Report “Political rights and freedoms in Ukraine: Monitoring compliance in 2018”

1
© Report “Political rights and freedoms in Ukraine: Monitoring compliance in 2018”
prepared by the public organization “All-Ukrainian Association 'Uspishna Varta'”, Kiev, January 2019

2
This report on the observance of political and civil rights and freedoms in Ukraine in 2018 was prepared by the
"Uspishna Varta" Ukrainian human rights platform.
The report is based on the monitoring of the observance of key political rights and freedoms, namely:
● The right to freedom of speech and opinion
Article 34 of the Constitution of Ukraine, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms, and Article 18, 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
● The right to freedom of thought
Article 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine, Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms, Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
● The right to freedom of association
Article 36-37 of the Constitution of Ukraine; Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms, and Article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
● The right to freedom of assembly
Article 39 of the Constitution of Ukraine; Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms, and Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
● The right to political participation
Article 38 of the Constitution of Ukraine, Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The monitoring assesses the observance of rights and freedoms in the territory controlled by the government
of Ukraine. The human rights platform "Uspishna Varta" has no mandate to operate on the territories of
Crimea and Donbass that are not under the control of the government of Ukraine to make an objective
assessment of the human rights situation in these territories.
In the framework of the report there is analysis of legislative regulation and law enforcement practices in the
context of government policy, as well as the status of social respect for these rights and freedoms in Ukraine
in 2018.
The report is based on data obtained by the human rights platform "Uspishna Varta" through conducting
detailed interviews with victims and witnesses of human rights violations and infringements, experts and human
rights defenders, as well as through carrying out activities to assist in the protection of human rights in
documented cases. Among them - the monitoring of trials, the advocacy of work with the duty bearers on the
observance of human rights, non-governmental organizations, and the media.In addition, the report uses data
collected by other non-governmental organizations and the media.

3
THE OVERALL SITUATION WITH THE OBSERVANCE OF POLITICAL RIGHTS IN
UKRAINE 4
THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OPINION 7
Legislative regulation 8
Government policy 12
Fines and deprivation of licenses for TV and radio channels 12
Restrictions imposed on freedom of speech and opinion by law enforcement bodies 13
Censorship of journalists and media agencies by the Security Service of Ukraine 13
Searches in media outlets and interference in the work of journalists 14
Deportation and non-admission of foreign journalists 15
Arrests of journalists and bloggers 16
Restricting Freedom of Expression and Information Exchange on the Internet 21
The status of societal respect 23
Physical violence and attacks on journalists and media agencies 23
Hate speech. “Mirotvorets” website 27
General recommendations 28
THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE 29
State interference in religious affairs 30
Discrimination when registering religious organizations 32
Law enforcement pressure on religious communities 34
Captures of temples and places of worship 35
Physical violence and attacks on temples and religious communities 37
THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF PEACEFUL ASSEMBLIES AND ASSOCIATIONS 41
Ban on political parties 42
The exertion of pressure by law enforcement bodies on parties and organizations 43
Criminal prosecution of participants of peaceful assemblies and actions 45
The use of force against the participants of peaceful rallies and actions 47
Attacks by right-wing radical groups against the offices of organizations and peaceful assemblies 49
Physical violence against community activists and human rights defenders 54
The existence of armed formations in ultra-right parties 57
THE RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN POLITICAL LIFE 61
Restriction of voting rights 62
Toughening responsibility for violations of electoral legislation 63
Restrictions on the right to access public service 64
Renewal of the Central Election Commission 65
Holding territorial community elections 65
Preparations for the 2019 presidential elections 66
MONITORING OF HUMAN RIGHTS CASES 68
75
ABOUT THE “USPISHNA VARTA” HUMAN RIGHTS PLATFORM 75

4
THE OVERALL SITUATION WITH THE OBSERVANCE OF POLITICAL RIGHTS IN
UKRAINE
In 2018, the trends in systematic violations of politicaland civil rights and freedoms persisted in Ukraine.
Against the background of the military conflict in the East of the country, measures to limit rights were justified
by the political leadership of the state by referring to the need to combat Russian aggression and separatism
within the state. In fact, this restriction was aimed primarily at the political opponents of the current
government, as well as organizations and social groups that broadcast alternative views and values in relation
to the current government.
According to the results of monitoring in 2018, the "Uspishna Varta" human rights platform recorded 197 cases
of violations of political and civil rights and freedoms.
In 59% of recorded cases (116) the right to freedom of speech and opinion was violated; in 54 cases
(27%) - the right to association and peaceful assembly; and in 27 cases (14%) – the right to freedom of
conscience and religion.
Journalists, bloggers, and individual media companies (46% of all cases), as well as public activists,
human rights defenders (18%), political parties (13%), and religious organizations and communities
(12%) remain the most vulnerable to violations of their rights in Ukraine. It should be emphasized that
the facts and cases of the rights of journalists and the media being violated are, as a rule, widely covered in the
media space. But other categories of persons whose rights have been violated either do not have the opportunity
to make such cases public or prefer not to do so.
In 32% of recorded cases (62) rights were violated as a result of the activities of right-wing radical groups,
such as C14, National Corpus, and Bratstvo. In these cases, law enforcement bodies are also responsible for their
inaction and/or lack of response towards these offences In 26% of cases (52), the violation of rights was caused
by the actions of law enforcement bodies themselves (Security Service, Prosecutor's Office, police).

5
In the regional aspect, more than half of all violations were recorded in Kiev (101 cases), as well as in Odessa
(23), Dnepr (17) and Lvov (8).
Under the aegis of the fight against "Russian hybrid aggression", the Ukrainian Parliament during the year
considered legislative initiatives aimed at restricting freedom of speech and opinion (extrajudicial blocking of
online resources, fines and deprivation of licenses for TV and radio channels, blocking the work of media
agencies by law enforcement bodies). In practice, the mandatory language quotas for the Ukrainian language
on television and radio were implemented. Significant restrictions for the media can also be introduced in the
event that the "language law", which obliges the print media to publish exclusively in the Ukrainian language,
is adopted at the second reading.
Deputies adopted draft laws that significantly limit the right to freedom of conscience and discriminate against
the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC). However, the law on peaceful assemblies and the electoral
code, which would ensure observance of the right to peaceful assembly and the right to political participation,
respectively, have not been adopted in four years.
The Security Service of Ukraine and law enforcement bodies continue to apply the so-called "separatist
articles" of the Criminal Code (state treason, aiding and abetting terrorism, overthrowing the constitutional
system) against journalists, bloggers, participants of peaceful assemblies, representatives of opposition parties,
organizations, and even ordinary users of social networks expressing an alternative position on the political and
social situation in the state. In 2018, these articles also started to be applied to the clergy of the Ukrainian
Orthodox Church. At the same time, the official Ukrainian government does not recognize the existence of
political prisoners in the state who were detained and/or convicted for their political views and stance
(journalists R. Kotsaba, V. Muravitsky, D. Vasilets and E. Timonin, P. Volkov, K. Vyshinsky, etc.).

6
In 2018, there was a high level of intolerance at the social level. Numerous and systematic acts of physical
violence and threats made by ultra-right groups against individuals and organizations belonging to
independent media agencies, political parties, and public organizations possessing an alternative ideology and
value paradigm, as well as the religious communities of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and ethnic minorities
(Romani) were recorded.
Law enforcement bodies do not obstruct, but even encourage extreme right-wing groups. According to experts
and the public statements of representatives of the most right-wing radical groups, they coordinate their
activities with the Security Service of Ukraine and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
High-profile murders of journalists and politicians (O. Buzina, P. Sheremet), committed by representatives of
these groups, among others, remain uninvestigated or disproportionately lenient court sentences are passed.
There has been no significant progress in ensuring accountability for grave human rights violations during the
killing of Maidan protesters and the 2nd May 2014 violence in Odessa.
Despite the numerous notes of protest of world human rights and journalistic organizations, the website
"Mirotvorets" still functions under the informal auspices of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, publishing the
personal data of Ukrainian and foreign journalists, political and public figures, lawyers, and representatives of
religious communities who are regarded by the authorities as ideological opponents.
As a result of legislative decisions, government practices, and the activities and acts of inaction by the Security
Service and law enforcement bodies, the principle of pluralism of opinions and political competition,
which are the most important basis for democratic foundations of society, is jeopardized. With its
statements and state policy, the Ukrainian authorities are fuelling hate speech, intolerance of dissent,
xenophobia, and interfaith conflict in society.
These trends threaten constitutional democracy, the rule of law and inclusiveness, and may lead to a
narrowing of the democratic/civil and political space throughout Ukraine. Given the fact that the 2019
parliamentary and presidential elections are nearing, it is extremely important to increase the attention
that the Ukrainian and international community is paying to the situation with respect to political
rights and freedoms being the most important basis for the functioning of the democratic system in
Ukraine.

7
THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OPINION
Despite publicly declaring its commitment to international law and European standards, Ukraine's state policy
in 2018 was de facto aimed at creating additional restrictions for the work of independent media and
journalists under the guise of fighting separatism and the need to protect the information space from
Russian aggression.
In Parliament deputies from the government coalition submitted a number of draft laws for consideration that
aim at obtaining the possibility to extrajudicially block online resources and the creation of additional reasons
for fines and the deprivation of licenses of TV channels. The Parliament's vote for the introduction of targeted
sanctions against two TV channels broadcasting alternative views and positions was unprecedented.
The National Council of TV and Radio Broadcasting, through its functions of licensing and imposing fines,
has become a tool for putting pressure on independent media in order to obtain a loyal editorial policy towards
President Poroshenko.
In addition, Ukrainian and international human rights defenders recorded numerous facts of the Security
Service of Ukraine and other law enforcement bodies interfering in the work of journalists and the activities of
public organizations in order to censor materials and voiced opinions. Since 2014, representatives of the SBU
have been overly broadly interpreting the provisions of the Criminal Code relating to terrorism, as well as the
provisions on treason and encroachment on the territorial integrity of the state in cases against Ukrainian media
workers, journalists, bloggers, and even ordinary users of social networks. In 2018, law enforcement bodies
initiated new proceedings against journalists (Kirill Vyshinsky).
An equally significant problem with the observance of the right to freedom of speech and opinion in Ukraine
is violence against journalists and media editorial boards. According to statistics, 96% of crimes against
journalists in Ukraine go unpunished.

8
Legislative regulation
The right to freedom of thought and speech and the right to freely express one's views and beliefs are enshrined
in article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and article 19 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the state of Ukraine. At the national level, this right
is guaranteed by article 34 of the Constitution of Ukraine. The prohibition of censorship and the impossibility of
recognizing any ideology as mandatory are also established at the constitutional level (article 15 of the Constitution).
The issue of the functioning and guarantees of the media, as well as the rights, duties, and responsibilities of
participants in information relations are regulated by about 100 legal acts. In addition to the Constitution, the
laws of Ukraine "On information" and "On printed mass media (press) in Ukraine", as well as the Law of
Ukraine "On television and radio broadcasting" (1997) occupy a leading place in matters of freedom of the
press.
During 2018, a number of legislative acts were introduced in the Parliament, which (if adopted) could
become a tool for the authorities to put additional pressure on independent media. The initiators of
these draft laws were mainly deputies from the coalition factions “Bloc of Petro Poroshenko” and “People's Front”.
Under the aegis of countering "Russian hybrid aggression", these draft laws contain measures that significantly
restrict freedom of speech and opinion in Ukraine. In particular, we are talking about the following legislative
initiatives submitted to the Parliament during 2018:
● The introduction of the possibility to block online information resources for up to 2 days (at the initiative
of the Prosecutor or investigator) or indefinitely (by a court decision). Relevant draft law No. 66881 was
included in the agenda of Parliament in June 2018.
On July 4th the parliamentary committee on
national security and defence approved the draft
law. The Security Service of Ukraine publicly
supported the draft law2. On September 4th the
parliamentary Committee on Information and
Communication decided to send the document for
revision. According to the human rights activists of
"Uspishna Varta", the fact that the draft law was
submitted to the Parliament is a serious blow to
freedom of expression and poses significant threats
to the media and the free exchange of information
on the Internet3.
● Giving the National Council of TV and Radio
Broadcasting (hereinafter – the National Council)
the opportunity to impose fines and cancel the
licenses of TV and radio channels for "calls for
a violent change of the constitutional system of
Ukraine, unleashing an aggressive war or its
propaganda and/or inciting national, racial, and
religious hatred and enmity". Relevant draft law
1 Draft Law No. 6688 from 12.07.2018 "On amendments to some legislative acts of Ukraine on countering threats to national security in the
information sphere". The draft law was developed by deputies from the “People's Front” faction (Dmitry Timchuk, Tatiyana Chernovol) and the
“Bloc of Petro Poroshenko” (Ivan Vinnik). It was included in the agenda of Parliament on June 21st. On July 4th the draft law was approved by the
Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security and Defence (headed by Sergey Pashinsky, “People's Front”).
http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/zweb2/webproc4_2?id=&pf3516=6688&skl=9
2 https://ssu.gov.ua/ua/news/1/category/21/view/5025#.jrIN5B5V.dpbs
3 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/zakonoproekt-o-vnesudebnom-blokirovanii-internet-sajtov-neset-pryamuyu-ugrozu-svobode-slova
The OSCE representative for freedom of the
media Harlem Desir urged Ukrainian legislators to
“seriously revise the text of the draft law and balance security
issues with the right of citizens to freedom of expression and free
media”. He is confident that the draft law “lacks provisions
that ensure effective judicial supervision and due process in
relation to decisions to block access to services.
The UN OHCHR also stressed that States should refrain
from undue interference in the exercise of the right to the freedom
to seek, receive, and disseminate any information, and recalls
that any restriction on freedom of speech (in particular on the
Internet) should be commensurate and necessary in order to
achieve the intended purpose (international Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, article 19, part 3).

9
No. 90684 was submitted to the Parliament on September 7th 2018. On October 2nd the Verkhovna Rada
Committee on Information Policy and Freedom of speech5 recommended to Parliament to adopt this draft
law at the first reading as a basis. On December 18th, despite the calls of the “People's Front” party in
support of the draft law, deputies did not have enough votes to put it to a vote. According to the human
rights activists of “Uspishna Varta”6, if the draft law is adopted, the National Council will have virtually
unlimited possibilities to put pressure on, and to even close, TV and radio companies that are undesirable
for the authorities.
● The possibility of blocking the resources of the Ukrainian media that are suspected by law
enforcement bodies of promoting "terrorist activities" is stipulated in draft law No. 97257, which was
registered by deputies from the "Bloc of Petro Poroshenko" and "People's Front" factions on November
7th. After two attempts (November 20th and December 6th), the draft law was not included in the voting
agenda by Parliament.
The vote of the Parliament on October 4th to submit to the National Security and Defence Council the
issue of imposing sanctions against the TV channel “112 Ukraine” and “NewsOne” (Decree 2589-
VIII)8 was an unprecedented case. The decree stipulates the following sanctions – the freezing of assets, the
cancellation or suspension of licences, the prohibition of the use of the radio frequency resource of Ukraine,
the prohibition of the transfer of technologies and rights to objects of intellectual property, and others.
The Parliament's decision was made as a part of
a general campaign of harassment and hate
speech from the side of officials and right-
wing radical groups against these TV
channels. Thus, immediately after the change of
management of the “NewsOne” channel in
August 2018, on September 3rd the chairmen of
the "Bloc of Petro Poroshenko" and "People's
Front" factions said that “the dynamics of anti-
Ukrainian sentiment on 'NewsOne' is becoming
larger” and “this channel more and more
broadcasts the Kremlin's dungeons, using
representatives of the fifth column”9. On September 4th representatives of these factions in the Parliament hall
urged the Prosecutor General's office and the SBU to investigate "pro-Russian" TV channels, which they call
"Vata-TV". Among the channels named by deputies were "112 channel", "NewsOne", and "Inter"10.
On September 20th in his annual address to the Parliament, President Poroshenko also demanded to register
"agents of influence" of the aggressor state. Journalists and experts suggested that President Poroshenko wants
to close “NewsOne” and other opposition media under the pretext of fighting "Kremlin agents"11.
4 Draft Law No. 9068 “On amendments to the Law of Ukraine 'On television and radio broadcasting'” on strengthening information security and
countering the aggressor state in the information sphere" was registered in the Parliament on 07.09.2018. The authors of the draft law are deputies of
the faction "People's Front" (Viktoriya Syumar, Maksim Burbak), the “Bloc of Petro Poroshenko” (Olga Chervakova, Grigory Shverk, Artur
Gerasimov), and "Self-help" (Oleg Berezyuk) http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/zweb2/webproc4_1?pf3511=64570
5 Headed by the author of the draft law Viktoriya Syumar, “People's Front”
6 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/zakonoproekt-9068-kak-novyj-instrument-davleniya-vlasti-na-nezavisimye-media
7 Draft law No. 9275 on introducing amendments to some laws regarding the protection of the information space. Registered in Parliament on
November 7th 2018 http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/zweb2/webproc4_1?pf3511=64909
8 Decree 2589-VIII "On the approval of proposals for the use of personal special economic and other restrictive measures (sanctions)", adopted on
04.10.2018, entered into force on 20.10.2018. http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2589-viii
9 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/deputaty-koalicii-opolchilis-na-telekanal-newsone
10 https://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2018/09/4/7191051/
11 https://vesti-ukr.com/strana/304139-komanda-fas-pod-predlohom-borby-s-ahentami-kremlja-prezident-khochet-zakryt-newsone-i-druhie-
oppozitsionnye-smi
The National Union of Journalists of Ukraine called the decision
of deputies illegal and recalled that the activities of the media are regulated
by the National Council on Television and Radio Broadcasting, as well as
the courts, but not politicians.
The OSCE representative for freedom of the media
Harlem Desir expressed deep concern over any future decision to
terminate or potentially block the regular functioning of the media in
Ukraine. "I urge the Ukrainian authorities to refrain from taking
disproportionately restrictive measures against the media without due process
of law, because it will have a negative impact on free access to information
and prevents the expression of a diversity of opinions," said Harlem Desir.

10
A number of restrictive measures for the work of the media and the free expression of opinions are also
contained in the draft laws, which are aimed at the actual prohibition of the Russian language and
culture in Ukraine.
Thus, significant restrictions on the work
of the media can be imposed in the event
of the entry into force of draft law No.
5670-d “On ensuring the functioning
of the Ukrainian language as the state
language”12, which was adopted on
October 4th at the first reading. Among
other things, the draft law stipulates that the print media must be published only in the Ukrainian language.
Media can be published in other languages if the content is completely identical to the Ukrainian-language
original. Electronic media should have a page in Ukrainian, which should be loaded by default as the home
page.
According to the preliminary estimates of media representatives, if this law is adopted a number of Ukrainian
media outlets may be closed due to a significant increase in financial costs. The Kyiv Post, the only fully-fledged
separate English-language media outlet in Ukraine, has already stated that it lacks resources for the release of a
second newspaper. There is also a high probability that these legislative norms will be used to fine and initiate
criminal cases against opposition publications.
Against the background of active anti-Russian rhetoric on the eve of the election campaign, on October 18th
the Parliament included in its agenda two more draft laws prohibiting propaganda of the "Russian world"
and the "Imperial ideology of the aggressor state" in Ukraine (draft laws No. 913913 and No. 920014
respectively). According to the lawyers of the "Uspishna Varta" human rights platform, the adoption of these
draft laws will pave the way for a groundless ban on the use of the Russian language and culture, as well
as a ban of the Orthodox faith, referring to the alleged idea of involvement and commitment to Russia, which
is contrary to the Constitution of Ukraine and international jurisprudence15.
The so-called "moratoria on the Russian-language cultural product" adopted by the regional councils of
Lvov and Zhytomyr (25th October), Ternopol (6th November), Ivano-Frankovsk (7th December), and Volyn regions
(20 December) have a negative impact on the freedom of speech and opinion16. According to the experts of
"Uspishna Varta, these moratoria contradict Article 10 of the Constitution of Ukraine and the law “On culture”.
The initiative of the deputies does not have any legal basis and is highly recommendatory. Nevertheless, the
12 Draft law No. 5670-d "On ensuring the functioning of the Ukrainian language as the state one". Registered in parliament on 09.06.2017, adopted at
the first reading on 04.10.2018 http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/zweb2/webproc4_1?pf3511=61994
13 Draft law No. 9139 “On Amendments to the Law of Ukraine 'On the Condemnation of the Communist and National Socialist (Nazi) Totalitarian
Regimes in Ukraine and Banning the Propaganda of Their Symbols'” (regarding the condemnation and prohibition of the “Russian world” in Ukraine.
It was brought to Parliament on September 28th by deputies from the "Ukrop" party (Aleksandr Shevchenko).
http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/zweb2/webproc4_1?pf3511=64706
14 Draft law No. 9200 “On Amendments to the Law of Ukraine 'On Condemnation of the Communist and National Socialist (Nazi) Totalitarian
Regimes in Ukraine and Banning the Propaganda of Their Symbols'” (concerning the condemnation and prohibition of the imperial ideology of the
aggressor state in Ukraine. It was submitted to Parliament on October 16th by deputies from the factions “Bloc of Petro Poroshenko” (Aleksandr
Briginets, Refat Chubarov) and “People's Front” (Andrey Teteruk and Sergey Vysotsky). Refat Chubarov is also the Chairman of the Mejlis of the
Crimean Tatar people. http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/zweb2/webproc4_1?pf3511=64796
15 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/zakonoproekty-po-zapretu-russkogo-mira-protivorechat-normam-nacionalnogo-i-mezhdunarodnogo-prava-
yuristy
16 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/svoboda-nastupaet-v-zhitomire-vsled-za-lvovom-zapretili-russkoyazychnyj-kulturnyj-produkt
Сontrary to the recommendations of the Council of Europe and the
PACE resolution "Protection and development of regional languages and
minority languages in Europe" of January 23, 2018, the legislation introducing
language quotas for the Ukrainian language (up to 75%) on television and radio,
as well as the "law on education", which significantly infringes on the rights of
national minorities and the Russian-speaking population, was not abolished.

11
decision of the regional councils not only
recommend, but also plan to control
their unconstitutional implementation.
For example, in the Lvov region an
interdepartmental working group is
being created to conduct "explanatory
work" on this moratorium". It is planned
to include law enforcement officers,
district administration officials, and the
public in the group.
The adoption of these moratoriums will
have a direct impact on the work of the
media and the ability to express their
opinions freely. Thus, the editorial board
of the Russian-language magazine "Sho"
(Lvov region) has already announced restrictions on the sale of its publications in connection with the
moratorium.
At the legislative level other prohibitions and restrictions on the work of the media that are not formally
related to the factor of Russian aggression were also initiated. Thus, on November 20th draft law No.
9306, which stipulates criminal liability for slander, was submitted to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine17.
The authors of the draft law (deputies from “Bloc of Petro Poroshenko”) propose to introduce criminal liability
for the deliberate distribution of knowingly false statements via the "public demonstration of works in the
media or on the Internet". The proposed sanction is a fine of 8,500 to 25,500 hryvnia, correctional labor for a
period of one to two years, or the restriction of freedom for a period of two to five years. The National Union
of Journalists of Ukraine said that this amounts to a ban on the profession and called to boycott this draft law18.
However, for the first time in the history of independent Ukraine, the Verkhovna Rada did not impose a
moratorium on media checks during the 2019 presidential elections. The moratorium was supported on
December 5th by the Committee on Freedom of Speech and Information Policy, but the issue was not put to
a vote. It was assumed that the Committee's amendments allowed only monitoring of language quotas on the
TV and radio.
17 Draft law 9306 "On Amendments to the Criminal and Criminal Procedure Codes of Ukraine regarding the establishment of responsibility for libel".
Registered in Parliament on 20.11.2018 by deputies from the “Bloc of Petro Poroshenko” faction.
http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/zweb2/webproc4_1?pf3511=64959
18 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/ukrainskiye-deputaty-khotyat-sazhat-zhurnalistov-na-5-let-za-klevetu-posle-dela-gandzyuk
The language issue is one of the key elements of the campaign of the current President
Poroshenko at the elections-2019

12
Government policy
Fines and deprivation of licenses for TV and radio channels
Supervision of compliance with the laws of Ukraine in the field of television and radio broadcasting is carried
out by the National Council of Ukraine for Television and Radio Broadcasting (hereinafter - the National
Council). At meetings concerning the deprivation of licenses, members of the National Council openly talk
about the political expediency of their decisions, allegedly with a view to "combat separatism" and "resist
Russian aggression".
In February 2018 more than 60 media representatives and media companies made an open appeal to President
Poroshenko and other authorities, urging them to stop the censorship in the country and to stop the
blackmailing of editors by the National Council, which they considered to be the beginning of the collapse
of freedom of speech in Ukraine. "The actual duties of this body were reduced to censorship, constant
unscheduled inspections, blackmailing editorial offices regarding the extension of licenses, etc.," says the appeal.
From the major media, it was signed by the journalists of the TV channels “Inter”, “ZIK”, “NewsOne”, “112
Ukraine”, the media holding companies “Vesti Ukraine” and “Era Media”, as well as other media agencies19.
Thus, in May, the head of the National Council Yury Artemenko on the air of "Channel 5" said that closing
the channel isn't beneficial, since indignation may arrive from Europe and Ukrainians themselves, but imposing
systematic fines is profitable and possible. "If a channel is closed – let's say I love or hate some channel, for example, Inter
- you understand that fault will be found and so many people will rise, and Europe will shout that an oppositional channel was
closed. But a fine is a good practice, which we saw on the quotas for Ukrainian songs. They pay, whine, cry, but they pay," he
said20.
The fines imposed by the National Council are mainly related to the media that is in opposition to the
current government and broadcast alternative opinions and assessments on the political agenda. The
media close to President Poroshenko and the parliamentary coalition factions, on the contrary, received
preferential licenses and were not fined for violations committed on the air.
On July 11th the National Council decided to fine the TV channel "Inter" for 4 million hryvnia because of a concert
shown on May 9th 2018 on the occasion of Victory Day. "Inter" believes that the fine was imposed exclusively for
"condemning Nazism as a manifestation of fascism" and intends to defend their interests in court21.
On August 29th the National Council also decided to carry out an unscheduled check of the radio station "Radio
Vesti". According to the regulator, on July 18th the proportion of Ukrainian-language programs on the radio was
42.4% versus the 55% of the daily volume of broadcasts required by law. The management of the media holding
company "Vesti" has repeatedly reported about the systematic pressure being put on it by the authorities22. On
November 1st the National Council decided to fine the "Vesti" radio station 22,800 hryvnia for violating the norms
for transmission in the Ukrainian language.
On August 29th it became known that the “NewsOne” TV channel was transferred to the management of the
lawyer Andrey Portnov, who previously held the post of the Deputy Head of the Presidential Administration, for 3
years. Immediately on August 30th the National Council announced a warning to the TV channel for the alleged
broadcasting of TV programs made after August 1st 1991 that contain the popularization or promotion of law
enforcement bodies, the army, and other military or security forces of the “aggressor state”23. On September 20th the
National Council appointed an unscheduled on-site inspection of “NewsOne”.
19 http://eramedia.com.ua/273632-zupiniti_znischennya_svobodi_slova_v_ukran/
20 https://newsone.ua/news/politics/zakryvat-ne-budem-no-vypishem-shtraf-hlava-natssoveta-po-tv-planiruet-naznachit-newsone-vneplanovuju-
proverku.html
21 https://inter.ua/uk/news/2018/07/12/6671
22 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/nacsovet-obvinil-radio-vesti-v-nesoblyudenii-yazykovyh-kvot
23 https://www.ukrinform.ru/rubric-society/2527139-nacsovet-obavil-preduprezdenie-newsone-izza-kommentaria-ob-oruzii-rf.html

13
In addition to fines, a tool of the National Council that is used to exert pressure is the issue of extending
or renewing the licenses of radio and TV channels. The media loyal to President Poroshenko coordinated
this issue without difficulties (radio "Novoye Vremya", the TV channel "Pryamoy"). The TV and radio channels
that refused to coordinate their editorial policy with the Presidential Administration continued to have
difficulties with the renewal of their licenses in 2018.
On January 24th the ZIK TV channel reported that pressure was being put on its activities after it interviewed an
opposition politician24. Only after it became known that the composition of the owners had changed did the National
Council on March 22nd satisfy the channel's application for the renewal of its broadcasting license.
The news information channel "112 Ukraine" also reported that pressure was being exerted on it. In May the head
of the National Council Yury Artemenko in an interview with "Channel 5" said that the National Council does not intend
to extend the license of the channel “112 Ukraine”, because it allegedly negatively influences public opinion. Channel “112” regarded
the threats of the officials about the non-renewal of its license for 2 months prior to a review as the obstruction of
journalistic activities and demanded the dismissal of Artemenko25.
On November 1st the National Council appointed an unscheduled inspection of the “NASH” TV channel (Maksi-
TV), which was launched by the opposition politician Evgeny Murayev on November 7th. On December 6th the
National Council refused to reissue the name and program concept of the TV channel. The leadership of the channel
called the decision of the National Council illegal, biased, and politically motivated26.
Restrictions imposed on freedom of speech and opinion by law enforcement bodies
Censorship of journalists and media agencies by the Security Service of Ukraine
Ukrainian and international human rights defenders recorded numerous instances of the SBU and other law
enforcement bodies interfering in the work of editors and journalists and the activities of public organizations
in order to censor materials and voiced opinions regarding the conflict in Donbass and relations with the
Russian Federation. In an open appeal to President Poroshenko in February 2018, more than 60 representatives
of Ukrainian media companies demanded to stop censorship in the country and, in particular, to assess the activities
of the SBU units that wiretap and survey journalists27.
Representatives of the SBU and law enforcement
bodies used the situation with the dramatization of
the "murder" of the journalist Arkady Babchenko
to intimidate and coerce journalists into self-
censorship. On May 29th law enforcement bodies
reported about the murder of the Russian journalist
living in Kiev Arkady Babchenko. On the same day, a
number of officials claimed that there was the "trace
of the Kremlin" in the crime. On May 30th at a
briefing the head of the SBU Vasily Gritsak and the
Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yury Lutsenko
reported that the journalist is alive. The SBU explained
that the dramatization was needed in order to identify
the perpetrators of the alleged contract killings of more
than 30 (later 47) Ukrainian journalists and public
figures. However, the video and statements of the detained "client" of this "murder" presented by the SBU
24 https://zik.ua/news/2018/01/24/kerivnytstvo_ziku_zayavlyaie_pro_zagostrennya_tysku_na_diyalnist_telekanalu_1250903
25 https://112.ua/novosti-kanala/telekanal-112-ukraina-trebuet-uvolneniya-predsedatelya-nacsoveta-po-tv-yuriy-artemenko-otkrytoe-pismo-
446659.html
26 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/natssovet-otkazal-telekanalu-nash-v-pereoformlenii-litsenzii
27 http://eramedia.com.ua/273632-zupiniti_znischennya_svobodi_slova_v_ukran/
Journalist Arkady Babchenko, Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yury
Lutsenko and head of the Security Service of Ukraine Vasily Gritsak at a
briefing on May 30, 2018

14
caused experts to cast doubts about the participation of the Russian special services in this case and about the
expediency of this dramatization in general.
International organizations and diplomatic missions demanded to clarify the need to stage the death of Arkady
Babchenko, calling it an “extraordinary measure”28. In addition, the International and European Federation of
journalists (IFJ-EFJ) condemned the growing number of threats against journalists in Ukraine made by
government officials and called on the Ukrainian authorities to stop such acts of harassment aimed against
journalists and representatives of journalistic organizations29. Authoritative organizations also condemned the
so-called "list of traitors" who criticized the government in the situation with Babchenko. This list was
published by the Press Secretary of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine Larisa Sargan. It included, amongst
others, the journalist Miroslava Gongadze and the Chairman of the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine
Sergey Tomilenko. The OSCE representative on freedom of the media Harlem Desir called the publication of
the list and the accusation of journalists of betrayal “unacceptable and dangerous”30.
Searches in media outlets and interference in the work of journalists
During the year, law enforcement bodies carried out searches in the editorial offices of independent media
agencies and secret investigations against journalists.
Thus, despite the protests and concerns of international
organizations, on February 8th 2018 the office of the
media holding company "Vesti Ukraine" was
captured with the active participation of government
agencies, law enforcement bodies, and civilian
mercenaries. As a result, journalists were prevented
from lawfully occupying their office, machinery,
equipment, and personal belongings were seized, the
editorial office was trashed, gas of an unknown origin
was used against the journalists, and journalistic activity
was obstructed. The holding company emphasizes that
it occupies the office legally as it has lease agreements
with the owner, whose right to use these premises is not
limited. After the office of the media holding was
captured it was held by unknown persons of an athletic
build drinking alcohol and destroying the equipment
and furniture of the journalists31. Since 2014 the National Council, representatives of law enforcement bodies, and
ultra-right groups have been systematically putting pressure on the media holding "Vesti Ukraine" (radio "Vesti", the
newspaper "Vesti", the “vesti-ukr” and ubr.ua websites, the UBR TV channel).
On March 5th the SBU carried out more than 25 searches in different regions of Ukraine at the homes of persons
who allegedly promote Russia in carrying out anti-Ukrainian actions. According to the Ukrainian media, searches, in
particular, took place in Kiev, Dnepr, Kharkov, and Odessa. In Kiev, the SBU searched the apartment of the
journalist Yury Lukashin32.
On May 15th the SBU carried out searches in the editorial office and in the homes of employees of the news agency
RIA "Novosti Ukraine". As a result of the searches the editor-in-chief of the agency Kirill Vyshinsky was detained.
He was charged with treason (part 1 of article 111 of the Criminal Code). The sanction on this charge stipulates up
to 15 years of imprisonment.
28 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/situaciya-s-babchenko-inscenirovka-ubijstva-zhurnalista-podryvaet-doverie-k-pravoohranitelnym-organam
29 http://europeanjournalists.org/blog/2018/06/01/ifj-and-efj-condemn-threats-against-journalists-in-ukraine/
30 https://www.osce.org/representative-on-freedom-of-media/383478
31 https://vesti-ukr.com/strana/277661-sem-dnej-okkupatsii-ofis-vestej-razhromlen-reshenie-suda-ihnoriruetsja
32 https://strana.ua/news/129130-jurij-lukashin-rasskazal-podrobnosti-obyska-sbu.html
Office of Media Holding "Vesti Ukraine" after the seizure of the military
prosecutor's office and the National Agency for Asset Management
(ARMA), February 2018

15
Other media companies in Ukraine also reported that the authorities and law enforcement bodies were putting
pressure on them.
Thus, on September 18th the publication “STRANA.ua” reported that an SBU officer threatened to punish a
journalist of the publication. It was precisely this journalist who took a picture of President Poroshenko’s villa in
Marbella (Spain) in May 2018. On October 1st the editor-in-chief of the publication, Igor Guzhva, announced that
he had obtained political asylum in Austria. The team of investigative journalists from “Bihus.info”, under the
leadership of Denis Bigus, also reported that its editors and journalists were being surveyed by the Security Service of
Ukraine.
On September 4th “Radio Svoboda” expressed its indignation regarding the decision of the Pechersky court to
provide the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine with access to the personal information of Nataliya Sedletskaya,
the chief editor of the “Schemes” investigation program33. Later, in accordance with the decision of the Kiev Court
of Appeal, the Prosecutor General of Ukraine was granted the right to access a smaller amount of data from the
journalist’s phone. The OSCE urged the Ukrainian government to respect the privilege of Sedletskaya as an
investigative journalist and to adhere to international standards and OSCE commitments.
Attempts to also put pressure on YouTube channels featuring socio-political content were also recorded.
On July 12th the Pechersky court of Kiev adopted a ruling allowing investigators of the National Police of Ukraine
to contact Google with a request to obtain data about a number of YouTube channels, including the channel of the
well-known journalist and video blogger Anatoly Sharij34.
Deportation and non-admission of foreign journalists
Despite the sharp reaction of the OSCE and other organizations, the practice of deporting and not allowing
foreign journalists to enter Ukraine continued in 2018. As was reported by the Security Service of Ukraine
at the end of 2018, the department banned 83 “Russian propagandists” from entering Ukraine35.
Thus, on May 2nd the State Border Service at the request of the SBU didn't let journalists from Italy, the Czech
Republic, and Russia enter Ukraine to cover commemorative events in Odessa, referring to the fact that these
journalists previously “improbably covered the events in Ukraine”36.
On June 26th Russia Today correspondent Paula Slier, as well as the Russian TV presenter and representative of the
Union of Journalists of Russia Evgeny Primakov, who arrived in Kiev for an OSCE conference, were not allowed
to enter Ukraine. On July 10th in Kiev the British journalist John Warren was not allowed entry with a ban on
entry for 3 years due to unauthorized visits to Crimea in September-October 2015.
On July 18th the SBU banned the Chairman of the Union of Journalists of Russia Vladimir Solovyov from entering
the country for three years. The OSCE representative on freedom of the media Harlem Desir stated that he was
"disappointed" with the non-admission of Solovyov, and that "travel restrictions affect the free flow of information".
During the 30 days of martial law (from November 26th to December 26th) 37 border guards on the Ukrainian-
Russian border refused entry to 6 journalists from Russia. This concerns the employee of the "Staraya Rus"
publication Elena Nikolaeva and Yuliya Nikitina from "Fontanka". In addition, border guards didn't let the
33 https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/schemes/29470455.html
34 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/zapros-nacpolicii-v-youtube-o-kanale-shariya-yavlyaetsya-prepyatstvovaniem-zhurnalistkoj-deyatelnosti-
yuristy-uspishna-varta
35 https://ssu.gov.ua/ua/news/1/category/2/view/5512#.mHz1rOaj.dpbs
36 https://dpsu.gov.ua/ua/news/Prikordonniki-ne-propustili-dlya-visvitlennya-podiy-v-Odesi-gromadyan-Italii-CHehii-ta-Rosii/
37 In accordance with the Law of Ukraine “On the Approval of the Decree of the President of Ukraine 'On the Imposition of Martial Law in Ukraine'”
(No. 2630-VIII), adopted by the Ukrainian parliament on November 26th, martial law was introduced in 10 regions of Ukraine and in the internal
waters of the Azov-Kerch water area from 14:00 on November 26th to 14:00 on December 26th 2018. In Decree No. 393/2018 “On the introduction
of martial law in Ukraine”, published on the website of the President, it is indicated that for the period of the legal regime of martial law, the
constitutional rights and freedoms of a person and citizen enshrined in Articles 30–34, 38, 39, 41–44, and 53 of the Constitution of Ukraine may be
limited.

16
correspondent of the newspaper "My District" Elena Vladykina and the journalist of the “SCOOP” network
Anastasiya Drozdova enter the country. The reasons for which the journalists were denied entry were not
explained. On December 4th two more journalists from Russia were also not allowed to enter Ukraine. In
general, during the period of martial law entry into Ukraine was denied to 1650 Russians38.
In addition, the SBU deported journalists living in Ukraine who have foreign citizenship.
On July 17th the staff of the Kiev SBU detained in Nikolaev the Turkish oppositional journalist Yusuf Inan, violently
brought him out of his house in Nikolaev, and, without the right to appeal, was extradited to Turkey. Inan ran an
opposition Internet website and was put on the wanted list by the Turkish authorities. The extradition of the journalist
caused a wave of indignation among human rights defenders in Ukraine and abroad.
On January 2nd 2019 employees of the SBU detained the founder of the "Glavnovosti" news website Pavel
Karnazytsky. He was deported to Belarus and banned from entering Ukraine for 3 years. The SBU claims that
Karnazytsky conducted "destructive activity, spreading anti-Ukrainian propaganda and fake information" in Ukraine.
The lawyer of the journalist noted that his client was forced to leave Belarus because of political persecution and since
the late 90's has lived in Ukraine39.
Arrests of journalists and bloggers
In 2018 the political persecution of journalists and public figures because of their opinions and
convictions continued in Ukraine. From those cases that are known to the “Uspishna Varta” human rights
platform, “political” cases against journalists, public figures, and politicians are initiated as a rule under the
articles “Crimes against the foundations of the national security of Ukraine” (Articles 110-114¹ of the Criminal
Code of Ukraine).
According to statistics from the General Prosecutor's Office for 2015-2018, under these articles a report was
submitted on suspicion of 711 cases. At the same time, in 38% of these cases (276) suspicions were handed
over in 2018. Most often, law enforcement bodies applied the following articles:
● Articles 110 and 110-2 "Infringing on the territorial integrity and inviolability of Ukraine" - a total of
302 suspicions;
● Article 109 “Actions aimed at forcibly changing or overthrowing the constitutional system or seizing
state power” - 198 suspicions;
● and article 111 “State treason” - 147 suspicions.
In 2018 the prosecutor's office filed in court 182 cases under the articles on national security with a indictment
(a total of 483 cases in 2015-2018). Most of the charges under these articles that had the legal team of “Uspishna
Varta”40
had the opportunity to study are based on “formal suspicion”, without a corresponding evidence base
and with violations of the rules of procedural law.
38 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/voyennoye-polozheniye-v-ukraine-itogi
39 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/sbu-deportirovala-v-belarus-oppozitsionnogo-zhurnalista
40 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/sizo-ili-zalog-pochemu-sudy-ne-naznachayut-zalogi-po-politicheskim-delam

17
Data from the website of the Prosecutor-General of Ukraine
As a result, hundreds of people for several years were (or continue to be) in pre-trial detention centers, without
a court decision, without the right to bail, and without any alternative. Among them are the journalists Ruslan
Kotsaba, Dmitry Vasilets, Vasily Muravitsky, Kirill Vyshinsky, Pavel Volkov (other cases are in the section
“Monitoring of human rights cases”).
In January 2015 the journalist from Ivano-Frankovsk Ruslan
Kotsaba was convicted of treason for publishing a video that
opposed military mobilisation. He spent 524 days in a detention
center without an alternative. In the spring of 2016 the court
sentenced Kotsaba to 3.5 years in prison. In July 2016 the court of
appeal fully acquitted and released the journalist. In March 2017
the Prosecutor's office received an appeal, and the Supreme Court
returned the case to the appellate instance for reconsideration.
Hearings on the Kotsaba case continued in 2018. Thus, on
February 19th the Dolinsky court of the Ivano-Frankovsk region
returned the indictment to the prosecutor's office for being
incompatible with the norms of the law of Ukraine. On May 29th
a similar decision was made by the Lvov Court of Appeal. However, in October in Ivano-Frankovsk the Security Service
of Ukraine filed a renewed case against the journalist for treason and disruption of mobilization. According to the
journalist, the charges have not changed, the evidence also remained the same. In his opinion, all this litigation is necessary
only to prevent the consideration of the case in the European Court of Human Rights.
Journalist Dmitry Vasilets and his colleague Evgeny Timonin
were detained by the SBU on November 24th 2015 on charges of
information assistance to terrorism (article 258-3 of the Criminal
Code). They were accused of setting up a YouTube channel and a
number of other services for the-then non-existent information
resource "Novorossiya-TV".
After almost two years of being detained in pre-trial detention and
accused in litigation, in September 2017 the Andrushevsky court
of Zhytomyr convicted Vasilets and Timonin to 9 years in prison.
In February 2018 the Kiev Court of Appeal overturned the verdict,
sending the case for a new trial to the court of first instance and
changed the measure of restraint to house arrest41. Vasilets and
Timonin were wrongly in jail for 820 days.
41 https://uspishna-varta.com/keys/dmitrij-vasilets-i-evgenij-timonin/
ст.109; 196; 27,6%
ст.110; 213; 30,0%ст.110 - 2; 89; 12,5%
ст.111; 147; 20,7%
ст.112; 33;
4,6%
ст.113; 17; 2,4% ст.114; 8; 1,1% ст.114-1; 8; 1,1%
Criminal proceedings under articles of Criminal Code, for which a notice of suspicion
was served (2015-2018)
ст.109 ст.110 ст.110 - 2 ст.111 ст.112 ст.113 ст.114 ст.114-1
Journalist Ruslan Kotsaba was in prison for 524 days
Journalists Vasilets and Timonin were sentenced to 9 years
in prison for "informational aiding terrorists"

18
During 2018 "Uspishna Varta" monitored the re-trial of Vasilets-Timonin in the Borodyansky district court of the Kiev
region. After the postponement of a number of court sessions42, the first preparatory hearing on the case took place only
on October 16th. The court granted the request of the defenders and returned the indictment to the Prosecutor's office
for revision, referring to the numerous violations committed during the pre-trial investigation and the non-compliance of
the indictment with the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Code. On December 13th the Kiev Court of Appeal
overturned the decision of the Borodyansky court and granted the appeal of the Zhytomyr Prosecutor's office43. Court
sessions concerning the Vasilets-Timonin case will continue in 2019.
Journalist and blogger Vasily Muravitsky was detained by
the SBU on August 2nd 2017 on charges of treason. He is
charged with the fact of concluding a standard employment
contract with an international Russian agency, where he had
his analytical column. He spent 11 months in a pre-trial
detention center without an alternative. As of January 2019
he continues to be under house arrest. Amnesty International
recognized Muravitsky as a prisoner of conscience.
The lawyer of Muravitsky reported to the "Uspishna Varta"
human rights group that in the indictment there is no crime,
and the most stringent measures of detention are wrongfully
imposed on the journalist. Muravitsky was detained by the
staff of the SBU in the maternity hospital where his wife gave
birth to their child. The SBU put pressure on the journalist and blackmailed him by threatening to involve his loved ones
if a guilty plea isn't made44.
The "Uspishna Varta" human rights platform monitored the 10 court hearings concerning the case of Muravitsky that
took place in 2018. Thus, at the hearings on May 7th, June 1st, and June 13th the court sent the materials of the investigation
for revision, prolonging the journalist's measure of restraint. On June 27th the Korolevsky court of Zhytomyr changed his
measure of restraint to house arrest45. During subsequent hearings the court examined the evidence of the Prosecutor's
office and extended the journalist's measure of restraint. Thus, on October 24th, during another court session the
Prosecutor provided Muravitsky's e-mail correspondence, including spam letters reporting that the journalist allegedly had
won a prize in the form of a sum in Russian rubles, as proof of his guilt. The journalist's defence insists that the written
evidence submitted by the Prosecutor cannot be recognized by the court as admissible46.
During the hearings of November 16th and December 12th, the court continued its examination of the prosecution's
evidence in the case47. On January 10th 2019 the court decided to extend the measure of restraint imposed on the journalist
in the form of around-the-clock house arrest for another 60 days.48. The court hearing on the case of Muravitsky will
continue in 2019.
Representatives of the right-wing radical group “C14” systematically appear at court hearings concerning the case of
Muravitsky, which can be regarded as the exertion of pressure on the court. On August 6th, immediately after the court
hearing, they attacked Muravitsky and doused him with zelenka49. On September 28th representatives of “C14” attacked
a lawyer and a journalist in the courtroom50. The police, who arrived after the incident happened, did not bring the attackers
to justice.
42 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/sud-po-delu-vasilca-i-timonina-perenesli-iz-za-neyavki-prokurorov
43 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/apellyatsionnyy-sud-vernul-delo-vasiltsa-i-timonina-v-sud-pervoy-instantsii
44 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/video/view/57
45 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/advokaty-i-pravozashitniki-dobilis-osvobozhdeniya-zhurnalista-muravickogo
46 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/prokuror-proignoriroval-trebovaniya-upk-vo-vremya-predostavleniya-dokazatelstv-po-delu-muravickogo
47 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/muravitskomu-prodlili-meru-presecheniya-v-vide-domashnego-aresta
48 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/sud-ostavil-muravitskogo-pod-domashnim-arestom-na-ocherednyye-60-dney
49 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/posle-suda-na-muravickogo-napali-radikaly
50 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/s-drakoj-i-vyzovom-policii-muravickomu-prodlili-domashnij-arest-kak-prohodil-skandalnyj-sud-v-
zhitomire
Journalist Vasily Muravitsky spent 11 months in the pre-trial prison in
Zhytomyr

19
The journalist and blogger Pavel Volkov was arrested on
September 27th 2017 on charges of part 2 of article 110 of the
Criminal Code of Ukraine – infringement of the territorial
integrity of Ukraine (by a group of persons) and article 258-3 –
rendering other assistance to terrorists. He is accused under both
articles because of his publications on the Internet. During the
pre-trial investigation and the trial Volkov spent 13 months in
jail without an alternative. Despite the deteriorating health of
Pavel, during this period the Shevchenkovsky court of
Zaporozhye extended the measure of restraint imposed on the
journalist in the form of detention.
During 2018, the "Uspishna Varta" human rights platform
monitored court sessions concerning Volkov's case. Hearings
were held at least once a month, and the journalist's measure of
restraint was extended. At the hearings on July 5th and August 27th the Prosecutor did not attach new evidence to the
case51. At the hearing on September 13th the court granted the request of the lawyer of Volkov to recognise two volumes
of the proceedings as inadmissible evidence52. The hearing on September 25th didn't take place because the judge fell ill.
In connection with the replacement of the judge, at a hearing on October 25th the Prosecutor filed a motion to have the
indictment considered from the beginning. Thus, all the evidence that had been previously appealed by Volkov's lawyers
started to be considered by the court again. At the same time, the court refused to satisfy the motion of the Prosecutor to
extend the measure of restraint imposed on Volkov in the form of detention, without having chosen an alternative. After
spending more than a year in jail in Zaporozhye the journalist was finally released53.
Hearings concerning Volkov's case resumed on November 21st. As proof of the journalist's guilt, the Prosecutor's office
presented videos showing a snippet of a rally in Zaporozhye in 2013, as well as an interview with Volkov in 2012, in which
historical, cultural, and philosophical issues were discussed. The defence noted that the case file contains evidence that is
not relevant to the prosecution.
On January 9th 2019, after a one-month break and the cancellation of six previous hearings, the hearings concerning
Volkov's case resumed. The defence of the journalist filed a motion to have a number of inspection reports declared as
inadmissible evidence due to procedural violations that took place during the investigation.
The editor-in-chief of RIA “Novosti Ukraine”
Kirill Vyshinsky was detained by the SBU on May
15th 2018 on suspicion of treason (part 1 of article
111 of the Criminal Code). Ever since this moment
he has had no alternative to being in the detention
center of Kherson.
Vyshinsky's lawyer told the coordinators of
“Uspishna Varta”54 that the journalist as the main
suspicion is charged with a number of journalistic
publications from March 2014, published in the
"Opinions" section of RIA "Novosti Ukraine".
These articles allegedly contain calls to change
territorial integrity and propagandistic appeals. The
SBU became interested in these articles only 4 years
after they were published.
51 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/v-zaporozhe-sud-ostavil-pod-strazhej-eshe-na-2-mesyaca-zhurnalista-pavla-volkova
52 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/zaporozhskij-sud-priznal-nedopustimymi-dokazatelstva-po-delu-zhurnalista-pavla-volkova
53 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/sud-otpustil-zhurnalista-pavla-volkova-domoj-posle-bolee-goda-v-sizo
54 Interview with the lawyer A. Domansky, who represents the interests of K. Vyshinsky https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/intervju-advokata-
kirilla-vyshinskogo-andreja-domanskogo
Journalist Pavel Volkov was detained for more than a year in
Zaporizhia
Journalist Kirill Vyshinsky was detained on May 15, 2017 on charges of treason

20
In an interview with the human rights activists of "Uspishna Varta" during the hearing on December 11th, Vyshinsky
himself said55 that, in addition to materials from 2014 on the website of RIA “Novosti Ukraine”, he is also charged with
state treason for an article published on May 15th 2018 (the day of his detention) with the title "The attack on the UOC
led to the refusal of autocephaly". The article presents the opinion of an expert expressing skepticism about the prospect
of obtaining autocephaly. In this material the expert's opinion is stated on 11 lines and the position of the UOC-KP is
stated on 17 lines.
Concern about the detention of Vyshinsky and
the consequences that it can lead to in terms of
freedom of the media in the country was
expressed in the Council of Europe56, Office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights57, the office of the OSCE representative on
freedom of the media, and Reporters Without Borders
(RSF).
Despite the concern of the international
community about the situation with RIA
Novosti, no reaction from the Ukrainian
authorities followed. The parliamentary
Committee on Freedom of Speech took the side
of the SBU and said that the detention of
Vyshinsky was justified, which actually legitimized the actions of law enforcement bodies aimed at putting pressure on
independent media and journalists.
The Prosecutor General’s Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs spoke about possibly exchanging Vyshinsky for the
Ukrainian director Oleg Sentsov58.
The “Uspishna Varta” human rights platform monitored the trial of Vyshinsky in the Kherson City Court and the Court
of Appeal in the Kherson region. At the first hearing on May 17th the Kherson City Court ordered the arrest of Vyshinsky
for 60 days without the right to bail. At the hearings on July 11th, September 6th, and November 1st the court supported
the motion of the prosecutor’s office to extend the term of the journalist's detention for another 60 days. At the hearing
on December 28th the arrest of Vyshinsky was extended until January 27th 2019.
The Appellate Court of the Kherson region, starting with the hearing on June 1st, systematically refuses the motion of
Vyshinsky's defence to change the measure of restraint, thus confirming the decision of the court of first instance. Lawyers
say that the appeal review is being dragged out. For example, on September 26th the journalist was not taken to court, and
on October 2nd the court hearing did not take place due to the reappointment of judges.
The defence of Vyshinsky states that in civilized countries the conditions of the journalist's detention in the Kherson pre-
trial detention center would be considered as torture, since the windows were removed from cells and rooms for the
course of investigative actions. Vyshinsky’s defence insists on the journalist undergoing an independent medical
examination. During his stay in the pre-trial detention center his health has significantly deteriorated.
On September 25th the Security Service announced the completion of the criminal proceedings investigation concerning
the case of Vyshinsky and the preparation of materials for transfer to the court. However, on October 10th the Prosecutor's
office said that the investigation concerning the case of Vyshinsky hadn't been completed and the examination continues.
At the same time the Prosecutor-General denied the information of the SBU about the completion of the investigation of
the journalist. The Prosecutor's office announced the completion of the pre-trial investigation concerning the case of
Vyshinsky only on January 10th 201959.
55 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/kirill-vyshinskiy-sledstviye-schitayet-chto-ya-podryvayu-vozmozhnost-polucheniya-avtokefalii
56 https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/spokesperson-of-the-secretary-general-council-of-europe-platform-for-the-protection-of-journalists-
registers-alert-on-ukraine-ria-novosti-journalist-k
57 http://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/5209833
58 https://vesti-ukr.com/strana/289753-v-mid-podumyvajut-obmenjat-sentsova-na-vyshinskoho-
59 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/zaversheno-dosudebnoye-rassledovaniye-v-otnoshenii-kirilla-vyshinskogo
On November 1 the OSCE Representative on Freedom of
the Media Harlem Desir expressed serious concern about the
lengthy pre-trial detention of Vyshinsky. “I urge the Ukrainian
authorities to speed up the investigation into the serious allegations
against Kirill Vyshinsky and to conduct such an investigation in full
compliance with the principles of the rule of law, necessity, and
proportionality. Journalists have the right to freely express their
opinions, including by reporting problems that may be considered
controversial, sensitive or offensive. Under no circumstances should they
be subjected to repression for their journalistic activities,” said Harlem
Desir. Later, the OSCE representative expressed disappointment
with the court's decision, which for the third time extended
Vyshinsky's arrest.

21
Restricting Freedom of Expression and Information Exchange on the Internet
During 2014-2018 the state's policy was aimed at restricting freedom on the Internet. Such a policy was publicly
justified by the need to confront Russian aggression and fight against separatism in the East of Ukraine. In
2018 the trend of restricting freedom of expression on the Internet continued.
Thus, on May 14th 2018 President Poroshenko, in accordance with decree No. 126/2018, enacted the decision
of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine from May 2nd to introduce new sanctions for 3
years against 1,748 individuals and 756 legal entities, including a number of media agencies. The list of resources
whose activities were blocked in Ukraine included the RIA “Novosti Ukraine” website, the websites of “Russia-
24”, “Pervy Kanal”, “NTV”, and others (the television channels themselves were blocked in 2014)"60. The
sanctions list also included the Ukrainian media companies “Media Innovation Group” (“Ekonomicheskiye
Izvestiya” publication) and “Ukrainian Business Portal LLC”, which are a part of the “Media Invest Group”
holding company. The “WebMoney” payment system, which was used by 4 million Ukrainians, was also
banned.
According to the Security Service of Ukraine, in 2018 the department blocked access to more than 300
Internet resources “used by Russia to wage hybrid war against Ukraine.” It was also reported that “preventive
measures” were taken against 220 administrators of online communities who spread destructive content
to an audience of more than 10 million Internet users. The press center said that the SBU is investigating 83
criminal proceedings against the owners and administrators of the communities of an “anti-Ukrainian nature”
who “deliberately spread calls to overthrow the constitutional system and state power, mass riots and other
illegal actions”61. Later the SBU reported that 49 social network administrators, 29 of who were issued
suspicion, were brought to justice for so-called "anti-Ukrainian propaganda", and 20 court sentences have
already entered into force62.
Neither the names nor the place of residence of the detainees were reported by the Security Service of Ukraine,
and, respectively, human rights activists and lawyers cannot respond promptly to such cases. Below are just
some examples of the cases of the detention of social network users that were recorded in the framework of
the monitoring of the “Uspishna Varta” human rights platform:
On March 22nd the SBU reported about the detention of a resident of Kiev because of their posts on social networks.
According to the Security Service, the detainee posted appeals on the Internet for the seizure of state power, for
which he subsequently received a monetary reward from representatives of the so-called DPR. The detainee involved
several other people in this activity63.
On April 26th the SBU announced that it was exposing and preventing the attempts of Russian special services to
carry out provocations for the May holidays through the use of prohibited social networks. In particular, the SBU
"ceased the activities of a group" consisting of two Kievans and three residents of the Odessa region who administered
anti-Ukrainian public pages on the social networks “VKontakte” and “Odnoklassniki”64.
On May 8th SBU officials said they had identified and stopped attempts by the Russian special services to carry out
provocations on May 9th using prohibited social networks. Two residents of the Kiev and Sumy regions who
administered communities on the social network VKontakte were detained65.
On May 24th the SBU reported about the detention of an "anti-Ukrainian agitator" in Odessa. According to the
Security Service, the woman posted "anti-Ukrainian materials" featuring appeals to change the border and
60 Decree of the President of Ukraine No.126/2018 http://www.president.gov.ua/documents/1262018-24150
61 https://ssu.gov.ua/ua/news/1/category/2/view/5545#.Uqwf3rvE.dpbs
62 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/v-2018-godu-sbu-zaderzhali-49-polzovateley-sotsialnykh-setey
63 https://ssu.gov.ua/ua/news/1/category/21/view/4544#.Gnbux6Qb.dpbs
64 https://ssu.gov.ua/ua/news/1/category/21/view/4688#.PJaaNurI.dpbs
65 https://ssu.gov.ua/ua/news/1/category/21/view/4749#.QsZgtbl0.dpbs

22
constitutional system of Ukraine, as well as the promotion of terrorism, on her Russian social network pages66.
Another “anti-Ukrainian Internet agitator” was detained in Odessa on September 14th.
In August the SBU said that it allegedly exposed and blocked the activity of a network of online agitators recruited by
the Russian special services for the preparation of interference in the upcoming presidential elections in Ukraine. The
residents of the cities of Dnepr, Krivoy Rog, and Nikopol who allegedly were the administrators of groups on social
networks were detained67.
On November 5th the SBU reported the arrest of 9 community administrators on social networks. We are talking
about residents of Odessa, Kiev, and Severodonetsk who, according to the SBU, "published political news that was
sent from Russia and called for acts of disobedience and riots". On November 6th the prosecutor's office and the
SBU also reported about the detention of a citizen of Ukraine who was distributing a video on one of the most
popular video hosting websites68.
The detainees are, as a rule, charged with having deliberate, political, and ideological motives, distributing
materials calling for deliberate acts aimed at changing the boundaries of the territory and the state border of
Ukraine (part 1 of article 110 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine), or committing wilful acts for the purpose of
changing the boundaries and the state border of Ukraine (Article 109 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).
Most of the accused agree to a deal with the investigation and plead guilty in exchange for a suspended
sentence. In 9 out of 14 court decisions under Article 109 of the Criminal Procedure Code that the legal team
of “Uspishna Varta” found in the register, the accused admitted their guilt in full. As a result, the court limited
itself to interrogating the accused or approving an agreement between the accused and the prosecutor on the
recognition of guilt. Although criminal procedural law prohibits sentencing solely on the basis of guilty pleas,
the use of guilty plea agreements allows the prosecution to circumvent this guarantee. As soon as the plea
agreement is submitted to the court, the court terminates the consideration of the case regardless of what stage
the proceedings are at. It is disturbing that the defendants may have entered into such agreements under
duress69.
For example, on August 30th a resident of Mariupol received a suspended sentence for sharing a post on the
“Odnoklassniki” social network. The court sentenced him to 3 years of jail, but after the convicted declared their
guilt, his term was reduced to a 1 year conditional sentence. Due to the fact that the man shared a post of the group
“Antimaidan (South-East)” in March 2017 on his personal social network page, he was charged under article 109 of
the Criminal Code of Ukraine70.
There are cases when users of social networks are sentenced in absentia.
In July the Lutsk city district court sentenced a local resident to 6 years in prison for posting pro-Russian and separatist
publications on the “VKontakte” social network. The verdict was announced in absentia and noted in court, since
they do not know the whereabouts of the convict71.
In December, the court sentenced in absentia a resident of Ternopol to 2 years of imprisonment for distributing on
“VKontakte” alleged appeals to Russia to start military aggression against Ukraine. The legal team of “Uspishna Varta”
analysed the sentence and noted that a part of the indictment is based on data from the scandalous website
“Mirotvorets”72.
66 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/sbu-prodolzhaet-ohotu-za-polzovatelyami-socialnyh-setej
67 https://interfax.com.ua/news/general/527915.html
68 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/v-ukraine-zaderzhany-yeshche-9-polzovateley-sotssetey
69 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/opinions/sverzhenie-konstitucionnogo-stroya-pochemu-i-net
70 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/v-ukraine-prodolzhayutsya-presledovaniya-za-posty-v-socsetyah
71 https://vesti-ukr.com/strana/296534-v-lutske-osudili-muzhchinu-na-6-let-tjurmy-za-posty-vkontakte
72 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/zhitel-ternopolya-osuzhden-na-2-goda-tyurmy-za-posty-vkontakte

23
The status of societal respect
Physical violence and attacks on journalists and media agencies
Violence against, and harassment of, journalists in Ukraine remained a significant problem during 2018.
According to the monthly monitoring of the “Index of Physical Security of Journalists of Ukraine”, carried by
the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine in partnership with other organizations, 86 incidents of the use
of force against journalists during 2018 were recorded. The inaction of the police and the lack of punishment
in relation to the attacks, and even the killing of journalists, led to a wave of violence carried out by right-wing
groups against media editorial offices and journalists who the “nationalists” consider to be “separatist”. Law
enforcement bodies did not prevent the pogroms and attacks of such groups; the attackers were not prosecuted
for committing crimes.
During the year cases of right-wing organizations blocking media offices and attacking press centers
were also recorded:
On January 25th about 50 members of ultra-right groups broke into the office of the “Union of Orthodox
Journalists” (connected to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church), insulted the members of the Union, and checked the
information on their computers. The police present at the scene did not intervene. The “C14” group posted a video
on Facebook showing the attacks committed by its members on the office.
In March the office of the “ZIK” TV channel in Kiev was picketed by radical nationalists from the "Bratstvo"
organisation. The National Union of Journalists said these actions impede professional activity.
On May 9th representatives of the ultra-right paramilitary organization “National Corpus” (Azov) besieged the office
of the Ukrainian “Inter” TV channel in Kiev. They demanded to cancel the broadcast of the concert entitled
“Victory. One for all”, which the channel planned to air on Victory Day. After the concert was aired to 13 million
viewers on television, on May 15th the right-wing group re-blocked the “Inter” building and demanded changes to
its editorial policy.
On November 21st representatives of the radical group “UNA-UNSO” repeatedly (November 21st, December 3rd)
picketed the office of the “NASH” TV channel because they consider it to be “pro-Russian”. The head of the channel,
Tigran Martirosyan, suggested that the picketing was happening in the interests of the authorities and said that the
“action” was aimed against journalists.
On December 21st in Lvov, "activists" with smoke bombs tried to break into the editorial board of the website
Zaxid.net. According to the media agency, the cause of the picket and attempts to capture the editorial office were
publications about abuses in the allocation of land for ATO participants. Among those who took part in the picket
were "activists" from the organizations "Development of Society", "National Corpus", and "Ukrainian Union of ATO
participants". The participants of the rally were accompanied by the police, who didn't interfere with their actions or
intervene.
Unidentified representatives of right-wing organizations launched an attack on the press centers of “Ukrainske
Novosti” (August 3rd) and “Interfax-Ukraine” (November 12th) in Kiev with the aim of disrupting the holding of
press conferences by commercial structures.
Also, during 2018 right-wing radical groups carried out attacks on individual journalists and media
representatives:
On February 3rd in Kiev a reporter for the online publication “Sharij.net” was blocked off by “C14” members, who
then threatened her. The police officers who were present did not intervene. The police advised the journalist to
"leave and stop your activities", otherwise they "will not be able to protect you"73. On June 21st, during a protest rally
73 https://sharij.net/108195

24
of right-wing organizations near the Patrol Police in Kiev, a journalist from “Sharij.net” was doused with an unknown
chemical liquid. Representatives of the ultra-right organization "Bratstvo" took responsibility for the attack.
On February 13th in the Kiev district court of Odessa, pending a motion to extend the measure of restraint of the
former leader of “Right Sector”, Sergey Sternenko, representatives of this group expelled the Odessa journalist
Maksim Voytenko from the court room. The radicals accused Maksim Voytenko of working for the Russian media
and said that he had no place among "patriots". Sternenko himself posted a video of the incident on his Facebook
page. The police present in the courtroom did not intervene.
On July 25th about 30 people wearing symbols of the ultra-right organization “Svoboda” broke into the building of
the Borznyansky Regional State Administration (Chernigov region) and held administration workers and the editor-
in-chief of “Vesti Borznyanshchiny” Sergey Bliznyuk captive for more than an hour. The journalist earlier wrote
an article about the youth Orthodox camp in the Chernigov region. The “activists” hit the journalist several times and
also forced him to write a letter of resignation. The priests and parishioners of the UOC adopted an appeal to the
President and the Minister of the Interior Ministry in connection with attacks on an Orthodox children's camp and
the assault of a journalist74.
After the hearing in Zhytomyr on August 6th representatives of “C14” attacked the journalist Vasily Muravitsky
and poured zelenka on him. On September 28th representatives of the “C14” and “National Corpus” factions
attacked the lawyer of Muravitsky and the local journalist Andrey Laktivonov directly in the court building75.
According to the representative of the National Police, the identities of the attackers have been established, and they
are being investigated. The National Police explained the fact of the presence of armed members of “right-wing
groups” at the court hearing by referring to the right to freedom of movement and to express one’s opinion.
On July 18th in Kiev near the Goloseevsky district court a clash took place between the leader of “C14” Evgeny
Karas and the “Gromadske TV” journalist Igor Burdyga. During the verbal skirmish Karas hit the journalist in
the face. The incident happened whilst a measure of restraint was being chosen for one of the coordinators of “C14”
Sergey Mazur in the case of dispersing and burning the Romani camp on Lysa Gora in Kiev. "Gromadske" decided
to suspend the journalist from work while the channel investigates the incident. The leader of “C14” Karas was not
brought to justice76.
The hate speech and discrediting information
campaigns of representatives of pro-government
parliamentary factions and law enforcement bodies
has generated a wave of aggression against the
journalists of the “NewsOne” TV channel, putting
their physical safety at risk. On September 17th,
during a live broadcast, the “NewsOne” journalist
Darina Bilera was attacked77. On October 11th
another journalist from the “NewsOne” channel,
Anastasiya Pshenichnaya, was attacked during a
rally of the right-wing radical group “C14” outside
the walls of the Ministry of Internal Affairs78. The
OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Harlem
Desir said on his Twitter page that the attack on the
journalist Darina Bilera was absolutely unacceptable, and called on the Ukrainian authorities to fully investigate this
incident.
At the local level, in regions, journalists as a rule became the targets of attacks carried out by representatives of
private and municipal companies whose activities they are investigating. Journalists investigating the
74 http://news.church.ua/2018/07/25/nacionalradikali-pogrozhuyut-dityam-ta-pobili-zhurnalista-yakij-napisav-stattyu-pro-molodizhnij-pravoslavnij-
tabir-na-chernigivshhini
75 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9p5MghPuXA
76 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/v-ukraine-uchastilis-sluchai-napadeniya-na-zhurnalistov-i-prepyatstvovaniya-zhurnalistkoj-deyatelnosti
77 https://uspishna-varta.com/en/news/na-zhurnalistku-newsone-napali-vo-vremya-stolknovenij-pod-genprokuraturoj-v-kieve
78 https://youtu.be/hhk--fNAcS4
The attack on live NewsOne journalist, September 17, 2018

25
activities of local authorities and local deputies are also attacked. Such cases were recorded in Kiev, Krivoy
Rog, Irpen (Kiev region), Dnepr, Odessa, Nikolaev, and Kramatorsk (Donetsk region).
Representatives of law enforcement bodies and communal security agencies were involved in a series of
attacks on journalists. For example, on July 28th a police officer, despite the presence of “Press” symbols,
deliberately sprayed gas from a police canister at the face of Efrem Lukatsky, the photo correspondent of
Associated Press in Ukraine. The incident happened in Kiev during clashes between the police and "National
Druzhina" over a construction in one of the residential areas of Kiev.
Cases of editorial property being damaged were also recorded in 2018:
On February 22nd in Rovno the editorial office of the information-analytical portal “Chetverta Vlada” was set on
fire. The prosecutor's office completed the investigation and referred the case to court in January 2019.
On July 10th in the Dnepropetrovsk region (Kamenskoye), unknown persons set the editorial board of the opposition
newspaper “Sobytie” on fire. The premises and equipment of the editorial office were destroyed. In September the
NUJU stated that the SBU refuses to investigate systematic arsons of the media and the intimidation of journalists in
Kamenskoye. According to their data, over the past 2 years 5 arsons of editorial offices and the property of journalists
were carried out in Kamenskoye (Dnepropetrovsk region), and the perpetrators have not been found79.
Despite the increasing occurrence of attacks, the inaction of the prosecutor's office and law enforcement
bodies, as well as ignoring even the most resonant crimes against journalists, has led to the fact that in recent
months only 8% of cases have reached the court. This was stated by the participants of public hearings
concerning the physical safety of journalists in Ukraine and the impunity to crimes against the media, which
took place on November 1st at the initiative of the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine80.
For example, a year after the special forces attacked the journalists of the “Gromadske TV” agency, “UNIAN”, and
the Internet newspaper “Strana.ua” in the Svyatoshinsky Court of Kiev (October 2017), the investigation did not
establish those involved and continues to reject the request of lawyers to simultaneously examine witnesses and
victims. This was stated by the lawyer of one of the journalist-victims.
With the support of the “Uspishna Varta” human rights platform,
legal support is provided to a journalist from Zhytomyr Ruslan
Kunavin (Moroz), who was attacked and robbed on June 10th
2017. He was hospitalized for more than a month, but due to the
severity of his injuries he needs to continue his treatment even
after being discharged. Consideration of the case of Moroz in
court was postponed for a long time for various reasons. Only on
July 12th 2017, after numerous postponements, was a hearing held
on this case. Those suspected of attacking the journalist were
charged under part 2 of article 187 (robbery by a group of
individuals), because of which they face between 7 and 10 years in
prison. Despite the severity of the articles of the prosecution, they
were kept under house arrest during all this time, and not even
around-the-clock either. The hearings on the journalist’s case were
held on July 24th, August 21st, and October 2nd. Under the weight of the evidence, those who attacked the journalist
confessed to committing the crime, but denied that the attack was politically-motivated81. On November 23rd the
prosecutor's office once again failed to deliver a witness to the court hearing and did not provide the materials of
secret investigative actions that were carried out by the decision of the investigating judge. The hearing was
rescheduled for January 18th 2019.
79 http://nsju.org/index.php/article/7350
80 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/ot-silovikov-trebuyut-publichnyy-otchet-o-rassledovanii-prestupleniy-protiv-zhurnalistov-
obshchestvennyye-slushaniya-nszhu
81 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/pravozashitnikov-ozadachila-operativnost-rassledovaniya-po-delu-nikolaevskogo-obshestvennika
Journalist Ruslan Kunavin (Moroz) was attacked in June
2017

26
Full investigative actions are carried out only in cases where journalists and media representatives
who are loyal to the authorities have been attacked. For example, on May 18th 2018 the Prosecutor-
General Yury Lutsenko signed a document granting parliamentary consent to criminalise Aleksandr
Ponomarev, a member of the “Freedom of Peoples” group, for obstructing the work of journalists from the
“Censor.net” and “Kamenyari-Info” Internet publications in the parliament building. According to the
journalistic community, the “Censor.net” publication is close to the “People's Front” party.
The media community and human rights organizations are seriously concerned by the lack of responsibility
for the murders of journalists. This is most clearly seen in the insignificant progress that has been made in
the investigations into recent attacks on media workers, as well as into the high-profile murder cases of Pavel
Sheremet and Oles Buzina82.
The Ukrainian journalist and writer Oles Buzina was killed on April
16th 2015 near his home in Kiev. Buzina was known for his criticism
of the government in connection with the events of Maidan and the
conflict in the East. The police opened an investigation into the
incident in accordance with article 115 (premeditated murder) of the
Criminal Code. On June 18th 2015, two suspects in this case
(representatives of the right-wing group “C14”) were placed under
arrest. In December 2015 they were released from custody under the
obligation to appear at court hearings via summons.
The first preparatory hearing on this case began in the Kiev
Shevchenkovsky court only on February 9th 2018, more than two years
after the murder of Buzina. On June 7th the court reopened the preparatory hearing of the case, canceling all previous
results of the case. According to the assessment of the human rights defenders of “Uspishna Varta” who monitor
this trial, the defence deliberately drags out the trial. Thus, the regular hearing scheduled for June 15th was
postponed for formal reasons; the jury was not given a memo. On August 9th a survey of candidates for jury members
was held during a court hearing and a long debate. In the corridor of the court nationalists shouted the slogans: “Judge
separatists, not soldiers!”, “Judges, remember, the government is not eternal!”, and “Dismiss the judges!”. After this
hearing the composition of the jury was approved. On September 26th the court hearing was canceled due to the
judge’s illness. On October 23rd the defence of the accused insisted on the need to consider the case from the
beginning and demanded the disqualification of a judge. On December 11th the lawyers of the accused challenged
the jury, but it was not satisfied either. Now the defence intends to challenge the prosecutor on this case. The next
hearings are scheduled for February 8th and 15th, 2019.
The well-known journalist Pavel Sheremet died on July 20th 2016
as a result of a car explosion in the center of Kiev. The Prosecutor-
General said that this crime is being investigated by an inter-
departmental task force consisting of representatives of the
National Police, the Security Service of Ukraine, and employees of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of the United States.
On July 20th 2018, on the second anniversary of the death of
Sheremet, Ukrainian human rights activists and journalists
demanded a public report from law enforcement bodies on the
investigation and the bringing to justice of those responsible for
the death of Pavel and other journalists killed in Ukraine in recent
years83. Earlier, the Prosecutor-General Yury Lutsenko stated that
the investigation had not made any progress concerning any of the narratives in the case of the journalist's murder.
An alternative investigation carried out by independent organizations revealed that the investigators had not
questioned key witnesses, and the recordings of the surveillance cameras had not been verified.
82 Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 August to 15 November 2017 (№20)
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UAReport20th_EN.pdf
83 https://uspishna-varta.com/ru/novyny/ubijstvo-pavla-sheremeta-dva-goda-spustya-sledstvie-ne-prodvinulos-ni-po-odnoj-iz-versij
Journalist Oles Buzin was killed in the courtyard of his own
house in April 2015
Journalist Pavel Sheremet was blown up in cars in July 2016

Report “Political rights and freedoms in Ukraine: Monitoring compliance in 2018”

Report “Political rights and freedoms in Ukraine: Monitoring compliance in 2018”

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Similar a Report “Political rights and freedoms in Ukraine: Monitoring compliance in 2018”

Similar a Report “Political rights and freedoms in Ukraine: Monitoring compliance in 2018” (20)

Más de Правозащитная платформа «Успішна варта»

Más de Правозащитная платформа «Успішна варта» (20)

Último

Último (20)

Report “Political rights and freedoms in Ukraine: Monitoring compliance in 2018”