Translated by Ollie Richardson & Angelina Siard
“I, Major-General of the Security Service of Ukraine Bik Vladimir Valentinovich, having spent more than two years in custody on treason charges regarding part 1 of article 111 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, want to officially state that I did not admit and never will admit guilt, and will defend my innocence to the last.
On 5th February, 2014, having behind me over 34 years of excellent service, I was appointed head of the counterintelligence department of the SBU, and in November of the same year, on the basis of slanderous denunciation I was presented with unsubstantiated allegations, which for the entire period of the investigation still haven’t found its confirmation. Despite the absence of evidence in criminal proceedings, the investigation referred the case to the court.
The prosecution, realizing the hopelessness of their situation and the lack of objective data that could be taken into account, chose the tactics of delaying the process, preventing the judges in making objective decisions, and violating constitutional norms and the law of the Prosecutor’s office, delegating duties to the public Prosecutor not only to prove the guilt of the defendant, but also to prevent his unreasonable and unjust condemnation. The scenario of the hearing imposed by the charges is reduced to hours and hours of watching videos that do not contain state secrets, and still are publicly available on the Internet. These videos in no way influenced the image of Ukraine, and could not be the reason for the annexation of Crimea or the aggravation of the situation in Donbass, as is stated in the indictment. As a result, I and my lawyers found ourselves as hostages to the situation, during which false facts are investigated, which have no evidence of my involvement and never will.
However, I claim that I didn’t violate the oath given to the people of Ukraine; that I have always acted within their authority in accordance with the applicable legislation, official instructions, orders of management of the Security Service of Ukraine, and officers’ ethics; that I didn’t aim to discredit Ukraine in the eyes of the world community or to harm its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
With all responsibility I declare that such accusations have an ordered nature. The fact that the real organizers of the tragic events of 2014 are still not established, testify to, obviously, the disinterest of the authorities in their identify, probably because part of the perpetrators of mass shootings on Maidan to this day continue to be their representatives. I believe that the government intends to cover them by using this criminal case, imitating activity on revealing the organizers, and presenting to society the people who have no involvement in this. This tactic is doubly effective, taking into account the opportunity to “settle personal scores”.
The activities of the SBU always assumed official liaison and joint interactions with the representatives of the Security Services of different foreign States, but this was implemented at the state level and executed in the framework of the Ukrainian legislation in the sphere of the interests of Ukraine. All service activities and contacts with representatives of foreign States, with my participation, also were clearly defined. What can be said about the activities of Valentin Nalyvaychenko for the post of Chairman of the SBU in the period from 2006 to 2010, which was aimed at maintaining a wide network of informal contacts among the representatives and personnel of the CIA, including Jeffrey Egan, Mark Buggy, Chuck Levin, who had his own cabinet – No. 102 on the ground floor in the Central office on 33 Vladimirskaya Street, as well as other employee-agents of US special bodies.
Informal liasons with the American intelligence services posed a threat to the interests of Ukraine, and were opening access to information of public importance and created favourable conditions for espionage to the detriment of our country and in the sole interest of the United States.
The information that I had, as well as our personal and ideological differences, became the reason that after 3 weeks after my return to the position of the Head of the SBU Valentin Nalyvaychenko, thanks to denunciations by his two subordinates Vadim Kochetygov and Mikhail Sakaly, in order of personal revenge, implemented a plan that aimed to solve simultaneously two tasks: to “appoint” the guilty and to get rid of a personal enemy.
The ordered nature of the accusations was confirmed by the public statement of the Chief Military Prosecutor of Ukraine Mr. Matios, who in an interview on 14th March, 2016, already before the completion of the investigation presented the actions incriminated to me as proven. I regard his statement as another attempt of pressure on the court and influence on public opinion with the aim to create in the public mind the image of a criminal, conspirator, and “enemy of the people”.
Such public statements are dangerous because they not only draw away the investigation from the real organizers of the events of February 2014, but also show a complete disregard for the law and the principles of the presumption of innocence, and this happens with the tacit consent of the current government representatives.
In this connection, let me recall the current Attorney-General of Ukraine, Mr Lutsenko, who, having suffered from an unjust verdict, during the appointment to the position promised to prevent lawlessness and the fulfillment of political orders, and to defend the law.
President Petro Poroshenko also promised to fight for the opportunity to live in a new way. But despite the promises, not all have managed to do it – neither in the country as a whole nor in the framework of separate criminal proceedings. But it is precisely such a situation that’s discredits Ukraine in the eyes of the world much more than those 257 videos posted on the channel RePostвYoutube. And for Mr. President and other dignitaries -it’s time to think about it seriously.
Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.