Mediaboss Marketing

The European Union and Ukraine held their annual Human Rights Dialogue on 13 June 2017 in Kyiv, the third time since the signing of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement. In the Association Agreement, the European Union and Ukraine express their mutual commitment to common values, in particular full respect for democratic principles, rule of law, good governance, human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The meeting was held in an open and constructive atmosphere, allowing a thorough exchange of views on the current human rights situation in Ukraine and on progress since the last dialogue, held in July 2016.

The EU and Ukraine expressed grave concern over the further deterioration of the human rights situation on the Crimean peninsula, including the situation of Crimean Tatars, following its illegal annexation by the Russian Federation. The EU and Ukraine condemned the human rights violations and abuses in the areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, which are not under the full effective control of the Government of Ukraine. They also called for the immediate release of illegally detained Ukrainian citizens in Russia and the Crimean peninsula.

The EU and Ukraine raised ways to mitigate the humanitarian impact on civilians of the illegal annexation of the Crimean peninsula, and the conflict in the east of Ukraine. They also discussed the ways to protect the human rights of internally displaced persons (IDPs). The work of the Ministry for Temporary Occupied Territories and IDPs and the Action Plan for certain areas of Donetsk and Luhansk, adopted by the Government of Ukraine, were welcomed.

The EU and Ukraine discussed the prevention of ill-treatment and torture and thecontribution that the ongoing reforms in the area of law enforcement continue to have in strengthening human rights in Ukraine. The EU also called for further progress to be made in the investigations into the crimes committed during the EuroMaidan protests, and the violent events in Odesa on 2 May 2014, emphasising the need to address the shortcomings identified by the International Advisory Panel of the Council of Europe and to bring to justice those responsible.

The EU highlighted the importance of harmonising electoral legislation and the appointment of members of the Central Election Commission whose mandate has expired.

Both sides highlighted the importance of free and independent media and discussed ways to advance the safety of journalists and media outlets, including the steps taken to address publication of journalists' private data on Ukrainian websites. The decision to block a number of Russia-based online services was also addressed.

Also on the agenda of the Dialogue was non-discrimination policy, including the rights of LGBTI persons and those belonging to ethnic, linguistic, religious and national minorities, and the rights of the child. Gender equality and women's rights, especially domestic violence, were raised and the EU encouraged Ukraine to ratify the Istanbul Convention.

The EU and Ukraine cooperate well in international fora in the field of human rights. The European Union recalled that Ukraine has committed to the ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

The EU delegation was led by Mr Dirk Schuebel, Head of Division for bilateral relations with the Eastern Partnership countries in the European External Action Service. The Ukrainian delegation was led by Mr Sergui Petukhov, Deputy Minister of Justice of Ukraine. In line with usual practice, the EU held consultations with representatives of Ukrainian civil society and international organisations prior to the dialogue. In March 2017, human rights organisations from Ukraine and the EU held a civil society seminar on human rights. The recommendations of that seminar were also discussed in the dialogue.

The dialogue was planned to coincide with the Justice, Freedom and Security subcommittee to be held on 14 June.

The next Human Rights Dialogue meeting between Ukraine and the EU is scheduled to take place in the summer of 2018.

See the article here:
EU-Ukraine Human Rights Dialogue - ReliefWeb

Kyiv's Friendship of Arch, temporarily renamed the Arch of Diversity in honour of the 2017 EuroVision Song Contest. (c) NurPhoto/SIPA USA/PA Images. All rights reserved.Since war broke out in 2014, Ukraine has experienced a difficult period both for its citizens and liberal values, which are the bedrock of any democratic state. The war has affected almost everybody in the country, and the conflict has become a justification for illiberal initiatives undertaken by Ukraines state apparatus. For Ukrainian society, the choice in favour of liberal freedoms is becoming more and more difficult. At first glance, restricting them seems to be necessary.

In December last year, Fareed Zakaria wrote in the Washington Post about the coming of illiberal democracy to America. He cites the examples of Hungary, Iraq, Philippines, Russia and Turkey as states where some form of democracy is maintained, but where a range of liberal freedoms is disappearing. Its not enough to strengthen provisions for the rule of law, the rights of minorities, freedom of speech in national legislation these norms should be put into practice. As Zakaria writes, today, Americas culture of liberal democracy is weakening, and this process should concern both Republicans and Democrats.

These worrying trends are visible across the Atlantic ocean, from Ukraine. Indeed, Ukrainian citizens support the women who come out to protest, Muslims who face discrimination and suspicion, and the newspapers whose correspondents have been refused entry to presidential press conferences. But this support seems to reflect an opportunity to observe the crisis of liberal democracy elsewhere. And this begs the question: are liberal values merely an object to be observed at a distance for Ukraine? Is this just an opportunity to sympathise with the crisis of democracy in Europe and America?

Itd be wrong to say that Ukrainian citizens cannot see illiberal tendencies in their country. But there is one factor that restrains our reaction to them: the external threat. In discussions of liberal democracy from freedom of speech to the right to peaceful assembly the importance of observing human rights is not placed first.

Are liberal values merely an object to be observed at a distance for Ukraine? Is this just an opportunity to sympathise with the crisis of democracy in Europe and America?

Theres an expression in Ukrainian ne na chasi, which means literally not the time. The expression doesnt imply that something isnt necessary, but that it should be postponed for a certain period. In Ukraines case, this time will come after the war ends. When the issue of the countrys security is solved, thats when different groups in society will be able to talk about various issues.

These non-governmental institutions and informal groups criticise and correct the agenda of Ukraines state institutions, to ensure they follow the interests of the entire society. But as Cas Mudde writes in No, we are NOT all Charlie (and thats a problem), this criticism can also be selective and subject to self-censorship. Writing a few days after the attack on the Charlie Hebdo office in Paris in 2015, Mudde argued that its easier to speak in the name of an entire society than to speak as an individual. Back then, the media campaigns that called for solidarity with Charlie Hebdo in the name of liberal values attracted people who, prior to the attack, would have refrained from criticising or supporting the magazines staff.

In February 2017, a situation similar to the Charlie Hebdo attack took place at Kyivs Center for Visual Culture. Members of a far-right nationalist organisation attacked an exhibition by anarchist artist David Chichkan. But here, Ukrainian society made no large-scale demonstration of solidarity in support of freedom of expression.

David Chichkan's exhibition "Lost Opportunity" after it was attacked in February 2017. Source: Political Critique. Far-right activists smashed windows, ripped up Chichkans pictures and sprayed slogans accusing him of separatism and playing up to Moscow. In this exhibition (Lost opportunity), Chichkan demonstrated his attitude to the chance for reforming the Ukrainian state that he believes Ukrainian citizens had lost after EuroMaidan. The artist believes that opportunities for change have been substituted with a nationalist programme and policy carried out by the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory, which is based on the extreme right-wing ideology of Ukrainian nationalists during the 1930s and 1940s.

Ukrainian societys consensus of justification towards people who have turned patriotism into vandalism is becoming more and more tangible. Indeed, when a country is at war, and the border with the aggressor state remains open, right-wing politicians offer a clear understanding of the situation. This picture is simplified, and is based exclusively on the national idea and ethnocentrism. And its possible that right-wing vision of the situation at hand are incompatible with the Constitution, and stretch our understanding of freedom of speech. But they give people an opportunity to solve the problems facing the country and society via very simple methods.

There is no universal formula that would show how nationalist organisations influence politics. Indeed, electoral support at presidential or parliamentary campaigns doesnt always reflect this influence

Since EuroMaidan, historians and other researchers have been discussing the extent to which the far-right were involved in the 2014 protest, and whether they were the driving force. There is no universal formula that would show how nationalist organisations influence politics. Indeed, electoral support at presidential or parliamentary campaigns doesnt always reflect this influence. When a country is basically at war, this situation raises patriotic feelings and makes certain slogans (otherwise the exclusive domain of the rightwing) more visible. This is how society turns to the right. Im talking about those ideas that are to the right of the centre, and which arent compatible with liberal values, but which arent a direct expression of far-right political views.

In Ukraine, political parties, apart from the obviously nationalist ones, dont have much in the way of ideology. They rely on their leaders personal charisma. This is why its easy for Ukrainian politicians to pick up slogans that appeal to their electorate. According to recent surveys carried out by Kiev International Institute of Sociology, Ukrainians name the war, living standards, economic situation and security as the issues that are most important to them. And if the Ukrainian electorate wants to build a wall with Russia, then the refusal to use Russian social networks could be the prototype it doesnt necessarily have to be made out of bricks.

A public exhibition detailing casualties and deaths at the frontline of the Donbas conflict. (c) NurPhoto/SIPA USA/PA Images. All rights reserved.On 16 May, President Petro Poroshenko signed a decree on the decision by Ukraines National Security and Defence Council on applying special personalised economic and other limiting measures. Among others, the popular Russian social media websites VKontake and Odnoklassniki fell under these sanctions. And given that these websites were named economically unsafe only in the third year of the Russian-Ukrainian war, it raises questions about why this step wasnt taken earlier. The ban on social networks (which are used mostly for mobilisation or entertainment) became more prominent than the educational campaigns about why signing over personal information to Russian social networks might be risky for users.

There were no prominent protests against this decree. The debate about whether freedom of speech can be limited during wartime has divided Ukrainian society between those who are ready to forego human rights under conditions of war, and those who arent. Indeed, Ukrainian journalists, public figures and human rights defenders are among those who supported the ban against Russian social media.

In Ukraine, the limits of the permissible, which can be violated by the state, are becoming less and less clear. And it is no less hard for a society traumatised by war to resist simplifications and ignore the destruction of something valuable before its very eyes.

Read this article:
Liberal democracy: a hard choice for Ukraine - Open Democracy

A United Nations report says hostilities have been escalating in eastern Ukraine in recent months because parties to the armed conflict there have "repeatedly failed to implement cease-fire agreements."

The report by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on June 13 says cease-fire violations on both Ukrainian armed forces and Russia-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine have allowed "hostilities to escalate and claim more lives as the conflict moved into its fourth year."

The report says that since the conflict began in mid-April of 2014, at least 10,090 people have been killed -- included 2,777 civilians. It said at least 23,966 people have been injured and more than 1.6 million people displaced by the fighting.

The report says the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine recorded 36 conflict-related civilian deaths and 157 injuries from February 16 to May 15 -- a 48 percent increase on the previous three months.

It also says people continue to be abducted, unlawfully deprived of freedom, and held incommunicado -- particularly in districts controlled by Russia-backed separatists.

It also says torture has persisted, with new incidents recorded on both sides of the contact line.

The OHCHR also expresses concern that, after three years, none of the senior officials responsible for deaths during antigovernment protests in Kyiv and violence in Odesa have been brought to account.

Read this article:
UN Says Ukraine Conflict Escalating Amid Cease Fire-Violations - RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty

Ukraine's Kazakh Embassy has lodged a protest over maps near an international energy exposition in Astana that show Ukraine's occupied Crimean Peninsula as part of Russia.

The maps are part of decorative statues on Nurzhol Boulevard outside of Expo 2017, a three-month exposition that began on June 10 with Russian President Vladimir Putin in attendance.

One statue is holding a map of Ukraine that does not include the territory of Crimea. Another holds a map of Russia that includes Crimea.

The Ukrainian Embassy wrote on Facebook on June 12 that the map of Ukraine was shown "with elements in violation of the country's territorial integrity," and the map of Russia was shown "with elements that violate Ukraine's territorial integrity."

The Ukrainian Embassy said it expected explanations from Kazakhstan's Foreign Ministry.

Russia seized control of Crimea in 2014 after sending in troops and staging a referendum considered illegitimate by Ukraine and more than 100 other countries in the United Nations.

View post:
Ukraine's Embassy In Kazakhstan Irked By Maps Showing Crimea As Russia - RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty

Published time: 13 Jun, 2017 18:18 Edited time: 13 Jun, 2017 18:53

Ukraines nuclear regulatory body reported smoke at one of the rooms at Unit 3 in Chernobyl, adding that it was briefly liquidated by the state emergency personnel and the radiological situation at the site has not changed following the incident.

At 15:57 pm weve received information from Chernobyl nuclear power plant about smoke in room 509 of Power Unit Three. At 16:00 the smoke was liquidated by the State Emergency Service staff, a statement issued by the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine reads.

The radiological situation in the third power unit and the stations territory has not changed, it added.

No further details were immediately available.

The Soviet-era Chernobyl nuclear power plant is known around the world for the accident, one of the worst ever, that took place there on April 26, 1986, when a failed safety experiment caused a catastrophic meltdown at the plants Reactor 4. An explosion followed, destroying the reactor and releasing large amounts of radiation into the atmosphere.

READ MORE in RT's special project CHERNOBYL: FALLOUT 30

Following the accident, a 30-square kilometer zone surrounding the NPP was evacuated and declared uninhabitable, while the large radioactive cloud spread across more than 200,000 square kilometers. The nuclear fallout contaminated large areas in Ukraine, Russia and Belarus, then republics of the Soviet Union.

Read more

Over 30 people died immediately or short-term after the accident. The total number of radiation-related deaths caused by the disaster could have amounted to about 4,000 by 2005, according to a massive study conducted by an international team of more than 100 scientists.

Following the disaster, a steel and concrete sarcophagus was constructed over the destroyed Reactor 4 to encase the dangerous area and prevent the remaining radioactive materials from getting into the atmosphere.

The sarcophagus deteriorated over time, due to extreme levels of radiation, and was deemed unrepairable by 1996. The construction of a new, internationally funded, shelter began in 2012. The giant steel radiation shield was maneuvered into place over the existing steel and concrete structures in November 2016, but construction is still under way. The replacement shield, costing 1.5 billion ($1.6 billion) and built by French consortium Novarka, is designed to withstand a tornado and has an expected lifespan of at least 100 years.

Power Unit 3 was launched in 1981 and remained operational even after the 1986 disaster. The unit was the last part of the nuclear plant to be permanently shut down in December 2000.

Read this article:
Smoke detected at crippled Chernobyl power plant Ukraine nuclear watchdog - RT