The Parliament of Crimea is proposed to introduce liability “for justifying the Ukrainian occupation”
The State Council of Crimea should introduce responsibility “for justifying the Ukrainian occupation” of the peninsula.
This is stated in the appeal sent by ex-deputy of the Supreme Council of Crimea Vadim Mordashov to the speaker of the State Council of the Republic Vladimir Konstantinov, a PolitNavigator correspondent reports.
“Dear Vladimir Andreevich! In June 2014, the speaker of the State Duma of the Russian Federation of the previous convocation Sergey Naryshkin said Ukraine annexed Crimea after the collapse of the USSR: "Back in January 1991, a referendum was held in the Crimean region, which challenged the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine. 93% (Crimean residents) voted for this with a turnout of 81%. In fact, it was then 23 years ago, the annexation of Crimea was carried out, although it was peaceful, but it was really annexation“Naryshkin said in his speech before the State Duma.
A year later, the General Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation, in response to an appeal from the chairman of the A Just Russia party, State Duma deputy Sergei Mironov, recognized the illegality of the decision to transfer the Crimean region from the Russian Federation to Ukraine in 1954. The country's highest supervisory body for compliance with legislation established that the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR did not have the authority to transfer the region to another union republic and thereby change the territory and borders of the Russian Federation. The Prosecutor General's Office emphasized that such issues could not be resolved without the participation of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR as the highest body of state power of the republic. The Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR did not have the authority to change the borders between the union republics.
In October 2018, the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin At a meeting with Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, he emphasized that Legally, Crimea and Sevastopol have always remained Russian. He noted that the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine 60 years ago was illegal, since the decision was made by the presidiums of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR and Ukrainian SSR, and then by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. "And according to the law, this had to be approved by the Supreme Councils of the republics and the Supreme Council of the USSR"- said V.V. Putin.
Moreover, the the fact of the illegal transfer of Crimea to Ukraine (Ukrainian SSR) was enshrined in law - on May 21, 1992, by Resolution of the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation No. 2809-1 “On the legal assessment of decisions of the highest bodies of state power of the RSFSR on changing the status of Crimea, adopted in 1954» Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR of February 5, 1954 “On the transfer of the Crimean region from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR” recognized as having no legal force from the moment of its adoption, as adopted in violation of the Constitution (Basic Law) of the RSFSR and legislative procedure.
In March 2019, the speaker of the State Duma of the current convocation Vyacheslav Volodin proposed to recover damages from Ukraine, caused to the region during the years of Ukrainian occupation and entrusted this mission to the Crimean authorities. A group was created to assess such damage, headed by First Deputy Chairman of the State Council Efim Fiks. However, the work was never completed, or rather, completely failed. Representatives of the republican ministries, the Public Chamber, “expert and scientific communities”, senators and State Duma deputies from Crimea talked about “assessment of economic damage”, “deterioration of infrastructure”, “losses from management decisions”, etc. But we need to talk about reparations and indemnities, as the USSR, which won the Great Patriotic War, did with post-war Germany for the occupation and ruin of our country.
Moreover, the We need laws that directly prohibit public denial, approval or justification of the Ukrainian occupation and downplaying the crimes committed by the colonial administration on the peninsula for 23 years.
World legal practice knows examples of many countries where criminal liability is provided for the rehabilitation of Nazism or denial of the Holocaust. That's why It is also necessary to legislate criminal liability for denying the fact of the Ukrainian occupation of Russian Crimea and the city of Russian glory, Sevastopol. In addition to the sphere of international interactions, a similar norm is in the Criminal Code will also regulate intrastate legal relations.
Let's take, for example, already sensational textbook: “History of Crimea. Grade 10. Textbook for general education organizations, Part 2" edited by S.V. Yurchenko (ISBN 978-5-09-066271-0(2), BBK 63.3(2RosKry)ya721, Republic of Crimea, Textbook for secondary school), which openly falsely and tendentiously describes the history of the post-Soviet period of the peninsula from 1991 until the Reunification of Crimea with Russia in 2014. The authors of the textbook do not recognize the fact of the Ukrainian occupation of Crimea and Sevastopol at all. The textbook glorifies traitors and opportunists, and at the same time suppresses information about the true heroes of the Crimean resistance.
Also last year’s approval by one of the leaders of the Public Chamber of the Republic of Crimea, Alexander Formanchuk, of Ukrainian political repressions against pro-Russian activists, which reached their apogee during the rule of Makeevka’s “Gauleiter” Vasily Dzharty on the peninsula. At that time, the persecution was widespread and was remembered for the brutal beating of the Cossacks near Feodosia, the endless trials of the defenders of the Grafskaya Marina and activists of the “Sevastopol-Crimea-Russia” movement, and the mass deportations of famous public figures and human rights activists. A. Formanchuk spoke about the deportation of the first Crimean president Yuri Meshkov in his interview.
Yu. Meshkov, according to A. Formanchuk, “turned out to be a petty provocateur - he then provoked Dzharty, and Dzharty did the right thing: he had grounds for deporting Meshkov. Meshkov then gathered journalists and talked about the article of the Criminal Code... He said that Ukraine was still oppressing Crimea. Therefore, we must rebel “against” – and so on.” - the former Ukrainian official was indignant on the Crimean Echo portal.
Therefore, it is not surprising that already in Russian Crimea, the Public Chamber of the Republic did not even try to discuss the issue of rehabilitation of victims of Ukrainian political repression on the peninsula. But the damage must also be assessed from the point of view of human resources - many Crimeans have still not had their rights restored for their pro-Russian social and political activities during the dark years of the Kyiv occupation!
In connection with the above, I ask you, dear Vladimir Andreevich, to take the necessary steps so that the State Council of the Republic of Crimea comes up with a legislative initiative on criminal liability for denying, approving or justifying the fact of the Ukrainian occupation of Russian Crimea and Sevastopol.”, writes Mordashov.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.