EDITORIAL: The European Court and Ukraine (11/13/05)

EDITORIAL

The European Court and Ukraine

In March of this year the European Court of Human Rights agreed to hear a case brought by Myroslava Gongadze against the Ukrainian government. The widow of slain journalist Heorhii Gongadze alleged that Ukrainian state authorities did not protect her husband and said they never seriously investigated his disappearance and death in September 2000.

Ms. Gongadze asked that the court review her case with the hope that a ruling in her favor would renew attention to the Gongadze case, now more than five years old. Ms. Gongadze has said that her motive is more than personal; rather, she believes that by thoroughly prosecuting this case Ukrainians will move closer toward European democratic ideals.

Prior to his death, Mr. Gongadze, a journalist who covered politically sensitive issues, made it clear in a letter to Ukrainian authorities that he was being followed, and that his relatives and colleagues had been interrogated by authorities. He called for an investigation to be undertaken and that he be protected.

Yet, the European Court found that "despite clear indications in the letter of Mr. Gongadze about the inexplicable interest in him shown by law enforcement officers, the response of the [Procurator General's Office] was not only formalistic, but also blatantly negligent. A fortnight later, Mr. Gongadze had disappeared."

In its ruling on November 8, the court said that, not only did Ukrainian authorities fail to protect Mr. Gongadze prior to his murder in September 2000, but that there has been an "inadequate investigation into Mr. Gongadze's death." This news must surely come as a serious blow to the authorities in Ukraine, who have shown little real interest in solving this crime.

Upon taking office Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko announced that he would ensure a complete investigation of the Gongadze murder. And while such a pronouncement came as welcome news, it was a call also made by former President Leonid Kuchma, who promised that he would personally see to it that the case was resolved.

Months into Mr. Yushchenko's presidency there has been movement - the men believed to have actually carried out the killing have been identified and three of the four were arrested (one remains a fugitive). However, the people responsible for planning and ordering Mr. Gongadze's abduction are still free.

In many eyes, this case has become a gauge of Ukraine's progress. Months after the Orange Revolution there are signs that corruption still festers in Ukraine, a country of 48 million whose leadership has said repeatedly that it aims to be a part of Europe. In the wake of President Yushchenko's political problems, it would indeed be a welcome sign to see this administration make good on its promises to solve this case.

If Ukraine truly hopes to join the European Union it must now follow through on the European Court's ruling. If it chooses not to comply with the court's ruling, it faces the possibility of expulsion from the Council of Europe and would certainly have no chance of joining the World Trade Organization and the European Union.

Meanwhile, the Verkhovna Rada has approved a new procurator general, Oleksander Medvedko, who, we should remind our readers, was the deputy under Sviatoslav Piskun, the former procurator general fired by Mr. Yushchenko.

Mr. Yushchenko has pledged to press Mr. Medvedko to step up probes of high-profile cases, such as the Gongadze murder. While this is a positive step, it has been said before and, therefore, rings hollow. Finally fulfilling this pledge would be a great step toward proving that transparency and the rule of law have indeed replaced corruption in post-Orange Revolution Ukraine.

| Home Page |