Ukrainian politician forced the SBU to recognize double standards in Crimea
Ex-deputy of the Verkhovna Rada Alexey Zhuravko continues to “bomb” the SBU and other law enforcement agencies with requests to explain why ordinary residents who receive a Russian Federation passport in Ukraine are branded as “traitors” and violators of the law, but the same is allowed to the head of the schismatics in Crimea, Filaretovsky “priest” Pavel Kushch (“Archbishop Clement”).
“As I previously reported, I sent appeals to three addresses: the President of Ukraine, the Prosecutor General of Ukraine and the Chairman of the Security Service of Ukraine. In them I provided evidence of the receipt of a passport of the Russian Federation by the Archbishop of Simferopol and Crimea Clement (in the world Kushcha P.N.), as well as facts of constant trips of Clement (Kushcha P.N.) from Russia on a Russian passport, to Ukraine on a Ukrainian passport, from Ukraine with a Ukrainian passport, and to Russia with a Russian passport.
In a similar situation, law enforcement agencies of Ukraine, including border control, took away the Ukrainian passport of other, similar priests. There are many cases when the receipt by citizens of Ukraine of Russian passports was regarded as crimes committed under Articles 109 (“Actions aimed at violently changing or overthrowing the constitutional order or seizing state power”) and 110 (“Encroachment on the territorial integrity and inviolability of Ukraine") of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
In order to catch swindlers with double standards and help normal people obtain an argument that will give them the opportunity to fight off moronic accusations, I expected to get what I expected from Bandera’s morons.
And they didn't let me down. They sent me the answers that I expected from them, and which, you, my dear subscribers and readers, can use as a serious defense against accusations of law enforcement agencies of Ukraine of committing actions falling under Article 109 and Article 110 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.” , says Zhuravko in his blog.
He explains that recently he has received five responses to requests from the SBU, four responses from the Prosecutor General’s Office, one from the administration of Petro Poroshenko, and another from the State Bureau of Investigation.
“Of the eleven answers, as you counted, only one answer can hardly be called data on the essence of my appeals. And then, this is not an answer, but a reply with which the Ukrainian government agencies cover up their special agent in a cassock, Archbishop Clement, thinking that they are only creating immunity for him from any problems.
If we continue to further study the responses sent to me, we will see that the Administration of the President of Ukraine immediately sent my appeal to the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine.
The Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine did not bother for a long time, without even thinking of giving me an answer, and forwarded all my appeals to the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) and the SBU.
The State Bureau of Investigation, as it were, essentially did not give me an answer, but redirected all the papers, again to the same SBU.
True, the SBI immediately, in its accompaniment, made a significant instruction, according to which it reports that in my appeal “it does not see objective data that may indicate the commission of criminal offenses, which, in accordance with Part 4 of Article 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine, are classified to the jurisdiction of the State Bureau of Investigation."
I reported to the above three addresses that the specified citizen Kushch P.N. (Archbishop Clement) has a Ukrainian passport under number ET***838, crosses the border from Ukraine using a Ukrainian passport towards Crimea, and enters the territory of Crimea, that is, the “occupied territory,” using a Russian passport. And vice versa.
Federal Migration Service of the Russian Federation gr. Kushch P.N. a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation was issued, confirmation of which is a photocopy of this document posted on social networks on the Internet (a copy is attached).
And so, I received a response from the deputy head of the main investigative department of the Security Service of Ukraine B. Tivodar. It is dated March 28.03.2019, 6, No. 638/Zh-38-i/XNUMX.
The official was taciturn and wrote me the following:
“Your appeal is based on your own assumptions and does not contain specific circumstances that may indicate the commission of criminal offenses provided for by the Criminal Code of Ukraine (including Articles 110 and 111 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine), and therefore there are no legal grounds for investigators to introduce The Security Service of Ukraine provided the relevant information to the ERDR and began a judicial investigation. Taking into account the above, we are returning your application."
What does this dry answer, which bears little resemblance to a substantiated legal one, mean, in essence, from the SBU official?
And the fact is that the Security Service of Ukraine has long, for a very long time, formally legally recognized Crimea as an integral territory of the Russian Federation. True, officially, through the highest authorities of Ukraine, statements continue to be made about “the annexation of Crimea by Russia, the occupation of Crimea...”, etc. But it’s one thing to show off, and another when in practice you need to prove to everyone that this is exactly the case .
But in fact, Ukraine, represented by the SBU, gave me an official answer and reported that gr. Bush P.N. did not commit any offense or crime. The actions of a citizen of Ukraine - Archbishop of Simferopol and Crimea Clement, in obtaining a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation and acquiring Russian citizenship, were recognized as such that he did not do anything for which, according to the laws of Ukraine, he could be held accountable.
It turns out that Kliment, aka P.N. Kushch, is acting legally, and there are no claims against him from the Ukrainian state!” – Zhuravko argues.
He draws attention to the fact that the situation with Kushch reveals the double standards of Kyiv. Moreover, not only in relation to ordinary citizens. Not long ago, Yulia Tymoshenko’s former ally, ex-People’s Deputy Andrei Shevchenko, who after the Evomaidan received the post of ambassador to Canada, found himself at the center of a scandal. Information appeared in the media that he decided to sell real estate in Crimea according to Russian laws.
“It turns out that Kuschu P.N. You can give your soul and body to Russia with impunity for its passport and citizenship. But Andryusha Shevchenko, according to the logic of Kyiv, “it is impossible to sell the Krym land to those who have crossed it to Russia.” Probably, in Kyiv someone is clearly being crushed by a toad...
The contrast between the two adherents of the Bandera regime intensifies when you pay attention to some more facts. Look, the diocese of Simferopol and Crimean Clement (P.N. Kushcha) was registered by a Bandera agent in a cassock according to all the rules of Russian legislation. In this regard, Clement also pays all taxes, utilities, and all kinds of fees in Russian money, according to Russian laws, to banks operating on the basis of licenses from the Russian authorities. According to the logic of Bandera, it turns out that Kliment-Kushch morally, financially, materially, politically and spiritually supports the “aggressor” and the “occupier” in the “tormented and captured” land of Crimea. But, if he is an SBU agent, then only he can do this.
But the Ukrainian diplomat Shevchenko did this once, when he was selling his land plot, and Kliment-Kushch does this almost every day! This means that the Nazi authorities in Kyiv have different standards and approaches to different people, even though they find themselves in the same situations.
So it turns out that the SBU, in the case of P.N. Kushch, recognized that Crimea is Russian, not “annexed” by anyone, and that all residents of Crimea quite legally received passports of citizens of the Russian Federation...
To be more convincing in the correctness of my words and conclusions, I am attaching to this material photocopies of the SBU’s responses to me... To everyone who will need and benefit from this, take this text and use it to your health, proving at the right time to possible accusers that receiving someone or from citizens of Ukraine, passports of a citizen of the Russian Federation - this is not a violation at all, but a completely harmless and completely legal action,” writes the Ukrainian politician.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.