Konstantin Baranov: Crimean civil society is almost mopped up

We need to educate new generation of activists, the Russian human rights fighter marks.

Crimea is no longer important news for the media; it is the conflict at the east of the country that captures most attention, while the annexed peninsula is now at dusk. “EuroBelarus” Information Service discussed the situation with the human rights in Crimea and the current state of the civil society with Konstantin Baranov, Russian human rights fighter, a member of the coordinating board of the international Youth Human Rights Movement, an expert of the Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights.

- Let me first say that the decisive factor of the whole situation with the human rights activists and civil society in Crimea is that after the so-called referendum followed by Russia’s annexation of the peninsula most people were compelled to leave it, so basically, most people with the active civic stand were forced to leave. First of all, these are civic activists, the leaders of the human rights organizations, and independent journalists. Now they are afraid to come back, but it is even more than that – many of them are in all sorts of “black lists” drawn by the Russian authorities.

- I.e. the field of human rights and civil society was fully mopped up?

- Few people are still left there, and my colleagues from the Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights which was formed in March 2014 are working with them: keeping in touch, getting information, checking it, etc. But their number is small, and these are people who are trying to escape publicity in order not to lose the possibility to live at the Crimean territory.

Those who left Crimea now have to settle in some other places and work for the good of Crimea from Kiev and other Ukrainian cities. However, there are a number of hindrances to do so; I think that these problems are clear for the Belarusan civil sector.

- What are the main problems for Crimea now?

- For a few months this territory was subject to the “grey law”: Ukrainian legislation stopped its work, the work of courts, notaries, all law enforcement agencies was paralyzed, while Russian legislation that is being introduced there now didn’t start working right away. And that created certain difficulties and led to huge confusion, which can be felt even now. There is high demand for all sorts of judicial consultations, for the help with the social and economic rights such as pensions, child allowances, and so on. Let me also mark that Ukrainian and Russian legislations differ a lot, so these problems are extremely widespread.

There is a bunch of questions that concern retention of citizenship or change of citizenship. The transition period set by the Russian authorities is quite short: until April 18 people are to decide and submit written applications in case they don’t want to receive Russian passports.

Besides, foreigners are limited in a number of other rights: they cannot chose and be chosen, they might encounter certain bureaucratic difficulties with the official employment, health care, and so on. They became foreigners at the territory where they have lived for generations.

One more important thing in this problem is that explanatory work was negligible, and people are not warned about the consequences of this or that step. In result the new Russian authorities consider everyone who didn’t write an appeal about refusing the Russian citizenship as Russian citizens by default.

- What about the relations between the new authorities and community of Crimean Tatars, who wouldn’t agree on referendum?

- There is a whole bunch of problems with it, not only as regards the Crimean Tatars, but also with a number of groups of Crimean citizens, who are now quite vulnerable. As to the Tatars, Russian authorities were trying to appease the community, and they partially succeeded in it. But it should be mentioned that the current Crimean authorities made a number of odd statements, for example, about the redistribution of the territory not in favor of the Crimean Tatars. And it is still unclear which one of the two promises we are to believe.

There are also some other less numerous and therefore, more vulnerable groups, which are also experiencing certain pressure from the local authorities. Let me recall that the moods reigning in Crimea now correspond to the “Russian world” doctrine, which uncovered various Russian nationalists, and that, in its turn, led to clashes (i.e. threats, insults, damages of property, and violence) with the representatives of other ethnicities. Nobody is working with this information, as there are basically no independent media there. Ukrainian media can’t work there now; those journalists who stayed in Ukraine are now left without work. And because the system of law enforcement agencies has collapsed, there is no one and nowhere to complain to.

Not only ethnical groups, but also a number of religious communities encountered similar problems. For instance, ethnical Ukrainians, who adopted Islam, are now discriminated, and according to my information, Chassidism community had to leave Crimea even before the referendum.

- What are human rights fighters doing?

- Largest Ukrainian human rights organizations have problems with assessing Crimean territory. Besides, they have lots of burning problems at the continental part of Ukraine – from Kiev to Donbas.

We can observe an inflow of GONGO (Government-Organized (or Operated) Non-Governmental Organizations) from Russia, such as “The Association of Lawyers of Russia”, among the members of which are Attorney General and Minister of Justice of Russia.

Independent NGOs are also trying to start their work now; for example, the representatives of different organizations visited Crimea to advise local citizens on certain trade issues.

The Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights is also working all the time. The Field Mission consists of the Russian and Ukrainian human rights organizations, which agreed to provide human rights presence and monitoring. There are also mobile human rights groups, and Crimea-SOS initiative, which mainly deals with the practical issues.

My feeling is that taking into account the complicated tangle of problems, the above-mentioned resources are still not enough. Besides, due to the abductions at the east of Ukraine Crimean problems have receded into the background.

- You are acquainted with the situation in Belarus; so can the problems of the civil society and the peculiarities of the legal situation be compared?

- Starting from the late 2010 we are working with the Belarusan problems within the framework of the International Observation Mission to Belarus. If compared with Crimea, the main difference is that there is a feeling of certain stagnation and absence of changes for a long, long time in Belarus. Whereas in Crimea people have suddenly transferred to an absolutely different reality, which they were not prepared to, and one can feel certain shock there from the unexpectedness of the changes.

I’m not sure whether we can say that there still remains civil society in Crimea; it is rather particular activists and initiatives, which don’t have almost any contacts. Crimean civil society was hit so hard that it won’t be able to recover soon.

We should basically start from nothing and try to educate new generation of activists. Many of those who have remained have an unpleasant background behind them, which creates a risk of threats and attacks. So we need a new pleiad of activists, who can occupy this niche.

“EuroBelarus” Information Service thanks Elena Tonkacheva, the head of the Legal Transformation Centre “Lawtrend”, for the help in the organization of the interview.