“Soviet Nuremberg” to start?

They say that tenacity is rewarded. The way Poland many years sought to recognize the Katyn massacre as a war crime is the evidence of this. Finally, it gained its ends. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) passed a ruling that the massacre of the Polish military near Katyn in 1940 was a war crime. The court also acknowledged that Russia had not given enough information about the officers killed near Katyn to their relatives. Meanwhile, the European Court of Human Rights decided not to pass any ruling concerning the complaint about the ineffectiveness of the investigation of the case of the executed Polish military carried out in Russia.

The counsel of the relatives of the Polish prisoners of war Ireneusz Kaminski declared that he was only partially satisfied with the court’s ruling concerning their complaint about Russian authorities’ actions and was going to appeal against it in the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR. According to him, the decision about the second article is more important for the claimants. In particular, the counsel mentioned that the wording of the decision of the court made it clear that the final resolution concerning the part of the complaint based on the second article of the convention was to be passed by the Grand Chamber.

The other claimants’ advocate Bartlomiej Sochanski considers the acknowledgement of the fact that Russia did not cooperate with the court in full to be the main achievement. According to him, the court was unable to pass the final ruling about the second article because Russia had not given all the documents concerning this case since many of them are classified. This was the main reason why the ECtHR was addressed. However, the attorney does not object that Russia carried out the investigation properly. Sochanski added that in general he is satisfied with the decision but he considers inevitable appealing to the Grand Chamber.

In his turn the advisor of the permanent mission of Russia in the Council of Europe Vladislav Yermakov declared that the decision was “difficult, but reasonable” and urged not to jump to conclusions and wait for the official press release of the court and the decision to be published. However, he concedes that the decision may be appealed. The parties are given three months for this.

Counsel to the Poles Anna Stawicka emphasized that the claimants got the complete investigation and rehabilitation of the victims, but no compensation. According to the international law the Katyn massacre does not have a time limitation, claimants’ advocates emphasized, and the inefficient investigation can be considered disregard towards the victims and their relatives who survived. Russia disclaimed these arguments and reminded that back in 1990 Russia launched a criminal action upon shooting the Polish military and closed it in 2004.

Strasbourg did not consider the question of the present Russian authorities’ responsibility for shooting that happened before the European Convention on Human Rights came into force. “The object of the complaint was not the murder of 1940. The object of the complaint was violation of the current Russian legislation by our law enforcement judicial bodies,” the website grani.ru quoted the head of the Polish “Memorial” program Aleksandr Guryanov.

We remind our readers that over half a century Moscow has been blaming the German invaders for executing the Polish officers. Only in 1990 the last USSR leader Mikhail Gorbachev admitted that the Soviet People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs (NKVD) was responsible for this crime, however, he did not specify Stalin’s personal responsibility. In November 2010 the State Duma passed the resolution reading that the documents stored in the Kremlin secret archives prove that Stalin personally ordered to kill the Poles. In November 2011 the Russian MPs admitted that the Polish officers were shot in the spring of 1940 on the Soviet authorities’ command.

The example of how Poland has gained its ends firstly obtaining access to the Soviet archives and then acknowledging the Katyn massacre as a war crime should be didactic for Ukraine. In Ukraine there are a lot of places where the victims of Stalin’s regime were buried. However, nobody knows how many people were shot and where exactly they were buried. The whole truth about the Holodomor is still unknown as well. All the Soviet archives are located in Russia. The earlier we find out the truth about our history the better. Besides, there will be fewer speculations about our history. Certainly, it is historians’ job, but the politicians have to help them access the archives. They should be encouraged by the decision of the European Court of Human Rights proving that the past cannot be hidden and sooner or later Stalin’s regime will be assessed.

The Day asked the Ukrainian, Russian and Polish experts to comment on the decision of the European Court and its meaning for Ukraine.

Vladyslav HRYNEVYCH, senior scientist at the Ivan Kuras Institute for Political and Ethno-National Studies at the National Academy of Science of Ukraine, candidate in history:

“It is an absolutely fair and reasonable decision. Shooting Polish officers in Katyn was a real war crime. According to the rules of warfare and the Hague Convention, prisoners of war have a special status. Interestingly, it happened in 1940; however, similar massacres of the Polish officers happened in September 1939 when the Red Army occupied Western Ukraine. Back then the Polish officers and soldiers who resisted were shot only because of their nationality.

“There should be at least a moral responsibility for this. The national-socialist regime was condemned in Nuremberg and the world community acknowledged it, Stalin’s regime came off clear. Now it got the world’s moral punishment: the European Court acknowledged the Katyn massacre of the Polish officers as a crime of Stalinism. Certainly, it is important for Ukraine as well since there were Ukrainians of Polish origin. We can say that little by little the justice is being restored.

“As for the reasons why Poland managed to condemn Stalinism crimes: the Poles make part of the world community and the Polish society is not that split identically and politically as the Ukrainian society. The Ukrainians do not understand their past and consider it a part of the Russian or Soviet heritage. Being a part of the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire has negatively influenced the Ukrainians. Moreover, the Poles do not have such a strong outside resistance which Russia is for Ukraine. Speaking at the UN, Russia blocks many things related to Ukraine. Russia as the legal successor of the USSR is also influenced by this scandal. Poland is much more independent from the Russian gas and it does not have any fifth column.”

Lukas ADAMSKI, coordinator of the scientific and research projects at the Polish-Russian Center for Dialog and Understanding:

“This ruling is of great importance for Poland and is Poland’s victory. The Strasbourg Court adopted a decision and found Russia guilty for violating the European Convention on Human Rights and refusing the relatives of the military shot in Katyn to assure justice.

“Unfortunately, the court did not take a stand as for the second part of the Polish complaint. The question is whether the investigation started in Russia in the 1990s and finished in 2004 was carried out thoroughly.

“Now the case will be passed to the Grand Chamber and it will be considered by the judges in full strength and not only by seven judges whose opinions about the second part of the complaint split.

“This case has drawn a wide public response. They should not have expected from Poland, especially from the relatives of the Katyn massacre victims not to be indignant by the way Russia interpreted the Katyn massacre. Russia did not qualify this crime as the crime against humanity or a war crime. According to the Russian prosecution, it was the abuse of power with especially grievous consequences. Moreover, Russian legislation did not allow to rehabilitate the victims of Katyn, Kharkiv, and in Ukrainian and Belarusian prisons where the Polish officers were shot. Now, with the verdict of the European Court of Human Rights these cases will hit stride. The crimes of Stalin’s regime are being acknowledged, but there is a problem how to qualify them. Are they crimes against humanity, war crimes or ordinary crimes, as the Russian court qualified them?

“Now the decision of the European Court of Human Rights has to be thoroughly analyzed. We need different lawyers to consult us. Two or three weeks are needed to legally assess the decision of the court. Then we should wait for the verdict of the Grand Chamber of the Court. And then we will be able to come up with certain conclusions.

“It is very important that the court proved that Russia violated the international law and interpreted Stalin’s crimes the way that provokes indignation and opposition from the legal point.”

Volodymyr VASYLENKO, former Plenipotentiary of Ukraine at the International UN Court, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine, Professor, candidate in law:

“In principle, Ukraine can raise the question of acknowledging the Holodomor as a crime against humanity in the European Court of Human Rights and demand Russia to apologize. Russia declared itself to be a legal successor of the USSR and has to assume the responsibility for all the crimes of Lenin and Stalin’s totalitarian regime. That is why, from the legal point this question is absolutely appropriate even taking into account that it will be difficult to find witnesses nowadays.

“However, it is clear that with the current Russian regime, the state of democracy and the world-view of the Russian society we can hardly expect it. It can happen only in the future.”