Mixed hatchet and a scalpel

So in a nutshell, nA my opinion, can be characterized by a decree of President of Ukraine “On the decision of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine of 28 April 2017” On the application of personal special economic and other restrictive measures (sanctions), “which introduced a one-year (or three years, five years, indefinitely -. to each his own), various restrictions on the 468 legal entities and 1228 individuals About this in his blog on the NRwrote the well-known human rights activist, member of the Board of the Ukrainian Helsinki human Rights Union, the head of Kharkiv Human Rights Group Evgeniy Zaharov.

The following is the opinion of human rights activist:

Let’s try to argue from a position of affirmation and protection of human rights, which, according to Article 3 of the Constitution of Ukraine, is … the primary responsibility of our state.

According to the second part of Article 22 of the Constitution: “With the adoption of new laws or amending existing laws are not allowed narrowing of the content and scope of existing rights and freedoms.” At the same time it is obvious that imposed by the Decree (ie, the act is not even legislative and executive authorities) sanctions restrict the key rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution: the right of ownership (Article 41) and / or freedom of information (Article 34) and / or creative freedom (article 54), and in respect only of individuals – even and / or the right to respect for private and family life (article 32) and / or freedom of movement (article 33).

In order to determine whether the restriction on the right (freedom) justified and valid, it is necessary to turn to his assessment on the basis of principles of the European Convention on Human Rights in 1950 Namely, the restriction of rights must be based on law, pursue a clearly defined goal of Limitations of fundamental law of Ukraine a list of objectives and be proportionate (adequate) in relation to the alleged threat was detected.

In any case, the effects of restrictions on rights and freedoms must bring less damage to society and the individual than the full implementation of the subjective right in its former, that is full. In our case, as far as can be judged, run by a presidential decree limiting the rights and freedoms formally based on the Law of Ukraine “On sanctions” on August 14, 2014, are intended to protect national security (or other objectives listed in Article 1 of the Law “On sanctions” ).

As for the answer to the question whether the rights and freedoms within an acceptable scale violated, the answer can only distance a thorough analysis of the proportionality introduced restrictions stated objectives. Such an analysis, which is very important, must be carried out with respect to each of the listed individuals and entities. In this case, a number of rights may be restricted only after a court decision to impose such restrictions. In any case, the principle of the rule of law requires the State and its agents provide a convincing argument in favor of the need to limit the rights.

Strictly speaking, to restrict the constitutional rights can only be in that case, if no such restriction is really impossible to do. Such a requirement is contained in the well-known presumption: based on the law and the court sanctioned restriction of the right should be recognized as “necessary in a democratic society”.

Whether in this case complied with the required procedure? I suppose not, but was glad to be wrong.

List of individuals to sanctions, including not only the citizens of Russia, but also in other foreign countries. It also got some Ukrainian citizens. We are talking about people living in the occupied territories as the Crimea, Donetsk and Lugansk regions and the territories controlled by the Ukrainian government. And I do not understand how in regard to the latter can act without prior court decision is most often found in the list of restriction of their property rights.

We are talking about blocking assets as a temporary restriction of a person the right to use and dispose of property belonging to him. Such a restriction may be regarded as an infringement of the fundamental right to private property is permissible only in the case of introduction of a state of emergency.

For example, a citizen Zagnibeda KG (№210 in the list), registered and residing in Slavyansk, should, it seems, for a year to get away from his home? And where? The all-knowing Google said that Mr. Zagnibeda born in 1963 – is an entrepreneur, the owner of the LLC “ZAGNIBEDA LTD” with the main activity:. “The production of plates, sheets, tubes and profiles made of plastics.”

In 2015, he ran for city council Slavic, being number 12 in the list of “Ukrainian parties honor the fight against corruption and organized crime.” More than anything substantive, I have not found, so to see at least a hint of why in this case to impose sanctions, failed. It is clear only that, apparently, during the occupation, Mr. Slavyansk Zagnibeda aggressor is not promoted, otherwise would have been prosecuted.

The list of legal entities – offshore companies, banks, airlines, industry, particularly engineering, enterprise, television and radio, social networking, and other services (cloud storage, navigation, music, etc.), software developers (hereinafter – Software) … Many of them have Ukrainian registration, they are in Ukraine and employ ordinary citizens of Ukraine.

Puzzling hit by sanctions of the Russian company “1C” and its Ukrainian representative office of LLC “1C Multimedia Ukraine”. Accounting computer system 1C uses 80% of Ukrainian enterprises of small and medium-sized businesses, the majority of public organizations.

It appears that in this case it is necessary to have very good reasons for decisions on sanctions, the data base must be sure to explain to the population. In general, a review of Ukrainian software development companies have come under the sanctions shows that they all have one similar trait – are subsidiaries or representative of the Russian companies. Is this the only and therefore sufficient from the point of view of the authorities, the legal basis?

Let’s consider the well-known company OOO “Parus-Ukraine”, working on the Ukrainian market since Soviet times. Referring to its website: parus.ua. The main activity of the group of companies “Sail” – the development, promotion and implementation of software for enterprise management. Today, the company – one of the largest software companies in Ukraine, developing business management. In addition to the development of the Center, for the period of its operation, the central office has developed a strong regional network of over 28 regional offices (see. №№ 443-468 in the legal list. Of persons) and more than two dozen dealers. The number of employees is more than 550 professionals, of which more than 250 are working in Kiev.

“Sail” Number of product installations exceeds 200,000, the software operates in more than 20,000 organizations. Users of software products “Sail” is the enterprise telecommunications, large industrial companies, oil and gas companies and thermal power complex, trading companies, insurance, credit and financial companies, design and construction organizations, enterprises transport and logistics, printing companies, publishing and media, restaurant complexes, cafes, bars, pubs, pizzerias, hotels, boarding houses, recreation, night sports and fitness clubs, entertainment centers, water parks, sire structure governmental administration, ministries, departments, committees, universities, medical and health institutions.

At the same site, “Sail” claims that his clients include 80% of the main managers of budgetary funds, including, in particular, the Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Internal Affairs, State Border Service, the regional management of the State Migration Service and emergency services, “Ukrtelecom” “Ukrnafta” SDO “Yuzhnoye”, National school of judges, and many other government agencies.

So it does not surprise me an urgent message on the official website, which appeared May 16 immediately after the release of the Decree, which reads as follows: “Sail” – a group of Ukrainian companies! Information about this can be found on the website under parus.ua “Copyright and Permissions”. Hit in the sanctions list in respect of the group of companies “Sail” is not valid, we will be challenged and is perceived by us as pressure.

And I was not surprised by the appearance of proposals to use all soon any new software products of Ukrainian origin, instead of products 1C, “Sail” and other subsidiaries of Russian software developers. I would like to still hear the explanation why many software developers to apply such a truly draconian restrictive measures.

But imposing sanctions on companies such as “Doctor Web”, “Kaspersky Lab” and their Ukrainian representative offices as no surprise. I had a lot to hear from system administrators familiar that these anti-virus programs as mail.ru complex can not be used, because they are engaged in espionage, embedded in the operating system of aggressive, damage the installation browser, install bugs and illegally collect information without permission and warn users.

In particular, personal information, financial records, data on the location, movement, and the like. The illegal collection of personal data and use them to the detriment of Ukraine also blame social networks “in contact” (VC) and “Classmates” (OK). In particular, the military claimed that the publication of photos of its soldiers in social networks sometimes leads to their death.

If the appeal to the social networks of people involved in the public sector, has brought serious harm to the national security and other public interests listed in Article 1 of the Law “On sanctions”, the restriction of access of civil servants and all other people working in state institutions, seem justified. But whether the state can restrict access to social networks of millions of people, to do with the public institutions do not have? I think it is – a massive violation of the right to privacy and freedom of expression.

The impression is that the imposition of sanctions is motivated primarily by some purely private, commercial and economic interests, and seeks to harm the financial interests of specific companies. In this vein, the sanctions would contribute to both the development of Ukrainian business. For example, as you know, “Yandex” and other Russian companies have brought down Ukrainian advertising market on the Internet and drove with him Ukrainian competitors. Sanctions will remove from the market “Yandex” and others. But it does benefit from that Ukrainian consumers? All this looks very doubtful and uncertain …

And I was wondering if anyone thought about the people who use “Yandex-purse”? For example, they can take in case of need their money? Or initial calculation was that the ban on access to web resources and easy to get around because all who need to quickly learn how to do it? This is indicated by many defenders of Presidential Decree – he, they say, is not directed against users, but against the companies, and that in our democratic state, no one will interfere with the VC and UC fans enjoy this personification of “Russian world”.

But older people remember well how quickly passed us by “enemies uneshnih” to “enemies unutrennim”. Here and now there are voices, including some active deputies, that you need to watch out for those who violate the decree and to hold them accountable. Our state has long dreamed of control over the internet, there have been several attempts to establish it. As long as they did not work. But to deal with the introduction of Internet control under the pretext of protecting information security during the war with the Russian aggressor will be more difficult. In any case, I really do not want to Ukraine in the national security services is easily confused with a rusty ax a surgical scalpel.

Sourse, 22/05/2017