About human rights investigations, monitoring and control over the observance of human rights in Crimea
Human rights problem in Crimea is one of the main themes of the international social and political agenda. Independent international human rights organizations have repeatedly expressed concern the situation of human rights violations on the territory of the peninsula. About human rights investigations, monitoring and control of the director of the Moscow office of Human Rights in the Crimea Amnesty International Sergei Nikitin.
– First of all, I would like to ask you tezisno characterized the human rights situation in the Crimea. I’m interested in how your personal observations as well as any data collected from the monitoring of Amnesty International.
– Firstly, it must be said that the monitoring of the human rights situation is not held in the Moscow office of the Crimea. This area of the office Amnesty International, which is located in the city of Kiev. Accordingly, everything that happens in Crimea, it is known, first and foremost, our Kyiv colleagues, and they react to events, either through stock emergency aid or any statements, press releases, and so on. However, I personally took part in a trip to the Crimea. It was, if I am not mistaken, in February 2015. I am with my colleague from the Kiev office spent nearly a week in the Crimea. The result of this visit was briefWhich is called “A year later: freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and association in the Crimea” [a report was issued by the Kiev bureau AI 24 March 2015]. This is sort of a snapshot of what was noted in February of last year. It is obvious that since that time a lot has changed, a lot has happened, but the overall picture today is, in principle, similar to that which has been featured in the past year. One of the main problems is the kidnapping. Basically we are talking about the people of Crimean Tatar. There is the problem of impunity, ie the actual Crimean authorities do not effectively investigate the abduction, but people who are involved in these crimes, and not brought to justice. Also, there is the problem of freedom of expression – the press is forced to silence. And if at the beginning of 2015, we met with the journalists of the Crimean Tatar TV channel ATR, the ATR does not exist today, they have been forced to close. More precisely, they exist, but not on the territory of the Crimea [channel closed April 1, 2015, after several unsuccessful attempts to obtain a Russian license; later resumed broadcasting channel in Kiev]. actively used administrative procedures to eliminate independent media. That, however, is a typical tool for the Russian law enforcement bodies and the authorities in the Russian Federation. To this day it remains relevant and may have even worsened the problem of freedom of peaceful assembly: still limited to the traditional meeting of the Crimean Tatar people, the expression of a protest shall be prohibited, carrying out any human rights activities has become virtually impossible. The right to freedom of association has also been compromised. In fact, there was a mass exodus from the Crimea independent non-governmental organizations has intensified harassment of members of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars, and after the recognition of his court Crimean extremist organization we dida statement which was entitled: “Crimea: a proposal for the abolition of the Majlis – the culmination of repression against the Crimean Tatars.”
What else I would like to say that the document issued by us in 2015, came to an end, as is traditionally the case with Amnesty International documents, recommendations. These recommendations were addressed to the de facto authorities in Crimea, and addressed to the international community. We have already expressed serious concerns regarding respect for human rights on the peninsula, these issues remain relevant to this day.
– Tell me, did not whether your visit to the territory of Crimea, as well as regularly published reports and statements prerequisite for any reaction of the local authorities? Did Amnesty International some feedback from them?
– In Crimea, we met with the Commissioner for Human Rights Lyudmiloy Lubinoy . At this meeting, we talked about the problems of the Crimean Tatars and as an example resulted in our attempts to visit the trial Akhtemov Chiygozom[Deputy chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars]. We came to the building at the time of the meeting of the court, but rather cynically organized “non-admission” of the public in the courtroom. It was scheduled for 18:00, the security would not let the people due to the fact that the court supposedly open until 18:00. A fair question whether the court of the public – the guard replied in the affirmative, at the same time saying that we will not be allowed, because the court is closed. In addition, we noticed Lubin at disappearances of the Crimean Tatar people, but to us it was pushed very in demand in the local environment counterargument, they say, there have been many disappearances, but you only care about the Crimean Tatars. At the same time, as I recall, Lubin suggested some figure of a few hundred people. According to her, it is the number of people per year has disappeared in the Crimea, which caused some surprise on my side, because if you disappear for a person a day, what, in this case, law enforcement agencies engaged in the Crimea. Again, it is worth saying that this conversation took place in an informal format, and all of the above facts, we have been provided orally, so about any consequences of this meeting can not speak.
I note the fact that the presence of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Crimea, the representatives of the Crimean Tatar people is ignored. That is, as I understand it, they did not apply to it, that, in my view, wrong. That’s what I said, and the Crimean Tatars, and many other people who are victims of human rights violations, but their skepticism was based on the fact that they do not feel to Lubin confidence. Overall, this is an old problem, when people do not go to the authorities because they do not trust them.
We also tried to organize a meeting at the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Crimea, where we have come in person and asked for a meeting with someone from the representatives of the body, what to us again was granted waiver for formal reasons. We were offered to present in writing all the questions of interest to us as we wanted to convey on paper, but we recommend to do so via e-mail. We’ll do it later, when you left the Crimea, and the prosecutor’s response was a usual runaround, where essentially no response was provided.
However, it seems to me important that requests to the authorities by Amnesty International continue to go. Thus, the Crimean authorities understand that there is a close attention on the part of the human rights community, by such renowned independent organizations, which is Amnesty International. All the materials we collected in the Crimea, were transferred to me Elle Panfilovoy , which at that time held the position of the Russian Ombudsman. During a personal meeting with Elloy Aleksandrovnoy, I spoke in detail about his visit to the Crimea.
– What you have described, it is situational contacts, respectively, as far as I understand, permanent contacts with the Crimean authorities Amnesty International does not support …
– No, I do not support. But again, I repeat, the work with the Crimea remains in the competence of our Kiev colleagues.
– Here the question arises: Do not you think that, as in the Crimea currently operating Russian legislation, the Russian working bodies of the vertical, human rights work would be more effective if it was engaged in the Moscow bureau of Amnesty International?
– This is a difficult question, because for us, for Amnesty International, from the point of view of international law, the government, which currently exist in the Crimea, are “de facto authorities”, which, of course, must ensure respect for human rights. But if we started to work in the Crimea, it would indirectly recognized the annexation of Crimea by Russia as legitimate.
– Tell, and how these problems of human rights violations are typical for the Russian regions? At least for the most “difficult” in this part, for example, to the Chechen Republic or RB?
– In fact, the problems that today are relevant to the Crimea, are typical for the whole country. Everywhere there are some of his characteristics. It is clear that in the Crimea, this “feature” is the Crimean Tatar population. The actual pressure of Crimean authorities in the representatives of the Crimean Tatar people, which I mentioned earlier, obviously. Therein lies its Crimean specificity. And overall, the universal situation is the inability to carry out some kind of socially significant public event. Freedom of peaceful assembly – it is, so to speak, the election. For one group it works as well for other Stalling various obstacles. But such a situation is typical, for example, to Moscow. Suffice it to recall a situation where people are not allowed to hold a public event to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the August coup, driving to the edge of the forest park “Sokolniki”. And this is a problem all over Russia – an attempt to squeeze activists squeeze civil society, all the forces that are independent of the Kremlin. Attempt to drive them to the edge of the forest.
– For the last time, actively raised the issue of the need for the presence in the Crimea monitoring groups representatives of independent human rights organizations. It is assumed that it must be international groups. Tell me, in your opinion, is there such a need right now and how this idea is realizable in practice?
– Я не готов сейчас ответить, является ли эта идея реализуемой на практике, однако на полуострове, по моему мнению, складывается очевидная тенденция, когда на любые правозащитные инициативы следует неприветливая реакция. Достаточно вспомнить попытки навесить на Полевую миссию по правам человека в Крыму клеймо нежелательной организации [была признана таковой 16 июля 2015 года]. Тогда, как вы помните, никакие доводы о том, что эта организация не является иностранной, не брались в расчет. Я сейчас не могу сказать, есть ли необходимость в постоянном присутствии на территории Крыма каких-то международных организаций, поскольку это решение должно приниматься каждой организацией отдельно. В то же время наблюдение за состоянием ситуации с правами человека мне представляется весьма корректной и цивилизованной процедурой. Это то, чем, в частности, и занимается Amnesty International практически во всех странах мира. Ведь мы критикуем за нарушения прав человека власти всех стран: и Российской Федерации, и Соединенных Штатов, и Австралии, и Германии, и стран Африки. Поэтому, как мне кажется, де-факто власти Крыма, если бы хотели продемонстрировать, что на этой территории с правами человека все в порядке, должны были бы приветствовать присутствие на полуострове представителей каких-то независимых международных правозащитных организаций и помогать им при необходимости. Еще хочется отметить, что те наши исследователи, которые проводят длительный мониторинг ситуации с правами человека, находятся, зачастую, в тех местах, где происходят вопиющие нарушения прав человека: это конфликт в Сирии, это конфликт в отношении беженцев. Что касается Крыма, то тут, к счастью, дела обстоят не до такой степени трагически, как в странах Ближнего Востока.
– At the end of May this year, Amnesty International has launched a subscription campaign in the name Natali Poklonskoy to investigate the disappearance of the Crimean Tatar activist, delegate of the World Congress of Crimean Tatars Erwin Ibragimov. In the letter, which was proposed to send to the Crimean prosecutor’s office, contained wording, signing under which any citizen of Russia runs the risk of being accused of extremism and / or separatism. This word “occupation”, “annexation”. Correctly, in your opinion, the use of structures that can trigger arousal of new criminal cases?
– Yes, indeed, such an appeal was published. This is called Urgent action – for a long time and is regularly used by our tool. The fact that it was publishednot only in Russian, respectively, to sign it could citizens of different states. As for the language you mentioned, I can say that we have no gag does not invent. All these terms are used in the annual reports of Amnesty International, in those parts in which the question of Crimea affected. Moreover, this action immediate assistance is a matter of purely voluntary, as well as any other part in the work of Amnesty International. Therefore, everyone is free to decide: Either he signs treatment and is aware of the possible consequences, though I have to be honest, I doubt that there is any danger or the person simply is not signed.
– Perhaps the last question concerns the existing now the Light of Human Rights under the President of Russia. You probably know that the composition of the Board has a time “Crimean group” human rights activists, headed by Nikolai Svanidze and Andrey Yurov. In your opinion, whether the Board of defenders can somehow influence on the situation of human rights in the Crimea? How do effective this tool?
– It’s hard to talk about efficiency, but I believe that all human rights work in Russia today is exceptionally complicated. This also applies to you mentioned the Council, and the Institute of the Commissioner for Human Rights, both federal and regional level. Therefore, on the one hand, we can say that it [the HRC under the Russian president] is not effective, but, on the other hand, the fact that at this point in history, these institutions exist, should be viewed in a positive way. I am personally acquainted with Andreem Yurovym, and Nikolai Svanidze, and with Mihailom Fedotovym[Head of the HRC]. We regularly discuss with them issues of human rights violations in Russia, and the East of Ukraine. Crimea periodically becomes the subject of our conversations. It is clear that always want more, but the fact that there are people who care about human rights issues in the Crimea is a big plus. I hope that in the future this work will continue, despite all the difficulties faced by human rights defenders in their work.
Sourse, 22/08/2016
