the Bukovina news-paper «Chas», informed the Forum that the governor recalled his recent claims against mass media.

Yet, Ludmila Kucherenko, the head of the Poltava media club, pointed out that it would be impossible to gather 200 journalists to a protest action in the Pol-tava oblast. She said that the situation with the freedom of speech in the region was shameful. The Poltava governor dared to state publicly that the newspaper «Informatsiyny bulleten» would never have a chance to be printed inside the oblast. For four years the newspaper is printed semi-legally, and, according to the words of editor Tamara Prosianik, they had to commit a deliberate offence and did not named in the dateline the printing shop, which agreed to print the newspaper. Before this they had to find new printing shops almost every month: some shops refused to print the newspaper «because of the absence of technical facilities», and sometimes (more often) the run was seized from the printing shops by law-enforcers. The number of the claims against this newspaper is incredible: some-times three claims were considered during one week. The last claim was handed by an honored journalist of Ukraine, who demanded to recompense the moral damage inflicted to him and to refute the statement of Tetiana Prosianik, who said that earlier he had been a master of journalism, but his level essentially decreased now.

Yet, the positive results of the struggle for the right for the professional ac-tivities exist in this region too. For example, the independent journalists were not admitted to the session of the oblast council. Then the Poltava media club created

30 5

the Public committee for the protection of the freedom of speech, and the oblast authorities were invited to the committee for the meetings with the press. The newspaper «Novy den», which had been founded by the Poltava media club, also obtained the refusal from the printing shops «Kobeliaki» and «Poltava». The mo-tive was rather obvious: «the current situation does not allow to continue the co-operation», read the telegram signed by the printing shop manager. Ludmila Ku-cherenko asserts that the pressure was exerted on the shop by the oblast directorate in charge of the press. The refusal to fulfill the contract on printing became the reason for bringing a suit to the economic court by the founders of the news-paper. The Kharkov appeal court obliged these enterprises to print the news-paper. Ludmila Kucherenko also handed the claim on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation against the oblast directorate in charge of the press, which spread the information about the alleged commitment of three crimes by Kucherenko. Three years ago this information caused her dismissal, and now she demands to recompense the moral damage. The Poltava media club also achieved the signature of the contract with «Ukrposhta» (the main Ukrainian post service. – Translator’s note) about the distribution of the Kyiv newspaper «Svoboda» edited by Oleg Liashko.

Owing to the support of Mykhaylo Aksaniuk, the head of the Odessa in-dependent trade union, and the IMI the newspaper «Veksel» (Yuzhny, the Odessa oblast) managed to win four trials: against the Odessa mayor, his dep-uty, the administrative department and the manager of a communal enterprise. After the proper publications and the visit of the IMI lawyer the mayor recalled his claim.

The Khmelnitska oblast newspaper «Fortetsia» was founded five years ago and was rather independent for some time. Now the pressure is exerted on the edition through its co-founders – a Kamianets-Podilskiy enterprise. Olga Zhmudovska, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper, says that she understands now that the financial independence is a necessary condition of the political independence of an edition. However, how to solve the conflict between the editorial collective and the co-founders?

The existence at somebody’s expense is very convenient for our mass media that are rather poor. Yet, as Oleg Liashko, the editor of the newspaper «Svoboda», correctly remarked, would the journalists (for example of the channel «NBM») be able to present the investigation of the question whether Petro Poroshenko actually «earned money for the election by washing the in-come taxes in Trans- Dniestr region»? «The words «oppositional» and «inde-pendent» are not synonymous», remarked the editor-in-chief of «Svoboda». A journalist must be independent of the power, opposition and financial groups.

The greatest number of questions appears in the connection with the rela-tions of the press and court power.

There was an unprecedented incident in the Ukrainian court practice: the decision issued by judge Matviyshina of the Leninskiy district court of

30 6

Lugansk about the seizure of property and ten subsequent issues of the news-paper «Rakurs plus» for securing the 100-thousand claim of Vladimir Me-dianik, a deputy of the town council. This incident occurred in past September. The most interesting peculiarity of the decision was that the judge passed the seized property for storage... to the plaintiff. The reason of the claim was the publication on 21 August 2002 in the newspaper «Rakurs plus» of the letter of parents’ committee of one of Lugansk schools. The parents wrote that they had turned to deputy Vladimir Medianik asking for help, but got no response. The businessman’s claim on the protection of honor and dignity has not been con-sidered yet, but the decision of the judge was cancelled. Yet, it appeared to be impossible to return the property to the edition. The seizure of ten issues of the newspaper resulted in the termination of its existence. The editors merely reg-istered the new edition «Novy Rakurs». In fact, it is the third attempt to realize the right for the professional activities, since Mykola Severin, the editor-in-chief of «Novy Rakurs», started his work in the newspaper «Rakurs». The IMI lawyer Maria Sambur reckons that the registration of new editions is not the best way out. In this case the journalists had to struggle till the last gun was fired, since they could win this case.

According to the information given by Tetiana Chornomaz, a correspon-dent of the radio «Liberty» in the Cherkassy oblast, in the case after the claim of MP Petro Kuzmenko (SDPU(u)) against the Uman newspaper «Ulyk», the judge forced the defendants to agree to pay to the claimant at least 3 thousand hryvnas, instead of 10 thousand that were demanded as the compensation. The chairman of the court told that he was dependent on the plaintiff, who was an MP.

Yaroslav Tkachivskiy, the editor of the Ivano-Frankivsk weekly «Tyzh-nevyk Galytchyny», waits for the consideration of the cassation complaint in the Supreme Court for eight months. The statistics evidences that the claims against mass media are considered quickly, and the consideration of journal-ists’ claims (against the organs of state power of other organs) lasts for months. So, it is no wonder that judge of the Supreme Court of Ukraine Ivan Dombrovskiy spoke very much about the necessity of creating the conditions for the independent justice.

The attacks on journalists are not investigated properly. Crimean journal-ist Oleksiy Ermolin (the newspaper «Krymskie novosti») informed that an at-tack was committed on him on 11 April in Simferopol. Before this he had been conducting the investigation of the conflict between the inhabitants of Gurzuf and the manager of the recreation camp «Artek». The latter warned the jour-nalist: «Be careful, when you will write about this». Oleksiy believes that the attack was somewhat connected with this warning. Yet, the law-enforcers, who investigate the case, are persistently ignoring this version.

The investigation of the attack on Oleksandr Pomoynitskiy, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper «Dilovy Pereyaslav», committed on 26 May, is also in-

30 7

effectual. The journalist still stays in a hospital with the cerebral brain concus-sion, closed cranial trauma and other grave injuries. Yesterday we learned about the attack on Dnepropetrovsk journalist Volodymir Belov. He got 15 knife wounds. The main version of militia is that the attack was caused by some every-day reasons, «Interfax-Ukraina» communicates.

It seems that in the cases of the attacks at journalists the version about the attack because of the professional activities must be considered first of all. This idea was discussed at the Forum along with other ones.

An interesting initiative was presented by Efim Marmer, the editor of the Kirovograd edition «Ukraina-tsentr». He proposed to create the expert council for the surveillance over the consideration of cassation complaints in the Su-preme Court of Ukraine.

By the way, Mykola Tomenko, the head of the Supreme Rada Committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, insisted on the conduction of the special Plenum of the Supreme Court on the questions of the application of the laws on information. The comments of the Supreme Court about the appli-cation of the European Convention on the protection of fundamental human rights and freedoms and the practices of the European Court of human rights are especially important.

Efim Marmer proposed one more form: signing the Memorandum be-tween mass media and the head of the oblast council (oblast state administra-tion) on the basic principles of the co-existence of the media and power. The European standards of the cooperation must be reflected in the Memorandum. The discussion on the problems of the cooperation is going on, and «Telek-ritika» invites everybody to take part in the discussion.

The stories about the problems of the regional journalists were very sad. Yet, the journalists unanimously confirmed the necessity of permanent con-tacts, exchange of experience and problems.

The elaboration of the joint strategy of struggle against any pressure on journalists or mass media is the main task today. 12 June 2003, Oksana Lysenko, the independent media trade union, www.profspilka.org.ua

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

On 10 June the political agreement on mutual understanding between the owners and journalists’ collective of the TV and radio company «Ekspress-inform» will be signed For the first time in the history of Ukrainian mass media the political

agreement on the mutual understanding between the owners and journalists’ collective of the TV and radio company «Ekspress-inform» according to the principles of editorial policy will be signed.

30 8

It will be announced about the beginning of the new joint information project of the TRC «Ekspress-inform», TRC «NBM» and the public organiza-tion «Fund of media initiatives».

Place and time of the signature: 57 Volodymirska St., Kyiv, at 10 a.m., before the beginning of the work of the Forum of journalists.

Participants of the signature ceremony: Petro Poroshenko, an MP (the frac-tion «Nasha Ukraina»), the honorary president of «Ukrprominvest»; Vladislav Li-asovskiy, the manager of the «Ekspress-inform»; Ivan Adamchuk, the manager of the TRC «NBM»; Roman Skrypin, the head of the public organization «Fund of media initiatives».

Invitees: ambassadors of the European countries and the USA, members of the National Council in charge of TV and radio broadcasting, MPs, head of the State committee of information, head of the Union of journalist of Ukraine, top managers of TV channels, etc.

Information given by the Fund of media initiatives. 06 June 2003, http://www.telekritika.kiev.ua/news

«Freedom of Expression in Ukraine», 1-15 June, 2003

First sitting of the press-club of the trade unionof independent journalists (Odessa) On 6 June the first sitting of the press-club of the trade union of inde-

pendent journalists was conducted in Odessa. Along with other interesting top-ics, the participants of the sitting discussed the plans on the protection of the workers of regional mass media from the pressure exerted by power.

The initial sitting of the press-club coincided with the Day of journalists, so this topic was the most important one at the sitting.

Leonid Zaslavskiy, the head of the regional trade union of independent journalists, said:

«In 2002 the journalism was gradually losing its positions. Journalists did not pay attention to socially important topics. The majority of them were con-trolled by the power.

The small number of journalists, who were protecting the rights of the Odessa dwellers, had to retire.

There are very few newspapers and TV channels in the city, which may be called independent. The majority of mass media prefer to express the viewpoint of the power. I believe that those, who serve to the power, have no right to call them-selves journalists. They are ordinary servants and nothing more».

The opinions expressed by the participants of the press-club were very different, and Leonid Zaslavskiy was highly pleased by that.

«Ukrainian journalists are not worse than foreign ones. Maybe, our power differs from the power in other countries, but we hope that it will change in the nearest future.

30 9

Our task is to keep our eyes open, to write truth, to collect, summarize and spread the information».

Well-known Odessa journalists Mikhail Aksaniuk, Igor Rozov, Olga Ko-logriova, Tatiana Gerasimova, Ganna Berdichevskaya, Leonid Shtekel andothers took the active part in the discussion.

The impression of Igor Grinshtein, the permanent chairman of the sittings of the press-club, was also positive.

«Our first sitting was very successful. If our plans would be fulfilled, then Odessa journalists would feel their force soon, and our press-club would begin to work professionally.

The topics for the sittings will be suggested by the life, since our country is unpredictable, and nobody knows what will happen tomorrow. Yet, it is al-ready known today that the presidential election will be held soon, so the top-ics connected with the election will be discussed in the press-club. We will debate about the candidates and about the preparation to the election on the side of power structures, which have already intensified the pressure on mass media», said I. Grinshtein.

On 7 June the second issue of «Odesska zagalna gazeta» will be pub-lished; many materials will be connected with the problems of the freedom of speech and the questions of the protection of journalists’ rights in Odessa and the Odessa oblast.

The first issue of «Odesska zagalna gazeta» was published as early as in 2000, later it continued to appear in the Internet-version under the editorship of journalist Sergey Kovalinskiy.

Igor Stoliarov, Odessa («Prava ludyny» (Ukrainian version), No. 16, 1-15 June 2003)

Independent media trade union was created in Kremenchug On 31 July the Initial conference was held, the participants of which took

the decision to create the Kremenchug independent media trade union(KIMTU). The trade union was created as a result of the joint work of the In-ternational foundation «Vidrodjennia», Kyiv independent media trade union, Kremenchug human rights protecting public organization «Za prava kozhnogo» («For everybody’s rights») and Kremenchug trade union of mass media «Media-Liga». There were representatives of Kremenchug mass media among the foun-ders of the trade union, such as: the newspapers «Vagonobudivnyk», «Telegraf», «Avtograf», «Visnyk Kremenchuga», as well as the representatives of the public organization «Za prava kozhnogo» and independent journalists. Mykola Feldman, an independent journalist, a former worker of the publishing house «Privatna ga-zeta» and a correspondent of the weekly «Telegraf», was elected to the post of the head of the KIMTU.

310

The trade union plans to conduct on 7 August 2003 in Kremenchug the seminar-presentation of the national trade union movement. The action will be carried out after the initiative of the founders of the Kyiv and Kremenchug IMTU with the support of the foundation «Vidrodjennia».

The additional information can be get by the address: e-mail: kirilll99@mail.ru, tel.: (05366) 32848.

«Tanya Akimova» <akim@profspilka.org.ua>

311

Independent trade union was created in Kremenchug On 31 July the Initial conference was held, the participants of which took

the decision to create the Kremenchug independent media trade union (KIMTU). The trade union was created as a result of the joint work of the International foun-dation «Vidrodjennia», Kyiv independent media trade union, Kremenchug human rights protecting public organization «Za prava kozhnogo» («For everybody’s rights») and Kremenchug trade union of mass media «Media-Liga». There were representatives of Kremenchug mass media among the founders of the trade un-ion, such as: the newspapers «Vagonobudivnyk», «Telegraf», «Avtograf», «Vis-nyk Kremenchuga», as well as the representatives of the public organization «Za prava kozhnogo» and independent journalists. Mykola Feldman, an independent journalist, a former worker of the publishing house «Privatna gazeta» and a corre-spondent of the weekly «Telegraf», was elected to the post of the head of the KIMTU.

The trade union plans to conduct on 7 August 2003 in Kremenchug the seminar-presentation of the national trade union movement. The action will be carried out after the initiative of the founders of the Kyiv and Kremenchug IMTU with the support of the foundation «Vidrodjennia».

(«Prava ludyny» (English version), August 2003)

«Reporters without frontiers» Ukraine occupied the 112th place out of 139 in the rating of the interna-

tional human rights protecting organization «Reporters without frontiers». This list was compiled on the basis of the poll conducted among journalists, re-searchers and experts. The respondents answered 50 questions concerning various violations of the freedom of the press in their countries.

(«Segodnia», No. 205, 12 September 2003)

The Kharkov group for human rights protection. Conference «The freedom of speech and human rights in Ukraine – 2003» Evhen Zakharov, the Kharkov group for human rights protection: On 18-19 September the conference «The freedom of speech and human

rights in Ukraine – 2003» was held in the institute of the post-graduate study of the Kyiv National University. The conference was organized by the USA Embassy in Ukraine and the Kharkov group for human rights protection with the goal to represent the state of human rights in Ukraine in the first seven months of 2003 and the situation with some most fundamental rights and free-doms: the freedom of expression, the right for the access to information, the right for privacy, the freedom from torture and cruel treatment, as well as the right for the access to justice. Besides, the conference had to demonstrate the intermediate results of the work of 42 organizations – the winners of the com-

312

petition «Human rights and the freedom of the press» conducted by the Em-bassy.

313

The conference consisted of six sessions: the first plenary sitting was de-voted to the general assessment of the state of human rights in Ukraine, next five sessions – to the consideration of the problems in the above-listed spheres of human rights. The organizers planned to represent different points of view: of the power, civil society, international experts, so they invited the represen-tatives of all these groups to deliver the 20-minute reports. Yet, we could not listen to the assessment of the power organs: neither vice-speaker Oleksandr Zinchenko nor vice-prime-minister Dmytro Tabachnik, who had agreed to take part in the conference, came there. Valentina Dovzhenko, the head of the state committee in charge of the problems of youth, who had promised to the organ-izers to take part in the conference, refused in the last moment and sent first deputy Zelinskiy instead of her, who spoke only about the work of his com-mittee. Thus, at the first session the participants of the conference (all in all, more than 200 representatives of Ukrainian state and non-governmental insti-tutions and international organizations took part in the conference) listened to the speeches of USA Ambassador John Herbst, international expert Oleksiy Korotayev (Geneva, the International Ligue of human rights), Ashley Gotier, a deputy of the general councilor of the U.S. News & World Report (Washing-ton) and Evhen Zakharov. In my opinion, the refusal of the top Ukrainian au-thorities from the participation in this conference and the speech of the new USA Ambassador vividly demonstrated the real, and not pretentious, attitude to human rights. The speech of Ambassador Herbst is quoted below. Oleksiy Korotayev expressed the anxiety of the international institutions, in particular, the profile committees of the UNO, about the situation with the application of torture in Ukraine, ungrounded restrictions of the freedom of expression, in particular the censorship in the form of «temniks», and the illegal restriction of the access to information. He also remarked that some drafts of Ukrainian laws were imperfect and endangered human rights, for example, the drafts of the Criminal-Procedural Code and of the laws on the registration of physical per-sons, on the monitoring of telecommunications, etc. Ashley Gotier told about new tendencies in the application of the First Amendment to the USA Consti-tution in the context of media-legislation and court practices. Her speech was very instructive for the Ukrainian lawyers and journalists, who understood the American attitude to the freedom of expression. I presented the report prepared with the assistance of Olga Zhiriachenkova, a worker of the Embassy. The report described the intermediate results of the USA Embassy project.

The agenda of the work of subject sessions was the following. The re-porters for 20-30-minute speeches and experienced moderators were invited to the sessions. The persons, who wanted to deliver the speeches shorter than 10 minutes had to agree beforehand the topics of their speeches with the organiz-ers; after this the topics were included to the agenda. Five minutes were given to everybody, who wanted to take part in the discussion.

314

Taking into account the great amount of work fulfilled by Mykola To-menko, the head of the Parliamentary committee in charge of the freedom of speech and information, and by Gennadiy Udovenko, the head of the Parlia-mentary committee in charge of human rights, national minorities and inter-ethnic relations, the organizers asked them to deliver the basic reports at the corresponding subject sessions. The basic report at the session «The access to justice» was delivered by Igor Koliushko, the manager of the Center of politi-cal and legislative reforms, a scientific consultant of the Supreme Rada com-mittee in charge of the policy of law. Roman Romanov delivered the basic speech at the session «The right for privacy», Evhen Zakharov – at the session «The access to information». It is noteworthy that Mr. Udovenko took into ac-count the absence of the review report on the state of human rights in Ukraine from the viewpoint of the state and, on the first day of the conference, stated in his report the official position of the state concerning the protection of human rights. He mentioned some positive moments: the adoption of the Constitution, introduction of the institute of ombudsperson and the successful work of this institute, adoption of a number of the progressive laws, joining the Council of Europe, signature of several international agreements of the Council of Europe, opportunity to turn to the European Court of human rights and the first successful cases in the Court, improvement of the situation in the spheres of interethnic and inter-confession relations and in other spheres. Mr. Udovenko also described the negative moments and the existing problems. The most important problems, in his opinion, are the low level of legal knowl-edge and the non-fulfillment of laws. I reckon that the report of Gennadiy Udovenko was very substantial and intelligible, he made an important contri-bution to the consideration of the state of human rights at the first session.

I think that the agenda of the conference suggested by the organizers was rather sensible. The conference was interesting and informative. The plenary reports were pithy, the discussions were very dynamic. International expert from Geneva Oleksiy Korotayev delivered very helpful speeches during the discussions at all sessions. He permanently compared the problems existing in Ukraine with the common European-Atlantic concepts of human rights. The level of almost all speeches at the conference was high, which was confirmed by assessments of the conference.

The results of the fulfillment of the USA Embassy project also excited a great interest: 200 copies of the printed materials presented at the conference were taken by the participants. In my opinion, it was the most successful con-ference on human rights, and I am glad that the Kharkov group for human rights protection took part in the organization of the conference. I want to ex-press my gratitude to the workers of the Department of the press, education and culture of the USA Embassy for their selfless work for the conference.

In the end of the first day of the conference the Reception was held by Ambassador John Herbst. The participants of the conference got the pleasant

315

opportunity to communicate with Ambassador Herbst, other workers of the Embassy and colleagues.

Ambassador John Herbst Opening Remarks Thank you Mr. Zakharov for the warm welcome and introduction. I am

honored that the Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group asked me to speak. Let me say thank you to the other organizers of this conference, as well as to the leadership of this great university for providing us with a venue for this dialogue. I arrived in Ukraine less than a week ago. It is apt that my first pub-lic appearance would be at the 2003 conference on Media Freedom and Hu-man Rights in Ukraine. After all, the United States constitution is devoted to the principles that this conference will address. My interest is in improving the U.S.-Ukrainian relationship to the fullest extent possible. That is best achieved by encouraging Ukraine to realize the democratic objectives that it has laid down and to practice the human rights principles that it has embraced by sign-ing the European Convention on Human Rights. Respect for these basic free-doms is an essential part of the advance to democratic freedom and prosperity.

Ukraine has repeatedly stated its aspiration for integration into Europe, for membership in NATO and the European Union.. To achieve its goals of membership in these organizations, Ukraine must ensure that all its citizens enjoy media freedoms and fundamental human rights. Ukrainians must not be satisfied with their country's progress until they live in a country free from «temniks», for example. As some of you may know, I have spent much of my life working in and on the post-Soviet area. In this context, Ukraine has man-aged some real achievements in the development of a democratic society. At the same time, Ukraine's human rights record in 2003 continued to raise con-cern. This week marks the third anniversary of the disappearance of Heorkiy Gongadze, and we still do not know what happened. The recent death in cus-tody of Minister of Interior officer Ihor Honcharov, who had been scheduled to testify in court on the murder of Gongadze, will continue to spark interest in the human rights case of the journalist. Future events in the life of harassed judge Yuriy Vasylenko of the Criminal Division, Kiev Court of Appeals and his wife, lawyer Tetiana Montian, require national and international monitor-ing attention. In addition, we will continue to monitor events in the high pro-file lives of human rights defense attorney Andriy Fedur, and of the wife and mother of the slain journalist Gongadze. The controversial vehicular death of journalist Volodymyr Yefremov and attacks on journalists throughout Ukraine continue to cause concern. With the 2004 presidential election, Ukraine's treatment of its journalists will continue to be a point of international scrutiny.

With presidential elections in Ukraine quickly approaching, Ukraine's as-pirations of European integration hinge on a free, fair, and transparent 2004 presidential election in Ukraine. Outside observers will expect presidential

316

campaigns and the election itself to be conducted based on the very freedoms you are espousing at this conference.

On the positive side, in May 2003 the Government of Ukraine closed the criminal case against numerous Ukrainian publications that alleged defamation of President Kuchma. When parliament votes in September, amendments to the law on TV and radio broadcasting should not restrict the re-broadcasting of the BBC, the Voice of America and Deutsche Welle in Ukraine. Moreover, the Government of Ukraine should cease to put pressure on Western broadcasters and their Ukrainian partners.

Also encouraging is that the State Bureau of Religious Affairs (SBRA) continues to show signs of real governmental representation of all the coun-try's religions and various believers. Adherents of many faiths have found comfort in freely expressing their beliefs in Ukraine.

During twelve years of independence from the Soviet Union, Ukraine has come a long way. But make no mistake; there is a long way to go. This coming year offers real opportunity for Ukrainians to bring greater democracy to Ukraine. Americans stand ready to support Ukrainians to help realize goals of freedom. Now, I am here to listen, to form impressions, and in the coming years, to work with Ukrainians toward improved fundamental freedoms and human rights in Ukraine. I will work with you to support the goals Ukraine has articulated for itself: a future of independence and democracy in Ukraine. I look forward to working with you to make Ukraine a better place for all. Thank you very much.

In what follows we present the short resumes of the sessions.

1. The freedom of expression in Ukraine Moderator: Roman Romanov, the International Foundation «Vidrodjennia». Plenary report: Mykola Tomenko. Participants of the session: Natalya Ligachova, «Telekritika». The right for information as a precon-

dition of the professional activities of journalists. Ways and means of protec-tion and self-protection.

Valeriy Ivanov, the Academy of the Ukrainian press. Monitoring of the state of the freedom of the press in Ukraine.

Oleksandr Chekmyshev, a deputy manager of the Institute of journalism of Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University, the head of the committee «Riv-nist mozhlivostey». Manipulations in the sphere of mass communication and the technologies of counteraction.

Oleksiy Svetikov, the head of the Lugansk branch of the Voters’ Commit-tee of Ukraine. The European perspective as a way for the protection of the freedom of speech: the Lugansk experience.

Jan Chaykovskiy, the philosophic and culturology magazine «I», Lviv. The myth about the freedom of speech in Ukraine.

317

Mykola Kozyrev, the Public committee for the protection of the constitu-tional rights and freedoms of citizens, Lugansk. The freedom of speech on the background of the monitoring of district newspapers of the Lugansk oblast.

Olena Volochay, the all-Ukrainian Independent Association of Judges. The institute of respect to court.

Oleg Tseluyko, the KhG. What will be the jurisprudence of the European court on human rights concerning the freedom of expressing the opinions in the Internet?

Five conferees took part in the discussion. One can observe the informational war of the Ukrainian power against its

own people. More and more frequent journalists obtain the information from one source, and the informational messages of different TV channels are like as two peas in a pod. So, the monitoring of the editorial policy is necessary to learn whether the messages satisfy the modern informational standards. On the other hand, the power wages the war against the journalists, who try to fulfill their professional duty conscientiously. The political opposition is isolated from the most influential mass media; this fact was confirmed by the monitoring con-ducted by the Academy of the Ukrainian press. The president’s clique brutally meddles in the work of the organ, which, according to its status, should be ab-solutely independent – the National council in charge of TV and radio broad-casting. The situation in the Parliament does not allow to hope for the adoption of new, perfect laws. The main goal today is the prevention of the approval of the law drafts, which groundlessly restrict human rights and fundamental free-doms, and the elaboration of new drafts for the future. The self-regulation of journalistic community must be also reformed: in particular, the trade unions should unite the majority of journalists and protect journalists’ professional rights.

The future election campaign is the most important question today. The ef-forts of the society should be concentrated on the conduction of honest and transparent election. The Council of Europe offered to send the long-term monitoring mission for the supervision over the Presidential election. The role of mass media during an election campaign is extremely significant.

So, we need: – the systematical monitoring of the freedom of expression, the regular

consultations for mass media and journalists and the legal protection of them; – the analysis of all court practices concerning the application of censorship; – the familiarization of the society with the law against the censorship,

which was adopted in the beginning of April 2003; – the adequate reaction of the society to every violation of the freedom of

speech;

318

– the special program of legal support of mass media in the connection with the coming election campaign (if the election would not be abolished, of course);

– the moratorium on tax and other checks of mass media (like those that were conducted during the last election).

2. The access to information in Ukraine Moderator: Taras Shevchenko, «Internews». Plenary report: Evhen Zakharov. Participants of the session: Sergiy Fedorynchyk, «Zeleny svit». Drawbacks of the state conception of

informational policy. Oleksandr Stepanenko, «Zeleny svit», Chortkiv. Concealment of informa-

tion as a basic method of self-protection of the corrupted authorities (the mis-uses in the enterprise «Ternopillis» are described as an example).

Oleksandr Bukalov, «The Donetsk Memorial». Accessibility of informa-tion and penitentiary reform: legislation and law-applying practices.

Evhen Bayramov, the Lugansk branch of the VCU. Access to the informa-tion on the budget of the organs of local self-rule: the situation in Severodonetsk.

Oleg Tseluyko, the KhG. The development of the culture of the access to information: the European experience.

Three conferees took part in the discussion. Owing to the development of the Internet and the computer legal systems,

the access to the parliamentary information in Ukraine has essentially im-proved. Free sites appeared (for instance, rada.kiev.ua) that contain all legal and the majority of open sublegal acts. The computer legal system «Liga-Zakon» includes all normative acts registered by the Ministry of Justice. Yet, this system is chargeable and rather expensive, so only a small number of pub-lic organizations can use it. The texts of many law drafts also became accessi-ble, so the non-governmental organizations got the opportunity to exert influ-ence on the legislative activities.

The access to information that is possessed by the organs of executive power is unsatisfactory. The progressive laws «On information», «On state se-crets» and other laws, which had been adopted in the first half of the 90s, were almost brought to nothing by the sublegal acts and the law-applying practices, the main feature of which is the wide use of the illegal security classifications restricting the access to information, in particular, such classifications as «for service use only», «not for printing» and «not for publishing». These classifi-cations are not envisaged by laws. The procedure of work with the documents «not for printing» and «not for publishing» is not stipulated by any registered normative acts, and the Instruction on the procedure of work with the docu-ments «for service use only» is written in the spirit of the old good totalitarian times and practically blocks the access to such documents.

319

The state guards «the information that is a state secret or other secret stipulated by law, confidential information owned by the state, open informa-tion that is important for the state, independently of where this information cir-culates, as well as the open information important for the society or separate persons, if this information circulates in the organs of state power and local self-rule, National Academy of Sciences, Armed Forces, other military units, law-enforcing organs, state enterprises, state establishments and organizations». The List of the informational items, which are guarded by the state, concerns only the information that is related to state secrets and confidential information owned by the state (classified as «for service use only»). However, the lists of the documents «for service use only» has not been published yet, and the List of the informa-tional items that are state secrets was published immediately after its approval in 1995, but later it was made secret, as well as the later additions to this list. Thus, the decisions on the restriction of the access to information is taken on the basis of the opinion of an official, who is responsible for the secrecy of this information, but not on the basis of open legal acts, as it should be done in a country, which is a member of the Council of Europe.

In order to learn how widely the illegal classifications are applied, the Kharkov group for human rights protection analyzed all documents that were adopted by several central agencies in 2000-2002 and counted up the number of the classified documents. We used the computer system «Liga-Zakon» and learned that the greatest number of the classified documents was issued by the President of Ukraine and the Cabinet of Ministers. At that, the President applied the classification «not for publishing», the Cabinet of Ministers – «not for print-ing», and various state agencies – mainly «for service use only». The titles of all documents «for service use only» (from which the substance of a document can be understood) are contained in the database. Yet, the documents «not for publish-ing» and «not for printing» have only numbers, so it is impossible to comprehend what type of information they concern.

A great number of the nameless documents issued by the President and the Cabinet of Ministers stimulated us to scrutinize the dynamics of the adoption of such documents during the longer period. It appeared that the wide application of the classifications «not for publishing» and «not for printing» had begun in 1994. We observed the obvious peaks of the number of such documents. Although there is no correlation between these peaks, but more often they coincide with the elec-tion campaigns and all-Ukrainian referendums. The proportion of such documents reached 7% of the total number. It is also noteworthy that the President classifies much more documents than the Cabinet of Ministers or any other agency. And the growth of the number of the documents «not for publishing» in 2002 coincided with the appointment of Viktor Medvedchuk to the post of the Head of President’s Administration. In September 2002 the proportion of «not for publishing» docu-ments signed by the President made almost 10% of the total number of the issued documents.

32 0

The participants of the conference gave many examples of the illegal security classifying of socially important information both on the central (the plan of the actions «Ukraine-NATO», agreement on the gas consortium, the Regulations on the state administration, information on the increase of salaries of the members of the Supreme Council of Justice, etc.) and local levels (destruction of the run of the Ternopil newspaper «Svoboda» with the information given by the deputies’ commission of the oblast council about the misuses in the company «Ternopillis», concealment of the town budget by Severodonetsk town administration and so on). At the same time, the participants remarked that there were some positive changes too: some organs of state power and local self-rule became more open, they informed the public about the taken decisions on their own sites, at the public hearings, etc.

In order to improve the situation as a whole it is necessary to adopt the mod-ern law concerning the access to information and to cease the practices of the ille-gal use of security classifications. Public must permanently and thoroughly control the situation with the access to information.

3. The right for privacy in UkraineModerator: Evhen Zakharov. Plenary report: Roman Romanov. Participants of the session: Maksim Shcherbatiuk, the Internet Association of Ukraine. The right for

privacy in the Internet: reality and prospects. Evhen Zakharov, the KhG. The system of registration of physical persons

and the right for privacy. Inna Banakh, the fund «Povernennia do zhyttia», Znamenka, the Kiro-

vograd oblast. The analysis of the Ukrainian legislation on the AIDS-infected persons in the context of the observance of the right for privacy.

Eight conferees took part in the discussion.The right for privacy is somewhat new phenomena in our society. Natu-

rally, in the Soviet times nobody could even dream about the inviolability of private life, correspondence, dwelling, etc. Evhen Sverstiuk correctly called this «a callosity on the public consciousness». That is why the court claims against the violations of privacy are so rare even now, that is why the Parlia-ment approves the law drafts on the registration of physical persons, although these laws undoubtedly violate the right for the protection of personal informa-tion, which is stipulated by the Constitution.

The conferees were familiarized with the modern demands concerning the observance of the right for privacy and considered the basic provisions of the draft of the law on the monitoring of telecommunications and other new legal acts about the collection of information from the communication channels, the law drafts on the registration of physical persons, on protection of personal data, etc. The reporters seriously criticized these law drafts in the connection with the violations of privacy envisaged by the drafts. The unified state automatized

321

passport system is now actively introduced, that the exchange of passports has al-ready begun, although this system is not stipulated by law yet. The tendency exists to use the tax identification number of a person as multi-purpose universal code that will be used in all documents of the person. The opinion was expressed that the realization of this conception would turn Ukraine into a police state, since this would give the law-enforcing structures the opportunity to collect various infor-mation about citizens without their consent and the motivation of the purpose of this collection. So, the human rights protecting organizations must analyze the corresponding law drafts and prepare the propositions for the liquidation of these drawbacks.

The participants of the conference briskly discussed the question of the access to medical information on a person, the peculiarities of such access in the case of grave diseases, such as, for example, AIDS. This discussion re-vealed a number of stereotypes that still are not overcome by public con-sciousness. One of the conclusions of this discussion was the necessity of fa-miliarization of the public with modern approaches to the right for privacy, in particular, the right for the protection of personal data. The existing draft of the law on personal data must be essentially changed, and, what is the most impor-tant, this draft must be considered first of all, before the drafts concerning the collection of personal information. The drafts connected with the processing of personal information must be considered from the viewpoint of the right for privacy.

(«Prava ludyny» (English version), September 2003)

The review of the intermediate results of the USA Embassy project «Human rights and the freedom of the press»for March-August 2003 Evhen Zakharov, the Kharkov group for human rights protection (the re-

port at the conference on 18 September): On 8 November 2002 Steven Pifer, the second deputy of the USA State

Secretary in charge of the questions of Europe and Eurasia, announced the competition of the projects of the Ukrainian NGOs and mass media, which would promote the freedom of the press and the observance of human rights. The goals of the competition: a) increasing the ability of regional NGOs to realize the monitoring and to inform about the violations of human rights; b) informing the public about the international standards on human rights and the freedom of the press; c) strengthening the juridical base of the protection of human rights and the freedom of mass media. The priority of the topics: a) monitoring and informing about the violations of human rights; b) creation of the reference service for ren-dering the juridical aid to the victims of the violations of human rights or the free-dom of speech; c) inspection of prisons and other establishments closed for public, distribution of the information about the upkeep conditions in these establish-ments; d) informing the public about human rights and the freedom of speech by

322

means of TV and radio features, special columns in newspapers and magazines, consultations and conduction of round tables.

The organizers of the competition received 234 applications. 42 organiza-tions became the winners: they got the grants (6-8 thousand USD each, the total sum was more than 300,000 USD) for the realization of the project «Human rights and the freedom of the press» during the period April-December 2003. The Embassy gave 20 grants for the work in the sphere of the freedom of mass media and 22 grants for the work in other spheres of human rights and freedoms. The grants were distributed after the regional principle: each oblast of Ukraine got 1-2 grants, and I believe that that was an undoubtedly positive feature of the project.

The Kharkov group for human rights protection (the KhG, in what follows) fulfills the following functions in this project: coordination, collection and distri-bution of the information, consultations, preparation and conduction of joint ac-tions (the training at the beginning of the project and the conference with the demonstration of intermediate results in September) and the generalization of the results of the work of all partners in the form of intermediate and final reports. In March 2004 the KhG must prepare, print and spread the final report among the governmental and non-governmental organizations.

The draft began from the 5-day training for the participants of the project and other organizations. During March the KhG prepared and printed the book «The freedom of expression in Ukraine-2002» in Ukrainian and English (1000 and 500 copies, 320 and 160 pages, respectively). The training was carried on 29 March-2 April in Kharkov, 89 activists of non-governmental human rights protecting organizations and 10 experts-trainers took part in the training. Repre-sentatives of international human rights protecting organizations, such as «Arti-cle 19» (the Great Britain) and Helsinki foundation of human rights (Poland), as well as the well-known Ukrainian specialists, were engaged in the training. On 29-30 March the participants of the training attended the lectures «Introduction to the conception of human rights», «What human rights are?» and «Public reception of-fices of human rights protecting organizations». They also discussed the technical and organizational aspects of the project: joint activities and duties of the partners, spreading the information, consultations, reporting and the plans of all organiza-tions taking part in the project. After this the participants divided into four groups and considered the examples of the successful monitoring projects and the plans for further work in the following spheres: the freedom of speech and the press, ac-cess to information, access to justice, freedom from torture and cruel treatment. On 31 March-2 April four specialists from the Helsinki foundation of human rights conducted the school on the methods of the monitoring of human rights.

Each participant of the training got the following books and informational materials:

1. «Freedom of expression in Ukraine-2001» (328 pp.) 2. «Freedom of expression in Ukraine-2002» (320 pp.) 3. «Freedom and practices of mass media in Ukraine» (128 .)

323

4. The bulletin «Freedom of expression and privacy», Nos. 3,4 (2000), 1-4 (2001), 1-4 (2002), 1 (2003).

5. «Against torture. The UNO international mechanisms» (152 pp.) 6. «Against torture. The Council of Europe international mechanisms»

(200 pp.) 7. «Against torture. The review of messages, 1997-2001» (200 pp.) 8. «Freedom of peaceful assemblies and the freedom of associations in

Ukraine» (200 pp.) 9. «Observance of human rights in Ukraine-2001» (64 pp.) 10. «Monitoring of human rights. Informational materials» 11. «Fulfillment of the projects on the basis of the USA Embassy grants.

Informational materials» Besides, every participant received the books needed for the work on the

project, which had been bought by the KhG: the Russian-English and Ukrainian-English dictionaries of juridical terms, popular juridical encyclopedia, Civil Code of Ukraine that would come into effect on 1 January 2004, reference book with the samples of court claims and other editions.

The monitoring of the freedom of the press was realized on the national (the Institute of mass information (IMI) and the KhG) and regional (16 organizations-partners) levels. The IMI and the KhG used the similar methods in their work. They obtained the data about the informational conflicts from their regional part-ners, sent their representatives to the places of the conflicts for the ascertainment of details and rendering the juridical consultations, represented the rights of jour-nalists and mass media in court, informed the public about the events through their sites and electronic delivery, generalized the collected information in the monthly electronic editions «Barometer of freedom» (the IMI) and «Freedom of expression in Ukraine» (the KhG) in Ukrainian and English. The IMI cooperated mainly with its own regional correspondents, and the KhG used the materials given by the or-ganizations, who took part in the project, and other organizations: the IMI, Asso-ciation of professional journalists and admen of the Zhytomir oblast, Kirovograd association «Public initiatives», Public committee for the protection of the consti-tutional rights and freedoms of citizens (Lugansk), Kherson, Transcarpa-thian, Lugansk and Chernivtsy oblast organizations of the Voters’ Committee of Ukraine, newspaper «Vikna» (Kalush), Poltava media club and so on. As a result, the cases were disclosed of direct or indirect censorship on the side of various or-gans of state power, as well as the attacks on journalists; several cases on defama-tion were won. It is noteworthy that the IMI and the KhG supplemented each other: the IMI was mainly occupied with the legal aid, and the KhG – with the analysis and interpretation of the law drafts concerning the freedom of expression.

One of the successful ideas of the project was the organization of the con-sultations for the participants of the project in the places of their work and in Kharkov. In April-August Oleg Tseluyko, a member of the KhG, visited the organizations-partners in Cherkassy, Poltava, Kremenchug, Sumy, Zaporoz-

32 4

hye, Kirovograd, Znamenka, Chernivtsy, Kalush, Ivano-Frankivsk, Lviv, Lutsk, Novovolynsk, Khmilnyk, Khmilnytsky, Ternopil, Uzhgorod, Cher-nigiv and Zhytomir. There he met, besides the partners, with the representa-tives of the oblast committees in charge of information (regional branches of the State committee in charge of TV and radio broadcasting), appeal courts, oblast prosecutor’s offices. In that way he tried to learn the opinion of the sec-ond party in the regional informational conflicts in order to establish the rea-sons of such conflicts. These visits were very useful both for the collection of information and for the increase of the effectiveness of juridical consultations. For instance, the quick collection and distribution of the information about the criminal case after Article 344 of the Criminal Code against seven local news-papers, meetings with the editors of these newspapers and with the representa-tives of prosecutor’s office, who fulfilled the order of the General Prosecutor’s office about the seizure of the newspapers and interrogations of the editors-in-chief, as well as the debates on the prospects of this criminal case drew the public attention to the case, the circumstances of the case were actively dis-cussed in the press, and the violations of criminal procedure were sharply criti-cized. As a result, in May the case was closed.

The members of the Association of professional journalists and admen of the Zhytomir oblast successfully conducted the regional monitoring of the freedom of speech in all directions: they considered the informational conflicts in the region, rendered the free juridical consultations to journalists and mass media, in particu-lar to those, against whom the claims had been handed to court, and sometimes re-alized the defense in court processes. Besides, the Association elucidated the gen-eralized results of the monitoring in its own weekly «Media Advocate» (two dou-ble issues were published: Nos. 1-2 and 3-4), one of the positive features of which was the publication of court decisions. The Association conducted the monitoring of 13 newspapers of the Zhytomir oblast and got very important results. As a re-sult, they uncovered the cases of meddling into the activities of the editorial boards of local editions on the side of the local power organs, in particular the oblast state administration, that passed some materials to the editorial boards, which materials the newspapers were obliged to print. By the conclusions of the researchers, the local press has the tendency to elucidate the socially important topics (for, example the discussion of the constitutional reform) from one point of view. The alternative opinions are absolutely absent in state mass media and are presented insufficiently in the independent editions. Opposition political figures have no opportunity to publish their views: they can express their opinions only in the party editions, which are subordinated to them. The non-governmental editions publish the materials of the opposition party leaders only as advertisements (and not during election campaigns). In this way the editions justify the publication of such materials in the eyes of the state organs.

The detailed description of the regional informational conflicts was presented by the Kherson organization of the Voters’ Committee of Ukraine as a result of

325

the monitoring of 10 local newspapers. The same sources, i.e. the local newspa-pers, were used by the magazine «I» for the analysis of the state of the freedom of speech in the Lviv and Volyn oblasts. All materials on this topic published by three most popular newspapers of the Lviv oblast and three newspapers of the Volyn oblast were analyzed. The results are the following: the Lviv oblast is no-ticeably more active and open for the press than the Volyn oblast, that Lviv newspapers are richer, which fact influences the quality of the materials, al-though, all in all, the total level of the materials, in the opinion of the researchers, is very low.

The Sumy oblast committee of youth organizations conducted the sociologi-cal poll of the inhabitants of Sumy and several towns of the Sumy oblast: Glukhiv, Lebedin, Okhtyrka and Romny. The poll concerned the transparency of the work of local power organs and the confidence in the press. The results of the poll were distressing: the majority of the respondents did not believe that the Presidential election would be honest, transparent and democratic, and the proportion of posi-tive answers to the question about the possibility of exerting influence on the power through public organizations varied from 51.7% in Okhtyrka to 31% in Lebedin. So, much work should be done to reach the real impact of public organi-zations on the situation and to change the public attitude to such activities.

Along with the monitoring of the freedom of the press, the participants of the project carried out the monitoring of other rights and freedoms. So, the Kharkov oblast union of soldiers’ mothers prepared the analytic report on the basis of the results of the monitoring of human rights in the army. The authors of the report gave the classification of the violations of human rights and proposed the ways of liquidation of these violations. The Kharkov group for human rights protection collected the information about the cases of torture and cruel treatment in militia, penitentiaries and army, analyzed the legislation in order to find the legal norms vulnerable from the standpoint of the possibility of applying torture. The charity fund «Povernennia do zhyttia» analyzed the normative legal acts that concern the AIDS-infected people. The Kherson oblast organization of the VCU conducted the monitoring of the violations of the wide sphere of human rights after the pub-lications in 10 local editions and prepared the systematic register of such viola-tions. The similar work was fulfilled by the Transcarpathian branch of the VCU.

Some partners, in particular the KhG, attended both to the adopted law drafts and the law drafts that were still considered by the Supreme Rada. The comments were prepared to a number of laws and law drafts connected with the topic of the project: «On the introduction of changes to the Constitution of Ukraine», «On the freedom of consciousness and religious organizations», «On the struggle with ter-rorism», «On the introduction of changes to some laws of Ukraine (in the connec-tion with the introduction of the Law «On the struggle with terrorism»)», «On the protection of personal data», «On the freedom of movement», «On the State regis-ter of physical persons», «On the introduction of changes to some legal acts of Ukraine (concerning the protection of state secrets)» and the draft of the Criminal-

326

Procedural Code. These propositions and remarks were sent to the corresponding Parliamentary committees, placed on several sites, published in the press, in par-ticular, in the newspapers «Dzerkalo tyzhnia», «Yuridychny visnyk Ukrainy», «Lvivska gazeta» and the magazine «Korrespondent». For instance, the analysis of the Law «On the introduction of changes to some legal acts of Ukraine (con-cerning the protection of state secrets)», which had been adopted by the Supreme Rada on 9 July, was printed in a number of well-known electronic editions (sites «Maydan», «Obkom», «Telekritika», IMI, KhG), in the newspapers «Dzerkalo tyzhnia» and «Yuridychny visnyk Ukrainy». Earlier the journalists’ community and the experts in the sphere of the freedom of expression, including the IMI and KhG, turned to the President with the proposition to veto this law. As a result, the President used this right and the existing version of the Law will not come into ef-fect. The Parliament also took into account some propositions by the KhG on the law draft «On the introduction of changes to some laws of Ukraine (in the connec-tion with the introduction of the Law «On the struggle with terrorism»)»: the leg-islators removed the most odious norms, which permitted, in some cases, the wire-tapping without court warrant and the conduction of the ODA without the institu-tion of a criminal case.

The participants of the project also rendered the direct aid to the victims of the violations of human rights, combining this aid with the enlightenment work (mainly through the publications in the local press) in order to teach the people to protect their rights by themselves. So, during the period under report, 375 persons turned to the public reception office of the KhG, among them 102 persons turned by the electronic mail through the KhG site. Everybody, who tuned to us, got the consultations, and some of them got the legal aid (in the cases, where, in our opin-ion, the law-enforcing organs violated the human rights). The majority of the complainers are poor people, who cannot afford to pay for advocate’s services. The complaints concerned the unjust, in the opinion of the complainers, court ver-dicts or the decisions on civil cases; pay arrears; actions of local power organs connected with the debts for communal services; actions of law-enforcing organs, in particular, the complaints about the application of torture; repressive actions of power organs against the opposition editions and groups, etc. Two cases on pay arrears were successfully completed owing to the claims to the European Court (the claims were prepared by the KhG) connected with the violation of Article 6 of the European Convention of human rights: non-execution of the court decision about the payment of the arrears of wages. The arrears were paid at once after the Secretariat of the Court was informed about the beginning of the communication on these cases. After that the claimants recalled their writ from the Court register. The communication on another claim to the European Court, which was prepared by the KhG after the fact of applying torture in the Kyivskiy district militia pre-cinct of Kharkov, has been started, and there are many chances that this claim will be accepted. Besides, a defamation case against Poltava journalist Druzhinina, which was controlled by the KhG, has been also completed happily in a court: the

327

claim was rejected. There were some other good results: for example, an illegally instituted criminal case was closed after the interference of the KhG. Lawyers of the Podilsk center of human rights went to the towns of the oblast and rendered 285 legal consultations in the consultation centers. The public reception office of the Kirovograd Association «Public initiatives» received 50 clients per moths, which was twice more than it had been planned. The greater part of the people, who turned to the reception office, represented the socially unprotected layers of the population: pensioners, invalids and unemployed. The same situation was ob-served in the reception offices of other participants of the project: Zaporozhye oblast public organization «Youth Rukh», «Podilsk human rights foundation», Congress of businessmen of the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast, etc. The limited time of my speech does not permit to tell about the effective work of other partners of the project: the Cherkassy union of soldiers’ mothers, newspaper «Yug» (Odessa), etc.

Not all participants of the project presented the information about their activi-ties and prepared the intermediate reports in the proper time (although we see from the reports that the work of, for instance, the all-Ukrainian independent asso-ciation of judges and the Donetsk fund «Dobrota» was fruitful), so the final con-clusions can be done only after the completion of the project. However, one can see even now that the project is rather successful, and many important and useful results were obtained during the work after the project.

Now I want to say several words about the preparation of the generalized in-termediate report. The KhG got the intermediate reports about the fulfillment of the project from 24 organizations out of 42, 7 of these reports were, in fact, not re-ports, but the materials prepared in the course of the fulfillment. Thus, the KhG had the opportunity to generalize only some part of the information. This informa-tion is contained in five brochures of A4 format, which were printed in 200 copies and spread among the participants of the conference. One of the brochures in-cludes 17 intermediate reports («Intermediate reports of the participants of the pro-ject», 56 pp.). The results of the monitoring of the freedom of expression are pre-sented in the brochure «Freedom of expression in Ukraine-2003, January-August» (172 pp.). The booklet «Regional monitoring of the freedom of the press» (40 pp.) holds the materials about Zhytomir, Sumy, Lviv and Lugansk. The brochure «Legal comments» (96 pp.) contains the analyses of law drafts and the comments to them (all materials were prepared by the KhG, except one text by the fund «Povernennia do zhyttia»). The booklet «Monitoring of human rights in Ukraine. Some aspects» (148 pp.) includes the review of the facts of torture and cruel treatment collected by the KhG and its partners during the reporting period, the results of the monitoring of human rights in the army and two re-gional monitorings of human rights prepared by the Kherson and Transcarpa-thian oblast branches of the Voters’ Committee of Ukraine. Besides the KhG prepared the booklet «Freedom of Expression in Ukraine-2003, January-August» (58 pp., this is a partial translation into English of the corresponding Ukrainian booklet) and published the brochure «Observance of human rights in

328

Ukraine-2002» (the translation of the report of the USA State Department). The conferees also have the opportunity to survey the exhibition of other KhG editions and to place an order for the literature they need for their work: we will send this literature by post gratis.

The USA Embassy hopes to widen the Ukrainian network of NGOs that will conduct the monitoring of the violations of human rights and the freedom of the press in the regions. Perhaps, in future this network will be endorsed by such international donor organizations as the UNO Program of development, coalition «Partnership for transparent society», Foundation «Eurasia», Interna-tional Foundation «Vidrodjennia», National Democratic Republican Institute, European Commission and the Institute «Open Society».

(«Prava ludyny» (English version), September 2003)

329

Media trade union is created in Kremenchug The trade union should protect the rights of journalists and solve the prob-

lems of the workers of town mass media in the sphere of labor and professional relations. This information was communicated to the informational agency «Kon-tekst-media» by Mykola Feldman, the head of the Kremenchug independent media trade union.

According to his words, this project was supported by the public organi-zation «Za pravo kozhnogo», Kyiv independent media trade union, Kremen-chug media-league and the International Foundation «Vidrodjennia». MykolaFeldman reckons that the creation of the Kremenchug independent media trade union is the first step to the creation of the efficient union of mass media work-ers.

The preparatory work will be finished in September, and the registration of the initial branches of the town trade union in the editorial boards will be-gin.

In the opinion of Mykola Feldman, lawyers should be included into the staff of the union, who would not only render the legal aid to journalists in court, but would also protect the rights of mass media workers concerning sala-ries, conditions of work, etc.

(«Kontekst-media», http://www.profspilka.org.ua; «The Poltava oblast media club», No. 48, 28 September 2003)

Ukraine occupies the 133rd place in the ratingof «Reporters without frontiers» Ukraine occupies the 133rd place in the world by the state of the freedom

of speech. These data were adduced in the annual report of the human rights protecting journalistic organization «Reporters without frontiers». The Institute of mass information, the representative of this organization in Ukraine, com-municates that in 2002 Ukraine occupied the 112th place in this rating, and the change of the place is caused by the fact that the number of countries in this list increased from 139 to 166.

(«Ukraina moloda», No. 195, 22 October 2003)

Public organization «Independent culturological magazine «I» (Lviv) conducted the public hearings «Freedom of speech – human rights» The public hearings were held on 22 October in Lutsk with the support of

the department of the information and press of the USA Embassy in Ukraine. Representatives of regional mass media and public organizations of

Volyn took part in the discussion of this important problem. The discussion was based on the results of the monitoring of the press in the Volyn and Lviv

330

oblasts. This monitoring was conducted by the magazine «I» during nine months. The publications were analyzed, which concerned the problems of the observance of Article 34 of the Ukrainian Constitution, which article guar-antees «to everybody… the right for the freedom of speech, for free expression of one’s views and opinions». Three most popular newspapers of the Volyn and Lviv oblasts were selected for the analysis.

Jan Chaykovskiy, the coordinator of the project, represented the analyti-cal report, which, in particular, read that in April-August 2003 the Lviv oblast mass media had published 86 materials concerning the questions of the freedom of the press and journalists’ rights, and the mass media of the Volyn oblast – only 24.

(«Visnyk&K», No. 44, 30 October 2003)

First results of the work of Kremenchug independent media trade union On 2 October three new workers of mass media joined the Kremenchug

independent media trade union (KIMTU). They, together with Marina Makeeva, a member of the KIMTU, created the primary organization in the editorial board of the weekly «Visnyk Kremenchuga». Correspondent Vera Ilkova was elected as the head of the board and delegate to the KIMTU committee.

The composition of the primary organization is the following: Vera Ilk-ova, a correspondent, the head of the board; Leonid Perepeliatnik, the deputy of the editor-in-chief, a member of the board; Ludmila Obrevko, a correspon-dent, the head of the inspection commission; Marina Makeeva, an operator of the computer making-up, a member of the inspection commission of the KIMTU.

«Visnyk Kremenchuga» is an official edition of the town council, a non-private mass media, where about ten persons work.

V. Ilkova reckons that the main reason of the creation of the primary or-ganization was the hope for the solution of problems of the collective with the aid of the trade union. The main problem of the weekly is the deprival of the collective of the rights of a co-owner: the illegal decision was issued a year ago about the exclusion of the collective from the ranks of co-owners. This decision was made without the approval of the session of the town council, but was supported by the mayor.

The members of the primary organization are going to protect and resume their rights.

This week three more primary organizations are going to be created in the editorial boards of Kremenchug mass media. The conduction of the general special meeting is planned on 13 October. The decisions on the membership fees will be taken at this meeting, and the plan of the further work of the KIMTU will be approved.

(http://www.vlada.kiev.ua, «The Poltava oblast media bulletin», No. 50, 9 October 2003)

331

* * * Two months have passed since the creation of the KIMTU. A large

amount of work has been fulfilled during this term. The first directions of this work are the following: the effective collection of information, looking for the common viewpoints, compromises and ways of solving various conflicts in the media space of Kremenchug. The number of the media trade organizations es-sentially increased. Along with such organizations as «Media-liga», «Associa-tion of humanitarian and informational technologies» and «Za prava kozh-nogo», two more organizations – «Reporter» (founded by the journalists of dif-ferent mass media) and the fund «Journalist» (founded by the journalists of the edition of the town council «Visnyk Kremenchuga» and the members of the KIMTU) were created and legalized in the town. The majority of the above-listed organizations are already represented in the trade union. Two months ago there were six members in the KIMTU; now this number has increased twice. The number of the potential members of the KIMTU, who are interested in the work and want to join the union, also grows. All in all, there are 40 po-tential members.

(Public association «Za prava kozhnogo», http://www.froe.org) («The Poltava oblast media bulletin», No. 50, 9 October 2003)

* * * On 13 October the seminar «Juridical maintenance of individual and col-

lective mass media initiatives» was held in Kremenchug. The schedule of the seminar envisaged the general meeting of the trade union, who had to take the decision about the size of membership fees and to elaborate the program of the development of the trade union. The majority of the members of the union supported the minimal size of the fees (5 hryvnas per month).

In spite of the small number of participants, the discussion revealed sev-eral interesting topics connected with the mechanisms of resistance to owners and state organs, compilation of collective agreements and labor contracts, protection from the illegal dismissals, perfection of the procedures of court de-fense, mechanisms of the juridical and informational protection of journalists.

The most interesting topic is the elaboration of the mechanisms of protec-tion, since they are the basic weapons of workers of mass media, who were afraid earlier to use their legal rights and had to obey the orders of their bosses. Now the journalists have the opportunity to get rid of this fear, since their rights are protected not only by themselves, but also by the trade union.

(«The Poltava oblast media bulletin», No. 51, 18 October 2003, www.froe.org)

332

Kyiv independent media trade union will create «the groupof fast response» Kyiv independent media trade union (KIMTU) plans to create «the group

of fast response», which would visit the regions, collect the information about the attacks and pressure on journalists and «present this information to the jour-nalistic community».

This information was made public by Sergiy Guz, the head of the KIMTU, at the conference «Social protection of journalists. Role of trade unions. Ukrain-ian and Western experience», which was held on 14 November in Kyiv. Ac-cording to Guz, the group will include the professional journalists, who spe-cialize in journalistic investigations. «The media trade union, in its turn, will react through the General Prosecutor’s office, Ministry of Interior and interna-tional trade unions», remarked S. Guz. He informed that the KIMTU would realize the juridical support of journalists during the presidential election cam-paign and conduct the monitoring of mass media.

The head of the KIMTU told about the recent negotiations with the Inter-national Federation of journalists: «We have arranged about the entry of our trade union to this international organization». S. Guz also pointed out that the media trade union was carrying on the negotiations about cooperation with British and German unions of journalists.

Mr. Guz informed the participants of the conference about the planned social-economic study of the conditions of work of journalists «in order to fa-cilitate the relations with the Ministry of Labor and the Federation of employ-ers». According to his words, the anonymous poll showed that 70% of journal-ists got the «illegal salaries», and about 50% – had no official labor agree-ments.

The leader of the KIMTU also proposed to establish the minimal salary for journalists. Journalist Ives-Claude York from the agency «France-Press» told that the minimal salary of a French journalist- probationer was about 1300 Euro per month (2500 Euro in Paris).

Natalya Ligachova, the head of the Internet edition «Telekritika», de-clared in her speech at the conference that media trade unions «have not be-come yet a real guarantee of the protection of journalists’ interests» and that Ukrainian journalists «do not have the real professional solidarity yet». Ac-cording to N. Ligachova, the poll and the recent Forum of Ukrainian journal-ists «Election without censorship» demonstrated that «the majority of journal-ists do not believe that the top managers of mass media and publishers are able to come to the agreement about the rules of honest struggle during presidential election campaign».

(UNIAN, «The Poltava oblast media club», No. 55, 17 November 2003)

333

On the work of the Voters’ Committee of Ukraine(Lugansk oblast) The Voters’ Committee of Ukraine is realizing in five oblasts of Ukraine,

including the Lugansk oblast, the pilot program of public consultations di-rected at rendering free legal aid to voters, first of all, in courts. The term of the fulfillment of the program is June-December 2003. The program is finan-cially supported by the Mott foundation.

One of the priority tasks of the program is the protection of political rights, first of all, the rights stated by Articles 10 and 11 of the International Convention on human rights.

In what follows we want to describe one case. Claim of N. Protopopova, the head of the Severodonetsk executive

committee department of the reception of citizens, against the newspaper «Tretiy sektor».

The claim was connected with the publication of the material «Referen-dumofobia», in which it was described how, on 19 November 2002, four town dwellers tried to hand to the executive committee the notification about a pub-lic meeting. The notification was accepted neither by the department of citi-zens’ appeals, nor in the general department, nor in the organizational depart-ment. The claimant believed that the newspaper had spread the untrue infor-mation thus inflicting to her the moral damage equal to 3000 hryvnas. Accord-ing to Protopopova’s claim, on 19 November some people really brought a no-tification about public meeting to her, but she did not know how to accept it. While she tried to learn how to do that, the woman, who brought the notifica-tion, allegedly went away.

During the trial the citizens, who had brought the notification, and the workers of the executive committee were interrogated. The court established that on 19 November these citizens tried to hand the notification to N. Pro-topopova three times during 40 minutes, but she refused to accept the docu-ment saying that she had to familiarize with the corresponding normative documents. On 30 June 2003 the Severodonetsk court decided that the in-formation spread by the newspaper was true and refused to satisfy the claim. The plaintiff did not appeal against the decision.

(The Voters’ Committee of Ukraine, the Lugansk oblast branch)

334

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN ABROAD

German police got the permission to wiretap the telephone conversations of journalists German police has the right to wiretap the telephones of journalists during

the investigation of grave crimes, if it is necessary for the search of especially dangerous criminals. This decision was issued on 12 March by the Constitu-tional Court of Federal Republic of Germany. The court came to the conclu-sion that the principles of the freedom of the press are not violated in such cases.

In this way the Court rejected the claims of journalists, whose phone con-versations were wiretapped by law-enforcing organs. Journalists’ trade unions criticized this decision. They believe that it means the abrogation of the right on the secrecy of informants.

Deutsche Welle informs that two journalists, a correspondent of the Sec-ond Channel of the German TV company ZDF and a reporter of the Hamburg weekly «Schtern», turned with the complaint to the Constitutional Court. The former conducted the journalist investigation of the resonance case of busi-nessman Jurgen Schneider accused of the large-scale gerrymanders in the con-struction industry. The journalist communicated with the businessman by tele-phone. The second journalist, on the task of the editorial board, communicated by cell phone with terrorist Hans-Joachim Klein, who was wanted by police.

The judges did not explain what they called «the especially grave crimes». At the same time, they remarked that law-enforcing organs might not regard the court decision as a carte blanche for wiretapping cell and stationary telephones of edito-rial boards.

To obtain the corresponding prosecutor’s warrant, law-enforcers must pre-sent the conclusive proofs both of the fact of the commitment of an especially grave crime by the suspected and the existence of the phone contact between the suspected and journalist.

14 March 2003 LIGA ONLINE

«Prava Ludyny», No. 3, March, 2003

335

IN MEMORIAM

Sergiy Naboka… In the early hours of the morning of 18 January

in Vinnitsa our friend and colleague Sergiy Nabokadied. And now only in our memory we will beable to see his smile, to hear his exact and pro-found estimations of the events, to feel his handon the shoulder and to hear his energetic «Yes!».He was a very tolerant person – absolutely dif-ferent people gathered at his funeral. Yet, it wasvery different for him to coexist with the today'scontempt to people and their freedom, with the disdain to everything Ukrainian. Sometimes he

lost his temper, and in such moments he was ready to take a gun to his hands.The burden of the negative information was too heavy for him. Maybe, thiswas the reason why his heart failed – the heart of a poet, through which allcrack of the world passed…

I know that he should reproach me for this «lofty style». But this is a truth.Evhen Zakharov

Journalist, poet, dissident, organizer of the Kyiv democratic club and the Ukrainian culturological club Sergiy Naboka was born on 26 April 1966 in the town of Tula in the family of journalists. Later his family moved to Kyiv.

Sergiy began to read freely since he was five years old. When he was 13-14, he read the work by Lenin «State and revolution», after which he became a staunch anti-Soviet and anti-communist. Afterwards he read the textbook «History of the UkrSSR». This textbook generated many questions, to solve which he had to read other open and «recommended literature». In these books Sergiy disclosed «a tremendous deposits of brazen lie».

Sergiy was strongly impressed by the arrests of the people, who came to Taras Shevchenko’s monument on 22 May 1972. In general, Sergiy lived like other young people of this time, but he also listened to the foreign radio and participated in the political discussions. Maybe this was the reason whyNaboka was enlisted to the army, although he was not-able-bodied. He served in a building unit in different places.

336

After the demobilization Sergiy Naboka was a student of the faculty of journalism of the Kyiv University (1976-81). He worked as a literary editor in the publishing house «Mystetstvo». The general atmosphere in the country was depressing, this was the bloom of the zastoy (depression) period. Sergiy met his former schoolmates, he felt the necessity to undertake some activities. In 1979 Naboka became a co-founder of the Kyiv democratic club, where they organized philosophic and religious seminars, interchange of books and the literary discussions.

As Sergiy himself told, the kernel of the club consisted of those, who wanted to do something, the second layer – of those, who wanted to be pre-sent, and the third level – of those, who did not want to act and were afraid of everything, but who were curious about the club activities. All in all, the club gathered 40 or 50 persons.

The members of the club were certainly tailed. When five club members, on the eve of the day of Ukrainian political prisoners, tried to distribute the leaflets that read «Compatriots! 12 January is the day of Ukrainian political prisoners. Let us support them!», the arrests began. All in all, four persons were arrested for this.

On 11 January 1981 Sergiy Naboka was arrested too. Along with the dis-tribution of the leaflets he was accused of writing «slanderous» verses and ar-ticles, participation in compiling the manifest on the internal policy of the USSR and the text «Perspectives of infilling the spiritual vacuum of the Soviet society». According to Article 187-1 of the Criminal Code of the UkrSSR S. Naboka was condemned to 3 years of incarceration. He served the sentence in the criminal camp No. 78 (the village of Raykivtsy, the Khmelnitska oblast).

After the release in 1984 Naboka returned to Kyiv and started the reli-gious activities. For a year he worked as a janitor in the Kyivo-Pecherska Lavra, then as a librarian and loader. During the perestroyka he took part in the restoration of the Ukrainian Autocephalic Orthodox Church (UAOC). Ser-giy was proud that the UAOC community organized by him and his associates was the first in Ukraine.

In 1987-1989 Sergiy Naboka was the organizer and head of the Ukrainian culturological club. Later the club joined the Ukrainian Helsinki Group (UHG).

In 1989 Sergiy edited the independent newspaper «Golos vidrodzhennia» («The voice of renaissance». Although it was advertised that this was a news-paper of the UHG, the UHG practically did not participate in the edition. Ser-giy and his wife made up the newspaper, printed at their own expense in the Baltic republics and distributed in the downtown of Kyiv.

Since 1989 Naboka worked as the commentator at the radio «Liberty». He also was a co-founder, co-owner and the general manager of the Ukrainian independent information agency «Respublika» («Republic»). Since 1994 Naboka was the President of the Ukrainian media club and the main editor of

337

the press-center «Gariacha liniya» («Hotline»). For some time Sergiy Naboka was a presenter of the night broadcasting of the TV company «Era».

338

In memory of Sergiy Naboka Viktor Dzereviago, an engineer The eve of the Epiphany was darkened by the grief news: Ukraine lost

Sergiy Naboka… I was not acquainted with Sergiy Naboka personally, I knew him by his

publications and appearances by radio and TV. In spite of this I was painfully stricken by his untimely decease. I do not like the stilted speeches, but today I want to say: we lost an extraordinary man, the model of professionalism and civil consciousness.

Journalist Naboka seemed to repeat the worlds of poet Irina Ratushinska: «No, my Ukraine is not dead! Do not bury her!». He gave exact, sarcastic and sometimes even mocking definitions of the events and personage of the mod-ern Ukraine, every his word was permeated with the remarkable intellect, dig-nity and respect to everybody, with the calm confidence in the victory of common sense. And he was not afraid! He was not afraid to be a Ukrainian, to call a spade a spade, to declare openly that he understood all «petty ruses» of the politicians. Sergiy behaved as a free person in free country, and urged us to follow his example.

Sergiy Naboka left us, but I trust: his Ukraine remained in the hearts and souls of his numerous readers and listeners. And this is the moral ideal, from which the noble and humanistic Ukrainian National idea will spring up.

«Prava Ludyny», No.1, January, 2003

339

CONTENT

SOME GENERAL DATA.................................................................................3 COMMON.......................................................................................................10 OPINIONS.......................................................................................................34 MASS MEDIA AND ELECTION ..................................................................47 ACCESS TO INFORMATION .......................................................................57 VIOLATIONS OF THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION. ..............................82

Political persecution .................................................................................................. 82 Criminal attacks at the press and journalists ........................................................... 103 Interfering into professional activities of journalists ............................................... 144 Impeding publication and distribution of mass media products ............................. 155 Court processes for protecting the freedom of speech and mass media ................. 164

CASES WHERE JOURNALISTS AND MASS MEDIA ARE ACCUSED ....173 Civil cases ............................................................................................................... 173 Criminal cases ......................................................................................................... 224

CONFLICTS CONNECTED WITH LICENSING OF ELECTRONIC MASS MEDIA...............................................................240 VIOLATION OF PRIVACY.........................................................................244 INFORMATION SECURITY AND INTERNET.........................................267 SELF-REGULATION...................................................................................277 FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN ABROAD ..............................................307 IN MEMORIAM ...........................................................................................308

34 0

Scientific edition

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN UKRAINE – 2003

33(74)

33(74) - « »

425 23.01.97.

’

30.06.2004 60 84 1/16. .

. . . . 17,98 . .- .19,46 .- . . 19,84 500 .

61002, , / 10430 e-mail: root@khpg.org http://www.khpg.org

« »61002, , . , 8

,61002, , . , 27, . 4