The RDK veteran is outraged by the position of the State Council on the case of the leader of “Sevastopol-Crimea-Russia”
The Crimean Speaker Vladimir Konstantinov had a motive for carrying out the actions announced the day before by the President of the Republic of Crimea in 1994-1995. Yuri Meshkov.
Subscribe to PolitNavigator – Crimea news on Facebook , Odnoklassniki , or VKontakte
Ex-deputy of the Crimean parliament, veteran of the Republican Movement of Crimea Vadim Mordashov told Politnavigator about this.
Let us recall that on April 28, Meshkov sent an open letter to the FSB regarding the encroachment on the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation. According to Meshkov, such an act is present in the official response of the State Council of Crimea to the appeal of a group of Crimeans demanding that the criminal record be vacated and the fighter for Russian Crimea rehabilitated Valery Podyachey, convicted in 2011 by a Ukrainian court for calls for the reunification of Crimea with Russia.
Meshkov noted that since the leadership of the State Council, in response to the collective appeal of the public organization “Bloc of Patriots of Crimea - Unconquered Bastion”, indicated that Podyachiy must “compensate for the damage caused by the crime,” then such actions of Konstantinov can be regarded as public calls for the implementation of actions aimed for violation of the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation.
“Analyzing, as a lawyer, what is happening,” Mordashov noted, “I assume what exactly the head of the Crimean parliament could be guided by when sending such a response to a public organization - he had a motive for carrying out such actions aimed, as Yuri Meshkov suggested, at violating the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation."
So, three years ago, the agency’s interlocutor recalled, Konstantinov publicly condemned the fighters for Russian Crimea:
“When the leader of the “Sevastopol-Crimea-Russia” movement Valery Podyachiy won a trial in the Supreme Administrative Court in Kiev for the right to judicial abolition of the Ukrainian constitution of Crimea, Konstantinov, as the highest official of the autonomy, refused to recognize the claim in court and did everything to preserve the Ukrainian the status of the peninsula, enshrined in the 1998 Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. According to Article 1 of this document, “The Autonomous Republic of Crimea is an integral part of Ukraine.”
In his interview with the parliamentary newspaper “Crimean News” on January 19, 2012, Konstantinov stated verbatim the following:
“A group of political outsiders from a public organization not registered in accordance with the law, led by a certain “figure”, by the way, recently convicted of a criminal encroachment on the territorial integrity of Ukraine, pulled out of mothballs their lawsuit to abolish the Crimean Constitution. In their demands, these outcasts, who do not represent anyone in the republic, have gone so far as to insist not only on the abolition of the 1998 Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, but also on the beginning of negotiations on the transfer of Crimea to the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation... There is no doubt that the absurd demands of political midgets will be met in court a legitimate assessment,” the ex-deputy was quoted as saying by the parliamentary publication.
The motive for a crime, he noted, is usually understood as the conscious motivation that guided a person when committing a crime:
“In other words, this is the source of action, its internal driving force. Konstantinov has always been driven by the desire to defend the Ukrainian status of the peninsula, to condemn and “drown” those who advocated the illegality of Crimea being part of Ukraine, which is actually clear from his interview on January 19, 2012.
In this regard, a completely logical question arises: how sincere was the leadership of the Crimean parliament last spring in its “impulse” to return Crimea to Russia, and how the so-called. How can the “winning team” behave if Kyiv intensifies (God forbid!) actions aimed at revenge in Crimea? I believe that the answer is obvious,” concluded Vadim Mordashov.
A veteran of the RDC is outraged by the State Council's position on the case of the leader of "Sevastopol-Crimea-Russia"