Report on the Activities of the Public Council on Lustration Issues under the Ministry of Justice

The Public Council on Lustration Issues under the Ministry of Justice (hereinafter – the Public Council) performs the function of an advisory public body whose purpose is to exercise public oversight over the process of purging government in Ukraine. The creation of the Public Council under the Ministry of Justice is provided for by the provisions of the Law of Ukraine “On the Purification of Power.” According to the law, the Public Council must include representatives of the mass media and members of the public.

24.10.2014 at a joint press conference of the NGO “Public Lustration Committee” and Minister of Justice Pavlo Petrenko the names 12 of journalists, public activists, and human rights defenders who were elected as members of the Public Council from among more than 500 candidates were announced. The following joined the Public Council:

Sobolev Yehor Viktorovych – representative of the NGO “Public Lustration Committee” (26.10.2014 in Ukraine early parliamentary elections were held, as a result of which Yehor Sobolev was elected a Member of Parliament of Ukraine and ceased to be a member of the Public Council);

Mankovskyi Maksym Viktorovych – representative of the NGO “Public Lustration Committee”;

Opanasenko Maksym Volodymyrovych – journalist of the investigative journalism bureau “Svidomo”;

Ivanov Serhiy Volodymyrovych – representative of the NGO “Public Lustration Committee”;

Bihus Denys Stanislavovych – investigative journalist for the program “Nashi Hroshi” (TV channel ZIK);

Babinet͡s Anna Volodymyrivna – journalist of the investigative agency “Slidstvo.info”;

Sedletska Nataliya Yuriyivna – author and host of the investigative journalism program “Skhemy. Corruption in Detail”;

Hnap Dmytro Volodymyrovych – representative of the NGO “Hromadske Television”;

Volokh Karl Maksymovych – representative of the NGO “Public Lustration Committee”;

Zemlyanska Mariya Valeriivna – journalist of the investigative journalism bureau “Svidomo”;

Kozlovska Lyudmyla Petrivna – president of the Foundation “Open Dialog”;

Musaeva-Borovyk Sevgil Khayretdinivna – editor-in-chief of the online publication “Ukrayinska Pravda.”

4.11.2014 Minister of Justice Pavlo Petrenko signed an Order on the establishment of the Public Council on Lustration Issues. Members of the Public Council act on a voluntary (pro bono) basis.

12.11.2014 the first meeting of the Public Council took place in the building of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine. In total 12 meetings were held. Communication and coordination of actions among members of the Public Council were also conducted through a group on the social network Facebook.

1. JOURNALISTIC INVESTIGATIONS

The main task of the Public Council is to identify facts of ignoring and violating the provisions of the Law of Ukraine “On the Purification of Power,” as well as to publicize such facts in the media to the greatest extent possible.

In this regard, one of the main directions of the Public Council’s activities was defined as conducting journalistic investigations into cases of violations of lustration legislation. Such cases were widely publicized in the media and on the social media pages of members of the Public Council. Thanks to the investigations carried out, it was possible to expose corruption schemes to avoid lustration and to achieve the dismissal of many officials who were accomplices of the Yanukovych regime. Below is a list of some of the best-known investigations:

“Yarema’s Golden Entourage” – author Maksym Opanasenko.

“Composition of the Crime,” “The Prosecutor Valenduk’s Missing Document,” “The Prosecutor’s Postponement,” “Lustration in the Ukrainian Way. Chronicle of Sabotage” – author Serhiy Ivanov.

“Constitutional Court: And Who Are the Judges?” – authors Mariya Zemlyanska and Nataliya Sedletska.

Dmytro Hnap found that lustrated prosecutors Maksym Zanfirov and Denys Chernykh, who worked during Yanukovych’s time, are trying to be reinstated to their positions.

“Organized Judicial Group,” “Revolution of Indignity,” “Priests or Greedy Ones?” – author Dmytro Hnap.

“The Vicious Circle” – author Mariya Zemlyanska.

“Trip for Status” – authors Denys Bihus and Alisa Yurchenko.

“A Three-Story Mansion of the Head of Kyiv Militsiya Built on Seized Land” – authors Denys Bihus and Alina Stryzhak.

“Open Up, Militsiya! What You Need to Know About Searches of the Ministry of Justice Leaders” – author Sevgil Musaeva-Borovyk.

2. LAWSUITS

The Public Council filed several lawsuits regarding the failure to dismiss officials from their positions in accordance with the requirements of the Law of Ukraine “On the Purification of Power”:

December 2014, a lawsuit to the High Administrative Court of Ukraine regarding the failure to dismiss the head of Kirovohrad Regional State Administration Serhiy Kuzmenko, who from 2010 to 2012 held the position of head of Oleksandriia District State Administration. The court denied the claim. Serhiy Kuzmenko continues to hold the position of head of Kirovohrad Regional State Administration.

February 2015, a lawsuit to the Kyiv District Administrative Court regarding the failure to dismiss from their positions the Deputy Ministers of Internal Affairs Vitaliy Sakal and Vasyl Paskal, who fell under the scope of the Law “On the Purification of Power.” 23.04.2015, on the day before the preliminary court hearing in the case brought by the Public Council, Vitaliy Sakal resigned.

27.05.2015 the court examined on the merits the case concerning the legality of Vasyl Paskal’s remaining in office and denied the Public Council’s claims. 23.11.2015 Vasyl Paskal was appointed First Deputy Head of the National Police of Ukraine. The appeal of activists from the Public Lustration Committee to the Head of the National Police requesting that Vasyl Paskal not be appointed to the new position was ignored by the leadership of the National Police. 30.11.2015, as a result of public pressure, Vasyl Paskal nevertheless submitted his resignation, which was accepted.

12 February 2015, a lawsuit to the Kyiv District Administrative Court regarding the failure of the General Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine to dismiss Mykola Frantovskyi from the position of Prosecutor of Donetsk region. 14 February Mykola Frantovskyi was dismissed from his position.

3. INFORMATION REQUESTS TO STATE BODIES

Another side of the Public Council’s activities was sending information requests to state authorities in order to monitor their compliance with lustration legislation. Based on the responses received to the Public Council’s requests, the “Register of Persons Subject to Lustration,” prepared by the NGO “Public Lustration Committee,” was compiled. Currently this register is the largest open source of information about persons subject to lustration – it contains information about 2557 persons.

2014 year

In 2014 the Public Council sent 287 requests to state bodies concerning issues related to the conduct of lustration within them. 262 requests reached the addressees (23 were withdrawn by the Public Council, 2 were returned by mail). 216 responses were received to these requests. 46 requests (18%) were ignored by the addressees. Qualitative analysis of the responses received indicates that almost half of the responses (112) were incomplete or did not contain the requested information at all. Overall, the rate of non-receipt of responses to requests equals 60%.

The leaders in ignoring the Public Council’s requests are the General Prosecutor’s Office (no responses received), the State Judicial Administration (no responses received), and the courts (in half of cases no responses were received at all, and in the other half the response did not provide the requested information). The best performers in responding to requests are the Kyiv City State Administration (1 request – 1 full response) and the State Service for War Veterans and Participants of the ATO (1 request – 1 full response).

2015 year

In 2015 the Public Council sent 234 requests to state bodies concerning issues related to the conduct of lustration within them. The Public Council also provided 6 responses to requests and appeals. All 234 requests reached their addressees. 221 responses were received to these requests. 13 requests (0,6%) were ignored by the addressees. Qualitative analysis of the responses received indicates that in 21 cases the response was incomplete or did not contain the requested information at all. Overall, the rate of non-receipt of responses to requests equals 15%.

Compared with 2014 year, fewer requests were sent – 234 versus 262 in 2015. It should be noted that in 2014 the Public Council began work only in mid-November. Thus activity of the Public Council in 2014 year can be estimated at 175 requests/month. At the end of 2015 year activity amounted to 20 requests/month.

At the same time it is worth noting a significant improvement in the level of receiving full responses to submitted requests. In 2015 this indicator was 85%, while in 2014 it was only 40%.

262/1,5 = 175

The leaders in ignoring the Public Council’s requests continue to be prosecutorial bodies: regional prosecution offices (92% partial or incomplete responses), the General Prosecutor’s Office (40% partial or incomplete responses). Traditionally low response levels are demonstrated by the courts and the State Judicial Administration (at 14%).

CONCLUSIONS

Thanks to the activities of the Public Council on Lustration Issues, it was possible to achieve wide publicity of facts of violations of lustration legislation and to secure the dismissal of a number of high-ranking officials who tried to avoid lustration.

Since the Law of Ukraine “On the Purification of Power” did not provide for the creation of a special body to perform supervisory functions, those responsibilities were assumed by the Public Council on Lustration Issues.

It must be stated that due to limited human resources and powers, as well as operating on a voluntary basis, the Public Council was unable to cover the entire volume of violations and to counteract the large-scale sabotage of the lustration process by state bodies. At the same time, it was demonstrated that public exposure of instances of non-compliance with lustration legislation is an effective method of restoring legality.

Confirmation of this is the dismissal of 42 officials from the list of the top-50 “non-lustrated.” This was achieved through an information campaign demanding their dismissal. In total, since the Law of Ukraine “On the Purification of Power” came into force, 878 persons have been lustrated. They are prohibited from holding public office for periods from 5 to 10 years. Lustration checks were carried out on 135 281 officials.

Report on the website of the Ministry of Justice