Translated by Ollie Richardson & Angelina Siard
The Security Service of Ukraine makes groundless statements about the detention of users of social networks and in fact does not carry out investigations concerning the stated facts. This is evidenced by the response of law enforcement bodies to the inquiry of the “Uspishna Varta“ human rights platform.
Thus, on January 22nd information about the identification of a Russian journalist who allegedly administered and filled anti-Ukrainian Internet communities with information was published on the page of the SBU on Facebook.
The human rights activists of “Uspishna Varta” addressed to the SBU with a request to obtain public information about the notification of suspicion handed to the specified journalist and the measure of restraint imposed on them within the framework of criminal proceedings.
In the received answer the required information was not provided. Moreover, Security Service specialists reported that their department hasn’t carried out a pre-trial investigation in relation to this case.
“A pre-trial investigation wasn’t carried out by the investigators of the Security Service due to the circumstances stated in the address. At the same time, according to the reports of operational Security Service of Ukraine specialists, the materials concerning the information requested by you in your address were sent to the bodies of the prosecutor’s office of Ukraine for the adoption of a procedural decision”it is reported in the reply of the Main Investigation Department of the Security Service of Ukraine
The lawyers of “Uspishna Varta” note that according to the standards of Article 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, the prosecutor was supposed to urgently, no later than 24 hours after their independent identification of any source of circumstances that can constitute the commission of a criminal offence, enter the corresponding data into the Unified register of pre-trial investigations. According to human rights activists, the current situation calls into question the competence of the bodies of the prosecutor’s office or the existence of such a “criminal”.
Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.