The Verkhovna Rada Commissioner for Human Rights, Dmytro Lubinets, revealed to the publication NV the key flaws of the draft law on mobilization, told that for the military it is the only defender, and explained why the UN is powerless and ineffective.
The ombudsman, or the Verkhovna Rada's human rights representative, is far from the most media personage in Ukrainian politics. However, from the point of view of ordinary citizens, its role is always important, and even more so in times of war. Because the number of significant topics handled by the commissioner has only increased now.
— One of the critical issues now is mobilization. We watched as the Verkhovna Rada committee on defense and security discussed the government's draft law on mobilization for a week. You were present at the first meeting. What were your comments on the document? And was there a consensus about them?
— I have not yet seen the final version of the bill after the vote in the profile committee. I don't know what the solution will be. It seems to me that right now it is being resolved. But yes, publicly I immediately commented that, in my opinion, the proposed draft law violates the norms of the Ukrainian Constitution.
We have been at war since 2014. It happens to us every day, and we need to change our approaches to mobilization.
First of all, we should do more recruiting, show that service in the army is a well-paid profession that is well-recognized in Ukrainian society. And while a citizen of Ukraine is serving in the Armed Forces, there is a list of basic rights that are not infringed by both military personnel and the entire family that has sent a loved one to the Armed Forces. We need to change these accents.
This is the prerequisite for overcoming the corruption component and other problems that I currently observe in the work of the TCC. And I see it every day.
By the way, as soon as the public news broke that I had begun criticizing the new mobilization bill, the first person to call me was the Secretary of Defense, who directly asked if I had been involved in the development. I said no. And he said that it would be fixed now. He also asked what the main questions were. I briefly sketched them, and the next day they began to work out the remarks and warnings that we officially expressed on the part of the human rights representative of the Verkhovna Rada.
- What kind of remarks were these?
— In my opinion, direct violations of the Constitution relate to the fact that additional powers of the TCC are added in the proposed version of the draft law. I directly showed that TCCs are military units.
According to our Constitution, military units cannot take part in restricting the rights of Ukrainian citizens, even if we are legally under military status.
This is a direct provision of our Constitution. For example, I did not understand: if we all see problems with the activities of the TCC, why do we give them the authority to check documents? We have bodies that check the documents of Ukrainian citizens, primarily the National Police, the State Border Service, the National Guard. But definitely not military.
The second caveat was that the head of the TCC, by his decision, can influence whether a citizen of Ukraine disposes of his property in full or not. It is nonsense when the military decides that someone cannot sell their apartment. For this, again, there are relevant executive authorities. Prescribe it if you want to increase the flow of mobilized people in Ukraine through this prism.
Well, my third warning was about persons with disabilities of the third group. We have a separate UN convention that has been ratified, we have a separate legislation that has been ratified. The explanation I heard at the committee meeting was that we have a lot of citizens of Ukraine who took advantage of an illegal right and got a certificate stating that they are disabled of the third group because of a corrupt component somewhere. In fact, they have no right to do so. I said, this is not a question of legislation. And you won't solve it at the level of the law. You have to deal with it in a different way. But you can't just take and break our international commitments. Again, I hope that all reservations and remarks that I have officially expressed and sent to the profile committee will be taken into account. I am waiting for the final revision.
Regarding the mobilization of convicts. We visited about 50% of penal colonies in Ukraine. There was not a single colony where my employees were not approached by the guys who are there and said: "I have a light article, I unwittingly committed a criminal offense (there are different cases), I am ready to join the Armed Forces, give me this opportunity."
There were even those who said that if it was not counted as serving a sentence, then they were ready to return to serve their term here: "But give me the opportunity to participate in the defense of my state."
By the way, I directly said this. And here, again, I know the caveat of how prisoners can be taken. I said it was very simple. For example, at the level of the law, it is determined. Two conditions are necessary: the first is a citizen of Ukraine who, in such a status, wants to enter the relevant unit; the second - the corresponding unit is ready to take such a citizen of Ukraine.
— As far as I know, the General Staff and Zaluzhny do not like this idea very much, because they say that the army is for decent people. There can be no army as punishment.
— I did not say that... Again, yes, there was a reaction from Zaluzhny, who categorically opposed it. On the other hand, I said that if these two conditions are met, when the unit itself is ready to take, they take responsibility for such a person. We understand that they will collect information in advance, conduct some kind of analysis, whether they need such a person or not. Again, I always emphasize that regardless of where a citizen of Ukraine is, in what position he is, in what place he is, he remains first and foremost a person, on the other hand, he remains a citizen of Ukraine.
— You mentioned the work of the TCC. What are the most common violations you receive? Is there any trend towards illegal behavior?
— The main issue raised by citizens of Ukraine is the inconsistency of the mandates of the TCC. This is when they demand to check documents, take away documents and physically detain Ukrainian citizens. They do not have such rights.
— Are there any cases that personally outraged you the most?
— Yes, when TCC employees used physical force against citizens of Ukraine. In this case, I was informed that criminal proceedings have been opened.
— We hear about cases when it is similar to abduction: a person was walking down the street and was taken by the TCC in a minibus and taken away. How common are such stories?
— I will not say that they are systemic, that there are many of them, but we are also approached with such cases.
— And how do you then react to it?
- Everything is very simple. I open proceedings and direct all inquiries. And we also sent monitoring checks to some TCCs.
— Then this issue is resolved somehow?
— Then I ask this question at the management level, when information about the abuse of rights by TCC employees is confirmed, so that some kind of disciplinary proceedings are opened against them, and the top management makes a decision to punish their subordinates.
- I also want to ask about the appeals of the military: how often do they come to your office and what are they about?
- A lot. Our legislation is structured in such a way that a serviceman or servicewoman can only turn to me for the protection of his rights. They cannot be members of trade unions, apply to public organizations. Not to anyone. Only to our institution. A relevant department was created and I introduced the position of a special representative for the protection of human rights in the security and defense sector. In my opinion, legally this person performs the duties of a military ombudsman in Ukraine. He has the same powers as other military ombudsmen in various other countries. The only difference is who and how they appoint people to these positions.
Do I have enough authority now? Legally enough. Physically, not enough. I have 42 people working in this department. In 2023, we received 17,5 thousand appeals in this direction alone. They concerned the violation of the rights of active servicemen to pay, vacations, and medical treatment. We have a lot of cases when a guy was injured, he was taken to a hospital in Dnipro, he underwent emergency surgery, he was saved, and the military unit officially wrote that he was a SZCH [arbitrarily left a part] and opened criminal proceedings against him. And such cases are not isolated. We have cases when relatives turned to us and said that legally they have all the documents that their relative died, but they cannot get payment from the state.
- The exchange of prisoners, I understood you correctly, that after this last exchange you expect that they will happen more often? At least there is potential for that?
— You are absolutely correct in saying that there is potential. We have the potential, we have Russian prisoners of war, we are ready to exchange prisoners of war.
— Is it possible to create a single mechanism for the return of civilians under these conditions? Are there tools that will allow this?
— In my opinion, we should work on it. We have another problem. Our problem is that we are constantly faced with the reluctance of the Russian side to comply with international humanitarian law and return our citizens to us. Well, reluctance. Your question can be put another way: can we find an organization or a country that will force the Russians to give us our civilian hostages? In my opinion, yes, there are such countries. Such an organization, if it would act according to their mandate, also exists, and that is the United Nations.
— Was there a readiness from the UN to help in the same matter?
— Everything related to international organizations... I'm sorry for my reaction - it's such a smile of sarcasm already. Probably, I spend the most time in communications precisely with international organizations, with UN structures, with the International Committee of the Red Christ. I can't say that they are all ineffective. I can give the example of UNICEF. This UN Children's Fund is a wonderful organization. They do everything they can within the limits of their mandate: help Ukrainian children, wherever they are - in Ukraine, on the territory of third countries, for rehabilitation, for creating additional conditions for education. Super! I have no comments at all, only words of thanks to UNICEF.
Regarding other structures. First of all, the political component of the UN. Namely: recording what is happening in Ukraine. Yes, recently, I am ready to tell you this publicly today, in the reports of the permanent monitoring mission of the UN in Ukraine, they finally began to mention that Russian missiles are arriving, and not just any missiles, that civil infrastructure is being destroyed, and not just infrastructure, which, for example, the Armed Forces could not direct their missiles at Olenivka [where Ukrainian prisoners of war were killed by a powerful explosion in the Russian colony] and these were definitely not HIMARS. Super! Well, at least it's something. On the other hand, where is the direct influence on the Russians to stop it?
We have nonsense. In our country, which has the status of a permanent member of the UN Security Council, attacks a country that is officially the founder of the UN. Where is our reaction? The response, not just the words "we are deeply concerned." We have been hearing these words since 2014.
The same with regard to the Russian Federation: if someone thinks that if, God forbid, Ukraine will not last, then Putin will stop, then in my opinion, definitely not. The only question is: who will be next? Moldova? Baltic countries? Kazakhstan or someone else? Nobody knows that. The problem is that no one even, in my opinion, wants to seriously think about it now. Yes, Ukraine now holds the entire democratic world, we [countries of the democratic world] somehow we help them, somehow... But this is help according to the final principle. If everyone understood that this is not Ukraine's issue, but ours, then the reaction would be different.
We have one-to-one parallels before the start of World War II. One on one: sluggish reaction, first Hitler took Austria, then Czechoslovakia, and only after that we had Poland. When did historians realize that World War II had begun in our country? Did they do it on September 1, 1939? No. Then Germany attacked, and two weeks later the Soviet Union attacked on the other side. And it was written about only after the end of the war, that it was the beginning. So that in the future it does not happen that now we are already living in the conditions of the Third World War, which began on February 23, 2022.
To always be aware of the most important things, read us at Telegram
