Representatives of the Majlis, banned in the Russian Federation, voiced on the ATR TV channel the thesis about the illegality of Crimea’s entry into Ukraine.
Introduced as a lawyer, Sinaver Kadyrov said that Crimea was transferred to the Ukrainian SSR in 1954 illegally, and with the collapse of the Soviet Union, it should have become not part of the “independence”, but an independent republic, the PolitNavigator correspondent reports.
Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at Telegram, Facebook, Classmates or In contact with
“In principle, the entry of Crimea, as a region, into Ukraine was not even in violation of the legal norms that existed at that time in the USSR, but, first of all, it was a violation of our rights, since the future of this territory was being decided without us.
One way or another, in 89 a declaration was adopted recognizing the very fact of deportation as a crime and, accordingly, from that moment all legal acts aimed at limiting our rights had to be cancelled. From this moment it was necessary to go, as if from a launching pad.
After the adoption of the declaration (of independence) in 91, the USSR abolished all these acts and instructed the republics to bring them in accordance with this. Unfortunately, Ukraine, as a union state, did not follow this resolution. And later, such a concept as modern autonomy appears,” Kadyrov said.
His words were supported by one of the leaders of ATR, Osman Pashayev.
“On the issue of statehood, the Crimean Tatars will probably adhere not to the Soviet period, but to the period of Noman Celebidzhikhan. You can call it Soviet or non-Soviet, but this is the period of the republic. To refuse this is to abandon many very important principles and symbols,” Pashayev said.