A new barrier at the entrance to the Crimea – from the “masons” of the Cabinet of Ukraine

Recently, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine approved  a new procedure for  entry into the temporarily occupied territory of Ukraine and departure c it.

It does not become easier. This procedure – an additional barrier at the entrance to the Crimea. Especially for foreigners, who prior to this order could travel freely. In accordance with the Constitution of Ukraine, freedom of movement may be restricted only in cases provided by law. Because this document – the new order of the Cabinet – contains a number of grounds for refusal to pass in the Crimea, or vice versa, is not based on the law, then their application in itself will already be in violation of the Ukrainian legislation.

A positive aspect can be considered only that the refusal of admission is oformlyatsyapismenno. The border guard will sign up to this document, and, therefore, will be responsible for the legality of such a decision. The threat of liability limits arbitrariness.

And now about the barriers on items.

Well, probably, that provides for a process flowsheet pass, when they should be clearly defined areas and promote the route. There are cases when a person is sent to the passport control, and at that time began to search his car, after which there were claims of smuggling. Now you should see something like the individual zones of the passport and customs control, with the word line, that after crossing can be held responsible for failure to declare etc.

As well as it provided for the creation of the service control zone. This much talked about our colleagues, human rights activists and lawyers – passage control was accompanied by inhuman conditions, especially in winter.

As for me, a ban on the use of symbols of the temporarily occupied territory sounds a bit strange.

Further. The order listed: foreigners and stateless persons may obtain a special permit if:

• their relatives living in the Crimea
• buried relatives
• if it is connected with the funeral of relatives
• has property
• if it is related to the protection of the interests of Ukraine
• This railway workers
• it is connected with their work

With regard to the occupation authorities, this order does not apply to their actions and verify the reasons for entry and exit, they will not be on it.

But this procedure can be used by border guards of the Russian Federation. For example, if a foreigner enters the Crimea, it is enough to ask him about the reason for travel. If any, will not “family” or “property”, it means that he travels at the request of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry. And what is the probability that he would be allowed?

In addition, when it comes to visiting the graves of relatives or funeral, the requirement of documentary evidence may be brought to the point of absurdity. Some documents may be in the Crimea, and so they simply can not be a person.

Very strange sounds and the requirement to provide a document confirming the availability of adequate financial support.

It is also one of the documents, which is necessary to obtain a special permit is a document confirming the legality of the stay of a foreigner on the territory of Ukraine (not a right of entry – that the legality of stay).

Curious and paragraph 26, which refers to the long-term resolution to foreigners or persons without citizenship who have a residence permit in Ukraine and the place of residence registered in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol.

This may only apply to Russian citizens who have permanent residence permits in the Crimea. For all the others would have to renew such authorization according to the laws of the Russian Federation.

Paragraph 36 provides for the introduction of the so-called A database of information about all the people who move in and out. However, the procedure, duration of storage, the mode of access to such a database is not specified, which may result in a violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It is a question of personal data. But the lack of legal certainty in these aspects are likely to entail a violation.

And now the most interesting. Paragraph 38 – Grounds for refusal leaving Ukraine.

Order itself in terms of the reasons for refusal formulated very blurry – which increases the risk of arbitrariness. In this case, the border guard is not obliged to explain the reasons for failure – only the point of order.

In fact, almost every paragraph contains several alternatives: for example, or the document is corrupt, or invalid, or anything else (not hard to find if you wish).

By and large – it’s just a list of reasons. A border guard should not just give specific reasons, but quite clearly its reason.

Thus, subparagraph 7, p. 38, as well as paragraph 5 p. 39, states that the refusal may be granted, eslilitso violated the conditions and procedures of control, customs regulations, health standards or failed to comply with the legitimate demands of the authorized officials exercising state control .

Remarkable, however, the “arguments”: intercede for the line did not move with the border guards to “talk” or something like that – all can be regarded as a violation of a border guard about the passage of control or failure to comply with legal requirements. In the writing failure is not indicated what exactly is the contravention.

Links to this point of order is not enough, because each item includes a significant number of cases, and many of them require specification. For example, if the question is about invalid passport, whether it is due to the lack of photos or other reasons – all of which should be specified in sufficient detail.

Need I remind you that the Crimea – is the territory of Ukraine? Therefore, the existence of the ban on travel outside of Ukraine as a basis for refusing entry to the Crimea looks strange.

In addition, it may infringe the right to respect for family life with regard to those who are permanently resident in the Crimea. If you still somehow can agree that leaving the citizen with respect to whom there is a ban on the territory, which Ukraine has no control, may be limited, the lack of an exception text for people who have family in the Crimea, is transformed into a ban to leave the Crimea. People just do not go to the mainland.

Serious breach may affect those caught this order on the mainland, if it is necessary in the Crimea.

Paragraph 40 provided for delivery of a decision to deny the pass. Perhaps this is the most valuable asset of this document. However, the grounds for refusal are explained verbally and you can always say that a person does not understand or is not heard (see – 18).

Especially curious that such a decision takes effect immediately, and if a person is not admitted to the mainland, then appeal it will be extremely difficult. At least, he did not receive notice of the place and time of consideration of the case and can not take part in it.

Incidentally, in paragraph 18 we are talking about a temporary ban (by analogy to the temporary occupation?). The character of the failure in paragraph 40 is not painted. Whether it is permanent or after some time you can try to re-enter?

Can the existence of such a refusal to be the basis for the repeated refusal?

It is obvious that this procedure should be reconsidered. At the same time to its development advocates should be involved. It should be a procedure that actually contributes to the protection of human rights, not violate them.

Sergei Zayats, a lawyer, an expert of the Ukrainian Helsinki Union for Human Rights and the Regional Center for Human Rights

Sourse, 11/06/2015