The Parliament of Crimea is proposed to introduce liability “for justifying the Ukrainian occupation”
The State Council of Crimea should introduce responsibility “for justifying the Ukrainian occupation” of the peninsula.
This is stated in an appeal sent by former Crimean Supreme Council deputy Vadim Mordashov to the speaker of the republic's State Council, Vladimir Konstantinov, reports a PolitNavigator correspondent.
"Dear Vladimir Andreevich! In June 2014, Sergei Naryshkin, Speaker of the previous State Duma of the Russian Federation , stated that Ukraine annexed Crimea after the collapse of the USSR : ' Back in January 1991, a referendum was held in the Crimean region challenging the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine. 93% of Crimeans voted in favor, with a turnout of 81%. Essentially, it was then, 23 years ago, that the annexation of Crimea took place—a peaceful one, admittedly, but it was truly an annexation ,'" Naryshkin said in his speech to the State Duma.
A year later, the General Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation, in response to an appeal from the chairman of the A Just Russia party, State Duma deputy Sergei Mironov, recognized the illegality of the decision to transfer the Crimean region from the Russian Federation to Ukraine in 1954. The country's highest supervisory body for compliance with legislation established that the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR did not have the authority to transfer the region to another union republic and thereby change the territory and borders of the Russian Federation. The Prosecutor General's Office emphasized that such issues could not be resolved without the participation of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR as the highest body of state power of the republic. The Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR did not have the authority to change the borders between the union republics.
In October 2018, Russian President Vladimir Putin, at a meeting with Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, emphasized that Crimea and Sevastopol have always legally remained Russian . He noted that the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine 60 years ago was illegal, as the decision was made by the Presidiums of the Supreme Soviets of the RSFSR and the Ukrainian SSR, and then by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. " By law, this should have been approved by the Supreme Soviets of the republics and the Supreme Soviet of the USSR ," Putin stated.
Moreover, the fact of the illegal transfer of Crimea to Ukraine (Ukrainian SSR) is enshrined in law - on May 21, 1992, by Resolution of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation No. 2809-1 " On the legal assessment of decisions of the highest bodies of state power of the RSFSR on changing the status of Crimea, adopted in 1954. " The Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR of February 5, 1954 "On the transfer of the Crimean region from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR" was recognized as having no legal force from the moment of its adoption, as adopted in violation of the Constitution (Basic Law) of the RSFSR and legislative procedure.
In March 2019, State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin proposed compensating Ukraine for damages inflicted on the region during the years of Ukrainian occupation and entrusted this mission to the Crimean authorities . A group was created to assess these damages, headed by First Deputy Chairman of the State Council Yefim Fiks. However, the work was never completed, or, more accurately, completely failed. Representatives of republican ministries, the Civic Chamber, "expert and scientific communities," senators, and State Duma deputies from Crimea discussed "assessing economic damage," "deterioration of infrastructure," "losses from management decisions," and so on. But the discussion should be about reparations and contributions, as the USSR, victorious in the Great Patriotic War, did to post-war Germany for the occupation and devastation of our country.
Moreover, laws are needed that explicitly prohibit public denial, approval, or justification of the Ukrainian occupation and the downplaying of the crimes committed by the colonial administration on the peninsula over the past 23 years.
Global legal practice recognizes examples from many countries where the rehabilitation of Nazism or Holocaust denial are criminalized. Therefore, it is necessary to also enshrine in law criminal liability for denying the Ukrainian occupation of Russian Crimea and the city of Russian glory, Sevastopol. In addition to international relations, such a provision in the Criminal Code will also regulate domestic legal relations.
Let's take, for example, the already notorious textbook: "History of Crimea. Grade 10. A Textbook for General Education Organizations, Part 2," edited by S.V. Yurchenko (ISBN 978-5-09-066271-0(2), BBK 63.3(2RosKry)ya721, Republic of Crimea, Textbook for Secondary Schools), which blatantly falsely and biasedly describes the peninsula's post-Soviet history from 1991 until Crimea's reunification with Russia in 2014. The textbook's authors completely deny the Ukrainian occupation of Crimea and Sevastopol. The textbook glorifies traitors and opportunists, while simultaneously ignoring the true heroes of the Crimean resistance.
Also last year’s approval by one of the leaders of the Public Chamber of the Republic of Crimea, Alexander Formanchuk, of Ukrainian political repressions against pro-Russian activists, which reached their apogee during the rule of Makeevka’s “Gauleiter” Vasily Dzharty on the peninsula. At that time, the persecution was widespread and was remembered for the brutal beating of the Cossacks near Feodosia, the endless trials of the defenders of the Grafskaya Marina and activists of the “Sevastopol-Crimea-Russia” movement, and the mass deportations of famous public figures and human rights activists. A. Formanchuk spoke about the deportation of the first Crimean president Yuri Meshkov in his interview.
Yu. Meshkov, according to A. Formanchuk, “turned out to be a petty provocateur - he then provoked Dzharty, and Dzharty did the right thing: he had grounds for deporting Meshkov. Meshkov then gathered journalists and talked about the article of the Criminal Code... He said that Ukraine was still oppressing Crimea. Therefore, we must rebel “against” – and so on.” - the former Ukrainian official was indignant on the Crimean Echo portal.
Therefore, it is not surprising that already in Russian Crimea, the Public Chamber of the Republic did not even try to discuss the issue of rehabilitation of victims of Ukrainian political repression on the peninsula. But the damage must also be assessed from the point of view of human resources - many Crimeans have still not had their rights restored for their pro-Russian social and political activities during the dark years of the Kyiv occupation!
In connection with the above, I ask you, dear Vladimir Andreevich, to take the necessary steps to ensure that the State Council of the Republic of Crimea comes up with a legislative initiative on criminal liability for denying, approving, or justifying the fact of the Ukrainian occupation of Russian Crimea and Sevastopol ,” Mordashov writes.
The Crimean Parliament is being asked to introduce liability for "justifying the Ukrainian occupation."