 |
Point of View
|
 By Victoria Sumar
Today Vecherniy Kharkiv daily and Status quo online edition came out with a report that police officers had suffered bodily injuries as a result of a search operation at the apartment of Vyacheslav Ismaylov.
Actually, the both editions referred to a press release issued by the ministry of the Interior saying “when the above-cited citizen was informed through the house intercom we had to proceed with a search, he began uttering some obscenities and said he would use a firearm, if police officers approached his apartment”.
“Thus, we took a decision to call “Berkut” special force unit officers with the intent to force the entry door. The operation was conducted in presence of search witnesses and a representative of the local government body.
“As the apartment was searched, the journalist’s behaviour, as well as this one of his sons and wife was cynical, they used bad language, threatened the police officers with a physical violence and dismissals from the ministry of the Interior.The police officers recorded all that on video”. Frankly, it is hard to imagine how some unarmed persons could threaten the armed cap-a-pie “Berkut”-men with a physical violence.
Our journalist who is investigating the Klymentyev’s case now, was present at the scene. He said several times they called an ambulance for Ismaylov's wife, in order to prevent syncope. Not only she was unable to threaten anybody, she could not speak, as she was shocked by such a number of masked men armed with Kalashnikovs assault rifles.
There were five “Berkut”-men for each person in the apartment, and these brave soldiers, as it was found out, suffered physical violence… Ismaylov was crying they tried to plant some white powder to his apartment, the journalists heard it. And today the police reported they did find drugs in the apartment…
So, I would like to ask these men with shoulder straps, who had signed this press release, and maybe this is a naïve question: have you ever heard what honour is?
All this smells a bad movie. But, unfortunately, this is Ukraine's reality. This is a semi-criminal state where human rights is nonentity, where nor law, neither legitimacy exist. This is a country where its citizens are totally unarmed in front of the arbitrary rule of those who are supposed to protect them. This is Ukraine in 2010.
Is this Ukraine for people? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monday, 28 July 2008 |
In June, the tensions between the journalists and government escalated. The problem of journalists being assaulted remains highly relevant as at least four attacks and cases of impediment to practice journalistic profession were registered in June. This monitoring does not cover inter-editorial censorship, facts of covert advertisement published in the media and journalistic ethics standards broken, which were rather numerous in June too. A verdict of the London High Court in the Renat Akhmetov vs. Oglyadach case became a serious precedent. The court of the British capital ruled Oglyadach would have to pay a big amount while the newspaper had not been informed on the date of the hearing. This precedent can become a negative model for other politicians and businessmen in Ukraine, unpleased with the publications in the media. Consequently, the case will have to be thoroughly analyzed by journalists and other persons concerned.
Journalists killed and missing – 0
New data on journalists killed and missing
Georgiy Gongadze
10-06-2008 The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe urges Ukrainian officials to identify the instigators and the organisers of the murder of journalist Georgiy Gongadze, says the Resolution on the execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Gongadze against Ukraine.
Though three police officers, perpetrators of the murder, have already been convicted, the Committee of Ministers urges the Ukrainian authorities “to take with reasonable expedition all necessary investigative steps to achieve concrete and visible progress in indentifying instigators and organisers of the murder... and bringing them to justice”.
The Committee of Ministers urges the Ukrainian state authorities to conduct an effective investigation in the Gongadze case taking into account the supremacy of law and equality of all persons before the law.
The Committee of the Council of Europe also passed decision to examine the progress of the investigation in the Gongadze case at the Committee meetings on human rights every six months.
The Resolution was adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, an executive body of the Council of Europe, in charge of supervising the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.
18-06-2008 The Supreme Court of Ukraine adjourned the hearing in the Gongadze case on Tuesday concerning the charges, brought against the former police officers V Kostenko, O Popovych and M. Protasov, accused of exceeding their commission and killing journalist Georgiy Gongadze as a criminally conspired group of persons.
Earlier, the Kyiv appellate court sentenced Protasov to 13 years, Kostenko and Popovych to 12 years of imprisonment. Afterwards, the lawyers of the convicts filed appeals against the judgment of the Kyiv appellate court to the Supreme Court of Ukraine.
The three convicts and their defenders challenged the judgment, denying they had previously conspired and planned the murder of the journalist.
Representative of the offended party Valentyna Telychenko submitted the protest against the appeals of the convicted and their defenders as she claimed the preliminary conspiracy had been established in their actions. Even V. Chevhuz, lawyer of Mykola Protasov, admitted at a press briefing after the judgment was pronounced the events in the forest on the notorious September night of 2000 demonstrated the law-enforcement agents had conspired to kill the journalist, Ms. Telychenko said.
The hearing in the appeal case was adjourned over the absence of one of the defenders, who is alleged to have left to Russia for a holiday, she said. The litigants were surprised to hear that as in early May all of them had been warned on the date of the hearing.
“Moreover, taking into account that the state of the convicted cannot be made worse by a judgment of an appellate court, the Criminal Procedural Court of Ukraine does not demand that defenders attend court sessions at this stage. So, the court had no grounds to adjourn the hearing of the case. But the hearing was adjourned for almost a month, which is, in its turn, a delay and violation of the right to court hearing within reasonable terms. The judgment of the Kyiv appellate court in the case of the perpetrators of the murder of journalist Gongadze will not take effect until the Supreme Court of Ukraine hears the case”, the representative of the journalist’s widow said.
25-06-2008 The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe says the Gongadze case cannot be considered as solved before all those responsible have been brought to justice.
Myroslava Gongadze, the journalist’s widow, told the Radio Liberty on Tuesday: “This report has a highly eloquent title – on the investigation of the crimes, committed by top-ranking officials under President Kuchma in Ukraine. It is not only about the Gongadze case, but also some other crimes. In this context, the Gongadze case can be seen as a symbol. And the report registers clearly the lack of the progress in the case of the instigators and organisers [of the crime]. The Committee on Legal Affairs of the Council of Europe says Ukrainian authorities have to conduct a criminal investigation against persons that hushed up the crime, which means against Potebenko, Vasylyev and other prosecutors general and former high-ranking officials of the Interior Ministry”.
The PACE Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights welcomed the conviction of three former police officers for the killing of Georgiy Gongadze, but said Ukrainian prosecutors should:
1) vigorously pursue authentification of the so-called “Melnychenko recordings” – in which former President Kuchma and three other senior officials allegedly discuss disposing of Gongadze – with the participation of foreign experts, so that they can be used as evidence in court if necessary;
2) pursue other methods of authenticating the recordings, such as interrogating as witnesses those allegedly recorded, and comparing their discussions with actual events;
3) investigate how General Pukach, the immediate superior of the convicted police officers and allegedly present at the murder, was released from custody and reportedly able to escape arrest in Israel.
Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger (Germany, ALDE), Rapporteur of the Council of Europe\'s Parliamentary Assembly on the Gongadze case, said: “I have encouraged the Prosecutor General to co-operate with the US Department of Justice, which had offered to assist in verifying the so-called Melnichenko recordings. These may hold important clues as to the alleged involvement of senior Kuchma era officials”. Mr. Melnychenko had requested international involvement to exclude any “foul play”, she said.
Journalists arrested, detained – 0
Journalists beaten, attacked, intimidated - 4
06-06-2008 During the holiday of the Days of the Russian language in Donetsk, the Internet edition Ostriv’s journalist Oleksandr Vladimirov was attacked.
The incident took place after one of the lyceum students, standing as guard of honor at the monument to Alexander Pushkin, felt sick, the journalist told Telekritika. “He was taken out of the guard of honor, given first aid, an ambulance arrived. All journalists naturally ran there. But the organisers of the campaign seemed to worry that this, I believe, quite an accidental case would become one of the leading topics of the reports on the Days”, the journalist said.
The journalist says he asked of the lyceum students, who had already broken out of the lines, how long they had been standing as guards of honor. “It was the event, organized for adults, but children took part in it nevertheless. Of course, they did not have to stand at attention like the Lenin Mausoleum guards, but they had to be changed from time to time anyway. At that moment, two young men came up to us and started to push me away rudely. I tried not to be rude myself, simply asking why I could not talk to the boy. One of them finally told me to leave using foul language”, Oleksandr Vladimirov said.
Afterwards the young man grabbed his recorder and hit the journalist, he said. “The blow was not that strong, he simply wanted to show he was the boss in this situation”, Ostriv’s correspondent says.
At that moment, publicist of the Donetsk regional organization of the Regions party Igor Chichasov arrived at the scene, and the attacked disappeared. Though the young man had a badge of the Regions party on his jacket, none of the members of the Regions party, present at the event, could identify him, the journalist says. Igor Chichasov told Telekritika the attacker had nothing to do with the official representatives of the Regions party. He simply attended the event, the Regions’ publicist said.
20-06-2008 In Mykolayiv, Andriy Dvoretsky, journalist of the Mykolayiv Internet edition Novosti N, was attacked during the conflict of the local residents and representatives of a construction company, maidan.org.ua reports.
Andriy Dvoretsky told Telekritika: “The mayor has passed decision to suspend the construction works at this problem site at Kirov Street, Mykolayiv until all facts have been established. Instead, residents told us the evening the construction works were in full swing”.
The journalist says as he arrived at the construction site, he saw workers stripping down a children’s playground. Andriy Dvoretsky was taking photos of them when he was attacked by one of the guards. “I had already had a conflict with this person earlier, at the beginning of the month. He had used a tear-gas spray container against me. But now he attacked me shrieking
Novosti N’s corresponded was rescued by people staying at the scene, a deputy of the city council among them. Yesterday, Andriy Dvoretsky filed a complaint to police, the guard was detained, but later released. A court hearing was scheduled for today, but was not held, the journalist says. The journalist filed an application to the regional prosecutor.
Earlier, journalist Igor Lutsenko was attacked during the conflict of the local residents and employees of a construction company at Lukyanivska Street, Kyiv. The journalist is currently in hospital.
20-06-2008 June 20, in the morning, unknown persons attacked and beat the former host of the Business World. Week program (the First National channel), a co-founder of the Business Support Agency Help.Biz.Ua Oleg Pelikhovsky in a bloc of flats.
Oleg Pelikhovsky says in a press release, published by his agency: “The unknown persons must have been waiting for me. There were two of them. The first one passed me by. The other one followed him a few meters behind. When I was between them, they suddenly started beating me. One of them yelled: “Serves you right!” Oleg Pelikhovsky says the attackers tried to grab his bag but they failed, instead the stuff remained lying scattered all over the floor. The offenders did not take money. Instead they took the journalist’s passport.
“I am convinced it was not attempted robbery. I assume it could be intimidation by my former employer”, said Oleg Pelikhovsky. His partner, with whom they set up the Business Support Agency, Volodymyr Tarnopolsky, was also threatened by their former employer. “I was told “Hold on. You gonna have it all in June...”, Volodymyr Tarnopolsky said. Oleg Pelikhovsky says he can be attacked again.
22-06-2008 On Saturday, June 22, at around 8:30 p.m., the unknown persons set ablaze the flat of UNIAN’s correspondent, press secretary of the People’s Self-Defense bloc in Sumy region Vitaliy Kokhan, Glavred reports. The journalist was working in the Sumy office of the People’s Self-Defense bloc during the arson.
The experts of the local fire brigade examined the scene and found out the flat had been set afire by some unknown substance, thrown into the flat through the balcony, Vitaliy Kokhan told IMI.
The journalist is not sure which of his activities – journalistic or political – caused the attack. He also said some regional organizations of the People’s Self-Defense bloc had been recently attacked too.
New data on journalists beaten, attacked, intimidated
03-06-2008 Journalist Vlad Isayev refused to remain on peaceful terms with businessman Anatoliy Pekhotin, who had earlier threatened to kill him.
“Pekhotin came up to me, offered to shake hands and remain friends we had never been before”, Vlad Isayev told IMI.
The Rivne city court continues hearing the case of Anatoliy Pekhotin accused of impeding Rivne Vechirne’s journalist Vlad Isayev to practice journalistic profession and threatening to kill him. At the preliminary hearing, the journalist said he sought 2 million 500 UAH in damages, ZIK reports.
The next hearing in the case Vlad Isayev vs. Anatoliy Pekhotin is scheduled for June 24.
Impediment to practice journalistic profession, censorship - 3
02-06-2008 Director of Donetsk-based Olimpiysky stadium Hennadiy Kalishchuk and police prevented the photo correspondent of the Ukrinform information agency Tkachenko from taking photos of Russian FC Zenit Anatoliy Tymoshchuk, who had brought the UEFA Cup his team won to Donetsk. It was the second time Kalishchuk and Tkachenko had had a conflict.
The photo corresponded arrived at the Olimpiysky stadium, where the Cup was exhibited, with an editorial staff, Ostrov quotes Mr. Tkachenko as saying. Trying to make some exclusive shots, Tkachenko asked Anatoliy Tymoshchuk to pose with the Cup. The football player took the photo correspondent to the stadium premises, guarded by the police. Several minutes later, Hennadiy Kalishchuk approached Tkachenko and, according to the correspondent, “demanded in a rude form to stop the photo session”. “You have no special accreditation”, the stadium director said and seized the photo correspondent’s accreditation card for home games of FC Shakhtar. He also asked the police to help him force Mr. Tkachenko from the territory.
Criminal proceedings were instigated earlier against Kalishchuk over attacking photo journalist Tkachenko. Mr. Kalishchuk however calls the allegations a lie.
04-06-2008 Editor-in-chief of the newspaper Alubika Ragim Humbatov says he was not allowed to attend an extra session of the Alupka city council. Mr. Humbatov says he entered the Alupka city council and was stopped by a person in civilian clothes, who introduced himself as Maksym, at the door to the office of the mayor of Alupka Andriy Kharytonov. Maksym said: “Unauthorized persons are not admitted”.
When the journalist asked for the reasons, Maksym could nothing but he had been ordered not to let anybody in.
IMI asked the Alupka city council for comment. Representatives of the city council denied the journalist’s allegations. The session was open, they said. Journalists could attend it, and nobody ordered not to admit journalists, including Ragim Humbatov. He was not seen in the Alupka city council on that day at all, the representatives of the city council said.
The Alupka city council earlier had conflicts with journalists. May 10, 2007, Alubika’s editor-in-chief Ragim Humbatov filed a lawsuit against Alupka city council deputy Petro Titov (the Social Christian party) to defend his honor, dignity and business reputation. Mr. Humbatov says Mr.Titov had made degrading statements about him in the newspaper Alupkinsky Vestnik. Moreover, Mr. Humbatov says during one of the sessions of the Alupka city council this deputy offered to deny the Alubika’s editor admittance to the sessions. Deputy Titov said Alubika allegedly published false information on the performance of the city council. But his initiative did not win support of the majority of the city council deputies.
The newspaper Alubika earlier had several conflicts with representatives of the local authorities. The newspaper’s editor-in-chief Ragim Humbatov accused the ex-mayor of Alupka, presently deputy of the city council Valeriy Andyk, of putting pressure on the newspaper. Mr. Humbatov says at the one of the sessions of the city council Mr. Andyk “attacked him and grabbed his microphone”, saying he did not like a critical article, published by the newspaper. In 2002, Mr. Andyk rejected an information inquiry, filed by Mr. Humbatov. The editor-in-chief appealed the mayor’s decision in court. In March 2005, the Yalta city court satisfied the journalist’s lawsuit partially, ordering Mr. Andyk to pay Mr. Humbatov 16 thousand UAH in damages.
03-08-2007 Ragim Humbatov won a trial in a lawsuit against Alupka city council deputy Petro Titov. The court ordered the deputy to publicly refute the false information he had published about the journalist.
The judgment was not executed, and the journalist had to appeal to the official department supervising execution of court judgments. As of March 2008, the supervising department did not manage to force the city council deputy to execute the judgment.
27-06-2008 In Pavlograd, Dnipropetrovsk region, Judge of the Pavlograd city and regional court Sergiy Tymchenko did not allow the newspaper Populiarniye Vedomosti’s journalist Olena Tyshchenko to be present at a court hearing, Telekritika reports.
The journalist told Telekritika, she had been informed the court would hear a criminal case on June 20 on one of the local illegal scrap metal reception points. The journalist decided to attend the hearing. “I came up to the court secretary at once and said I would attend the hearing. I also introduced myself to the judge. In the session hall, Sergiy Tymchenko asked me why I had come to the court. When I said the case to be considered was socially important, the judge said he did not trust the press as it often distorted information and asked me to leave the court hall”, Olena Tyshchenko said. She says when she asked the judge under what article of the law he had passed this decision, the judge did not answer. Sergiy Tymchenko only said: “That’s what I decided”.
It is the first incident of this kind in five years she has been employed in criminal journalism in Dnipropetrovsk region, Olena Tyshchenko said.
New data on impediment to practice journalistic profession
02-06-2008 Advisor for the mayor of Kyiv on mass media and press freedom Kazbek Bektursunov and Deputy Chair for Information Broadcast of the STB channel Oleksiy Mustafin said the incident with the STB’s journalist Sergiy Andrushko, which had taken place in the Kyiv administration on May 27, was resolved.
STB’s journalist, who asked mayor Chernovetsky, was pushed away by the mayor’s spokespeople, while Kazbek Bektursunov threatened the journalist he would discuss his actions with the STB management.
Both parties have come to agreement and express mutual respect and hope for further fruitful cooperation.
03-06-2008 The Donetsk city prosecutor instituted criminal proceedings against the Griffin staff member, who had beaten journalist Igor Nezhurko of the newspaper Ostriv.
The journalist received a letter from the prosecutor, saying the Kyiv district prosecutor’s office of Donetsk had conducted an inquiry into the assault committed by the Griffin member against Ostriv’s journalist Igor Nezhurko. As a result, criminal proceedings were instituted against the military unit staff member over exceeding his commission.
Ordered by the judge, the Griffin member threw out journalist Igor Nezhurko from the court hall, inflicted him the bodily injuries and took his mobile phone. The court session, during which the incident took place, was deemed to be open.
Igor Nezhurko told IMI the prosecutor tried with the resolution “to cover” the judge, who had ordered the Griffin member to throw the journalist out of the session hall.
Legal actions against journalists and mass media - 1
18-06-2008 The Podil district court of Kyiv satisfied the lawsuit of MP Andriy Portnov (the Yulia Tymoshenko bloc) against Channel 5, UNIAN quotes Mr. Portnov’s lawyer Volodymyr Makar as saying.
The information, made public in the People’s Control program, on MP Portnov was false and defamatory, Mr. Makar said. The court found the actions of Channel 5 as illegal and ordered the channel to refute the information and apologize to the Member of Parliament.
At the same time, Andriy Portnov says he has withdrawn the claims to Channel 5 and its journalists.
“I withdraw the claims and believe Channel 5’s journalists should feel independent of the officials, Members of Parliament and channel owners. I’d like to say hello to the owner of the “channel of honest news” Petro Poroshenko with my lawsuit”, the Member of Parliament said.
New data on legal actions against journalists and mass media
02-06-2008 MP Yevhen Kyrylchuk (the Yulia Tymoshenko bloc) is convinced he will win a lawsuit, filed by the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra monastery against him and the Western Information Corporation (ZIK), ZIK quotes him as saying to a news conference.
The Member of Parliament confirmed Lavra had filed the lawsuit: “One of the monks has filed a lawsuit to court. But neither you, nor me have ever personally insulted the Lavra officials”. He did not damage the reputation of the church either, he said. “I can come to the Lavra walls and apologize to this land. I have not hurt anybody. I said “... used the Lavra premises”, MP Kyrylchuk said.
Yevhen Kyrylchuk said: “I was informed by a staff member, believer, who called me on my mobile phone without introducing himself. “I must believe me as a real believer”, he said. I couldn’t say it was a lie as the person sounded very convincing”.
“He said the money had been transferred from Donetsk. It was a period of massive bribing of Members of Ukrainian Parliament. They are not going to refute this information”, the Member of Parliament said.
He said: “I can tell them: “If you want to know this information, you can exercise your right of confession to ask your people who and when said that. But you cannot make this information public then”.
“They still demand that apologize publicly. Under the law, a court judgment cannot be published in the press without the consent of defendants. That’s why it is not worth a damn”, the Member of Parliament said. Yevhen Kyrylchuk also said he would demand the case to be heard by Lviv court.
The hearing of the case of Kyiv Pechersk Lavra vs. Member of Ukrainian Parliament Yevhen Kyrylchuk, the Western Information Corporation and its owner Danylo Derega has been suspended in the Pechersk district court of Kyiv until the Appellate court passes decision on a complaint, filed by MP Kyrylchuk.
10-06-2008 The Internet edition Oglyadach has to pay $100 000 to businessman Renat Akhmetov, ruled the High Court of Justice in London on June 5, 2008, says a press release of the law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, which represented Mr. Akhmetov in court, Ukrainska Pravda reports.
“The High Court of Justice in London has cast $100 000 in damages and legal costs in favor of Renat Akhmetov in the defamation case Renat Akhmetov vs. the Internet edition Oglyadach. The trial was caused by a number of articles with numerous defamatory statements about Akhmetov”, the press release said.
The court also passed a ruling against two editors of Oglyadach Oleg Medvedev and Yaroslav Bilyk and journalist Tetiana Chornovil.
Mr. Akhmetov’s lawyer, Mark MacDougall said Mr. Akhmetov “is pleased with the decision of the High Court”.
“We intend to strongly demand that the resolution in this defamation case vs. Oglyadach and other defendants is executed in Ukraine”, Ukrainska Pravda quotes the lawyer as saying.
Oglyadach has posted an article Akhmetov deceives Oglyadach into parting with $100 000, stressing Ukraine has not ratified the provisions of the international law making the judgment of the British court legitimate in Ukraine. Oglyadach hopes Ukrainian court will not ratify the decision of the London High Court.
Natalia Petrova, a media law expert, says: “Of course, decisions of the British court are not directly executed in Ukraine. But there are certain procedures used to execute them. Akhmetov’s on its compulsory execution. The Ukrainian court will have to consider it”.
18-06-2008 June 17, the Blitz Inform Holding Company filed an appeal against the decision of the Desniansky district court of Kyiv in the lawsuit of Yuri Sydorenko. The Blitz Inform’s representative in court says the judgment was passed with violation of the material and procedural law. He also cites letters of the Prosecutor’s General and Interior Ministry of Ukraine to justify the publication of the appealled materials.
May 23, 2008, the Desniansky district court of Kyiv passed judgment in the case of Sydorenko vs. Blitz Inform Holding Company, Kobyshev and Birovash, partly satisfying the lawsuit.
The court ordered the Blitz Inform Holding Company to pay Mr. Sydorenko 22mn UAH in damages and 2 200 010 UAH of legal costs, i.e. the total of 24 200 010 UAH.
The editor-in-chief of the newspaper Business S.A. Kobyshev has to pay 5 000 UAH in damages to the plaintiff. The court ordered the Business’ special correspondent M.M. Birovash to pay a similar sum in damages too. The court prohibited the defendants to use the photos of Mr. Sydorenko without his consent.
November 19, Chair of the advisory board of the EDAPS consortium filed a lawsuit against the Blitz Inform Holding Company. The plaintiff sought 46mn UAH in damages. Mr. Sydorenko says the information on him, published by the newspaper Business, owned by the holding company, is inadequate and discrediting.
23-06-2008 A panel of judges of the Civil Court Chamber of the Supreme Court of Ukraine dismissed an appeal, filed by Oleksandr Moroz, requesting to revoke the previous judgments and pass a new judgment on his lawsuit, filed against the Internet edition Ukrainska Pravda and publicist Sergiy Hrabovsky to defend his honor and dignity and refute inadequate information, says a ruling of the Court Chamber of the Supreme Court of Ukraine of June 5, 2008.
October 30, 2006, Ukrainska Pravda posted Sergiy Hrabovsky’s article Oleksandr Moroz Actually Trying On Presidential Crown? . The leader of the Socialist party of Ukraine asked the court to find as false and damaging his honor and dignity the following statements: “But if to analyze the actions of Oleksandr Moroz at the help of the Verkhovna Rada, we will see totally different tendencies – from ignoring the fact that Renat Akhmetov is absent from the session hall while his voting card is taking part in the vote to changing the Rada Procedural Rules to pass the decisions the anti-crisis coalition needed”.
During the trial, Oleksandr Moroz added new demands to the lawsuit, seeking 2500 UAH in damages from each of the defendants.
The Pechersk district court of Kyiv dismissed the lawsuit, filed by Oleksandr Moroz, with a ruling of July 5, 2007. So did the Kyiv appellate court with a ruling of January 14, 2008.
The Civil Court Chamber of the Supreme Court of Ukraine confirmed the previous judgments as the evidence in the case did not prove the courts had violated the norms of the material and procedural law. The ruling is not subject to appeal.
26-06-2008 The Pechersk district court of Kyiv passed decision in the case of Sergiy Poyarkov and Oleg Pinchuk vs. the Publishing House Svit, satisfying some of the demands of the plaintiffs. The court ordered the defendants to publicly apologize to the plaintiffs, refute the published information and pay each 34 000 UAH in damages, Telekritika reports.
The lawsuit was filed over Olena Kyrychenko’s material Art Fashion. What To Buy For Collection?, published in May’s issue of the Zhensky magazine for 2007. The plaintiffs claimed a part of the article damaged their honor, dignity and business reputation.
Oleg Pinchuk said Olena Kyrychenko’s article “discredited all he has been working on, the twenty years of his work were put in question”. “I don’t believe any of her words until she provides evidence. I don’t believe Khamatov, who publishes Pinchuk on the cover, said his (Pinchuk’s) success is illusion and prices (for his paintings) are bluff”, Sergiy Poyarkov said. He is indignant about the fact the artists rating was based on the opinion of ten experts, whose names however were not mentioned in the article.
Olena Kyrychenko said the published material did not require any evidence. “You don’t have to come up to every participant of a press conference and ask them to specify which were their words. Otherwise our journalism is worth nothing”, Ms. Kyrychenko said. When the judge asked who the author of the material was, Olena Kyrychenko said: “There are different genres in journalism which do provide for an author. A roundtable discussion is a public genre”, so she had a right to record the opinions of public persons, edit and publish them. “I didn’t ask the art experts to comment negatively on Poyarkov or Pinchuk. I was interested in their opinion about the state of contemporary art”, she said.
None of the litigants changed their opinion until the decision was passed. Sergiy Poyarkov said: “This article is aimed at deliberately damaging the image of the artists and Olena Kyrychenko is an author of the text concerned as it was not published as a quotation”. The plaintiffs’ represented said he was sorry Ukraine did not have a law on journalistic genres.
At the same time, Alla Bronishevska of the Publishing House Svit insists it was mentioned at the beginning of the article that all issues had been discussed by the experts at the roundtable and none of them contacted the magazine protesting against the published article. She also mentioned a decision of the European Court, which had heard a similar case. It said: “The European Court finds it unjustified to apply sanctions against the defendants for expressing evaluating statements”.
Artists are public persons, whose paintings can be assessed both positively and negatively, Olena Kyrychenko said. “Should I have stopped the debates as I heard negative comments on Pinchuk and Poyarkov and invite the experts who would say something good about them?” she said.
When the judgment was pronounced, Olena Kyrychenko said she would challenge it in an appellate court. She also plans to file a complaint to the Verkhovna Rada Committee for freedom of expression and information.
Lawsuits filed by journalists and mass media
New data on lawsuits filed by journalists and mass media
03-06-2008 The Kyiv appellate court dismissed an appeal of the former director of the Kyiv TV channel Valeriy Tkachuk, who demanded to suspend the reorganization of the Kyiv company, spokespeople for the Kyiv Media Holding report.
Dmytro Kozonak, a spokesman for the Kyiv Media Holding, said: “Today, Junó 3á the Kyiv appellate court has dismissed the appeal, filed by the former director of the TV and Radio Company Kyiv Valeriy Tkachuk against the ruling of the Obolon district court of Kyiv of April 1, which dismissed the appeal of the former Kyiv director to suspend the ruling of the Kyiv city state administration and Kyiv city council on reorganization of the TV channel Kyiv”.
Valeriy Tkachuk asked in the appeal to suspend the ruling on the reorganization of the TV channel before decision in the case of his reinstating as channel director as the Kyiv channel might not exist in its present form when the decision is passed.
Valeriy Tkachuk expects the decision on reinstating him as Kyiv director within ten days.
²Ì²
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Last comment
 The Ukraine MPs are going to resume an old practice of criminal liability for libel. May 17, the MP Vasyl Kyselyov, who had been elected as a member of the Party of Regions list, has submitted a respective bill at the parliament (Verkhovna Rada). |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Debate
|
Wednesday, 09 June 2010 |
|
The first week of June and the last week of May a number of incidents have been reported which are evidence of attempts made by new Administration of the President, the Cabinet of Ministers and some representatives of the governing party in the regions to restrict rights and freedoms of the mass media and Ukraine’s citizens. These are alarming attempts of the head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and, being in his second job, co-owner of the most important TV channel to exert influence on procedure of delivering the authorizations to broadcast for two independent and critical towards authorities TV channels, Channel 5 and TVi. As response to this pressure the journalists have started a campaign “Stop to censorship!”, held the Journalist’s Day. One should remark, the action which involved several prominent journalists from national TV channels has not been even mentioned in the news at these TV channels. These are facts involving pressure by government bodies. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Last News
10-09-2010
09-09-2010
07-09-2010
03-09-2010
02-09-2010
31-08-2010
27-08-2010
20-08-2010
19-08-2010
16-08-2010
11-08-2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
