Mark Feygin, lawyer for Ukrainian political prisoners Sushchenko and Umerov

18.08.2017 17:09

Putin's aide says tanks not needed to seize Ukraine

A conversation with the Russian lawyer defending Ukrainian political prisoners, journalist Roman Sushchenko, and deputy head of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people Ilmi Umerov, began quite traditionally. But in the end it went far beyond the limits of the respective investigative actions or trials. And it was inevitable, because politically motivated justice, adopted in Russia, generously spills into all related spheres - international policy; domestic policy, both Russian and Ukrainian; and information war.

PROBE INTO SUSHCHENKO CASE MAY END IN SEPTEMBER

- On Monday I will go to Lefortovo to visit Roman Sushchenko. While I was in Crimea at the trial on "the Umerov case" (deputy head of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people Ilmi Umerov is being tried in the Russian-controlled court of Simferopol for not recognizing Russia's annexation of Crimea), there was an involuntary break. Now I'm going to clarify the timing of Roman's call to his son, Maksym. Let me remind you that he turned 10 on July 15, but his father could not call him. Now the investigators allowed them to talk. It is also necessary to agree on the date of arrival to Sushchenko of his wife Anzhelika and daughter Yulia for a meeting in prison.

- Is there any movement in the investigation into the "Sushchenko case"? What is the forecast for the terms of its completion?

- Last week we were familiarized with the conclusions of a number of examinations. The psychiatric examination expectedly confirmed the sanity of Sushchenko. I cannot speak about another examination because of the secrecy of the case. So if this case does not start to slow, then I can make a preliminary forecast that we will come to the end of investigative actions in September. There is also political dynamics in the discussion of this issue at the international level.

- You went to Kyiv and talked to Ukrainian Information Policy Minister Yuriy Stets.

- Yes, I received some additional information in Ukraine. But in addition to that, there is news on other topics. It's no secret that we addressed the leaders of the participating countries of the "Normandy format." I have recently received a response from Germany to our address. According to it, the case of journalist Sushchenko is a matter of concern for the German leadership. This is significant. So at the next meeting of the leaders of the "Normandy format" countries the issue of the release of Roman Sushchenko will be definitely raised, by many sides. There is also hope that U.S. State Department's Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker will also join the discussion on the release of journalist Sushchenko.

- So it means there is a substantial probability of resumption of exchanges, the return of Ukrainian political prisoners from Russia to Ukraine.

- Yes, there is. And in these conditions Moscow is taking some new actions. So to say, it is looking for its interests - besides the interests of those whom the Ukrainian side will present for exchange. The late Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky said in such cases: "Give me money! And something else." You see, the Russian leadership is of little concern about the fate of people to be given by Ukraine as a result of the exchange. They agree to the exchange itself only under international pressure. Therefore, it seems quite natural for them to get some extra bonuses in something else.

- The OSCE saw a reshuffle in the leadership in an important unit, whom you contacted in connection with the Sushchenko case. In mid-July, French Harlem Desir replaced Dunja Mijatovic as OSCE representative on freedom of the media.

- This is an important circumstance for us. Mr. Desir can personally remember Sushchenko as a journalist. Roman spoke with him in France while preparing some article. Sushchenko has now prepared an appeal to him. In the near future we hope to transfer it to the office in Vienna.

'HEAD-ON' PROPAGANDA

- You have recently said that a defamation campaign was organized against you. What is the situation at the moment?

- Well, as you can see, they failed to deprive me of my lawyer status. However, it was a large-scale campaign. But it was generally unprecedented. A person can be stripped of lawyer status for serious offenses, minor offenses, and crimes. But here were had a banal squabble in social networks. However, it did not end here. This campaign continued through blogger Anatoly Shariy. I was sure before, and I convince everyone now, that this is a person who has long been working against Ukraine. However, his masters have recently pulled him up to the Russian platform.

- Yes. It was a strange debut of Shariy in a popular program aired on the Russian radio station Ekho Moskvy. They usually invite well-publicized people, but here they had to explain to the audience for five to seven minutes who it was.

- But we know well who he is, for whom he works and from whom he gets money. Shariy has recently been working hard on two objects: me and Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny. By the way, Roman Sushchenko, even in the period of journalistic work in Paris, also dealt with Shariy. Do you remember the story with Charlie Hebdo? Then there was a popular slogan "I'm Charlie!" Roman wrote that its author was a French journalist of Ukrainian origin. It was normal journalistic work. But Shariy then began to assert completely groundlessly that these are all fictions, insinuations. He insulted and soiled Sushchenko's work. The word "blogger" is now widely interpreted, but it fact Shariy cannot be considered a journalist, he is rather Putin's propagandist. Roman said that he might also write about him and the experience of encountering him... The late Boris Nemtsov told me how he came to the Ekho Moskvy radio station, how he agreed on his participation in programs, and how hard it was sometimes. But here it is not clear who gets the right to speak. And before that, the editor-in-chief of Ekho Moskvy, Alexei Venediktov, said that in the "dispute between Shariy and Feygin" he was on the side of Shariy. It is very interesting – then why will Venediktov not give the floor to Feygin, according to journalistic principles? Or why won't he say honestly that I'm in his stop list? I have already told the Ukrainian audience many times about the principles of Ekho Moskvy's work, and why the Kremlin needs it. There are crude propaganda tools, like the First Channel - this is for the great mass of the population. But Ekho Moskvy is an instrument of fine-tuning, focused on intellectuals. They give the content that attracts them, and the rest is a sophisticated editorial censorship in the interests of the Kremlin's propaganda. Shariy is no exception.

- You said that this campaign is organized personally by presidential aide Vladislav Surkov and his team?

- Yes. And the "blogger," about whom we speak more than he deserves, was also in the hacked correspondence of Surkov's reception office. Look at all these campaigns against me. As they say, "there never was such a thing, and then again." The Pussy Riot case, the case of Ukrainian pilot Nadia Savchenko - when the situation reaches a certain level, an attack on the lawyer begins. Now it is exactly the same. Again, there are conversations that were at the very beginning: in the case of Sushchenko it is necessary to replace lawyer Feygin, and it is easy to guess with whom.

KREMLIN'S 'WORKBOOKS' IN UKRAINE'S INFORMATION SPACE

- With what it can be connected? When the situation reaches the level that the prospects of exchange are already visible, they do not want the bonuses to come to one lawyer, but to the other?

- It's not just that. Only my presence prevents them to agree on the conditions favorable to the Kremlin. Now there is a conditional prospect for the exchange of Sushchenko with Russian serviceman Viktor Ageyev, who was detained in Luhansk region. Ageyev's fault is quite obvious, acknowledged. Well, but Sushchenko should then (in Moscow's opinion) acknowledge his guilt.

- However, Nadia Savchenko did not plead guilty, but the exchange took place.

- Yes, there was a precedent. But they will still say so. Pay attention to how few people are among Ukrainian political prisoners who, in principle, did not admit their guilt. Now these are film director Oleh Sentsov (in August 2015, he was sentenced by a Russian court to 20 years in prison for trumped-up charges of "terrorist" activities) and Roman Sushchenko (he has been illegally held in the Lefortovo detention center since late September 20116 on suspicion of espionage). I understand there were different situations - abduction of detainees, torture. But also the personality of a lawyer is very important - his intransigence, adherence to principle in defending the interests and rights of the defendant. Sorry, but I again remember the statements of Shariy - just take Feygin away and he will pay for another lawyer of Roman Sushchenko. Quite eloquently! It looks like he reads it from his workbook. However, greater generalization is also relevant here, with the spread of the influence of such "workbooks" on the entire Ukrainian media space.

- I cannot understand. Could you please specify what you mean?

- You know my principle - not to talk about Ukrainian political cases and not to allow myself to interfere in Ukraine's internal policy. But the fact is that as a lawyer for Ukrainian political prisoners I find myself inscribed in the Ukrainian information agenda. I do not exaggerate my significance - I'm not so important there, but I occupy some peripheral place. And therefore I see a commonality of approaches, to me and my work in particular and to the whole situation in Ukraine... Surkov's position is the following – tanks are not needed to seize Ukraine. The seat of war has already been created - that's enough. And then it is necessary to give everybody a chance to quarrel within the country itself (especially when presidential elections in Ukraine will be held in less than two years). And everything is done for this - through informational influence, through political agents. I do not call them by their names, but I give a clear criterion for defining the Ukrainian media, which somehow work in favor of the Kremlin. This is the case if conversations about Russian aggression in Ukraine are not welcome, if the words about the "hand of Moscow" are ridiculed as a meaningless truism, and if they do not say about Russian domestic and foreign policy problems, shortcomings and about Putin's fault... In short, if the main thesis is "Why do you talk again about the Kremlin and Putin, we should not pay attention to them, but should deal with each other in our own affairs," then such a media outlet has a high probability of Moscow's engagement. This is not demonization, it's an information war. Of course, it's necessary to sort the things out and bring order to the country. But the external threat is the main reason for the destruction of order. Those who are stirring up the situation inside Ukraine, so that everyone quarrels with each other, and at the same time are trying not to say bad words about Putin work in favor of the Kremlin.

- The hearing of the Umerov case is continuing. Your Crimean colleagues report a lot about this. But what is your opinion on the current situation?

- In my opinion, we have recently had several undeniable achievements. Those who follow the Crimean processes know that Russian law enforcers have the so-called "expert" Ivanova who provides the necessary conclusions. We received a qualified, independent examination from reputable experts - a review of her conclusion on Ilmi Umerov's speech on the ATR television channel, for which he is being tried. The fact that the court did not deny us, but added this expertise to the case is very important. There is no doubt that the verdict will eventually be accusatory. It cannot be otherwise in the Russian justice in terms of political cases. But we will struggle to ensure that the sentence is suspended or, maybe, the case is limited to a fine. There are chances for this.

Oleh Kudrin, Riga

Riga