The recognition in Russia of the Ukrainian “Azov” regiment as a “terrorist” organization caused indignation from the Ukrainian authorities and politicians. Representatives of Ukrainian civil society accused Moscow of legal nihilism.

“To satisfy the administrative request of the Attorney General, to recognize the Ukrainian paramilitary unit “Azov” as a terrorist organization and to ban its activities on the territory of the Russian Federation,” announced a judge of the Russian Supreme Court on August 2. She added that the implementation of this decision starts immediately. However, Russian news agency TASS noted that the decision has not yet taken effect and can be appealed.

Reports from Moscow said the trial continued behind closed doors and in the absence of representatives from the “opposite side”. The meeting was broadcast only to the press and only in the witness interrogation phase. As a result, the court announced only the operative part of the decision, and its motives remained unknown.

strange verdict

“It seems a bit strange: a country that is one step away from being recognized as a sponsor of terrorism and violating any rules and customs of war recognizes some organization as a terrorist…”, – this was how DW publicly reacted to the decision of the Russian court. about “Azov” adviser to the chief of staff of the President of Ukraine Mikhail Podolyak. He is confident that this court ruling will have no legal force for the entire world, will not affect prisoner exchange negotiations and is “a product of purely internal propaganda”.

Captured Ukrainian soldiers defending the Azovstal factory

Podolyak recalled that the Azov Volunteer Battalion has not existed since 2014: since then it has been a separate special-purpose detachment as part of the 12th Operational Brigade of the Ukrainian National Guard. And also that this division “acted exclusively within the limits of legally motivated competences, and Russian jurisdiction does not extend to the territory of Ukraine, and therefore the decision is a legal absurdity”. Thus, the decision of the Russian court is “an illegal use of domestic jurisdiction to mask its deliberate violation of the rights of prisoners of war”, summarized the adviser to the head of the presidential office.

This opinion is shared by the deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of the “Servant of the People” party Yegor Chernev. “Azov” carries out its activities within the framework of Ukrainian and international law, does not operate outside Ukraine and carries out only tasks for the defense of the state of Ukraine. Therefore, Russia’s recognition of it as a terrorist organization is legal nihilism and complete nonsense.”

The same position is taken by the parliamentary opposition. European Solidarity MP Vladimir Ariev told DW that in 2015 the Verkhovna Rada called on the international community to recognize the Russian Federation as an aggressor state, and in May of this year, appealed to the world to recognize this country as a sponsor of terrorism. “Today I registered with the Verkhovna Rada a draft appeal to civilized countries and international organizations, including the EU, with an appeal to recognize the Russian Federation as a terrorist state, blamed for the destruction of Ukrainian prisoners of war in Yelenovka on July 28. This is a terrorist act. This is a hidden execution. And if a terrorist state with nuclear weapons has arisen in the world – the world cannot turn a blind eye to it,” said Ariev.

Society reaction

Photos of the place of death of Ukrainian prisoners of war in Yelenovka

The command of the Azov regiment also called the Russian court’s decision an attempt to justify the “crime of war and public execution” of prisoners of war defending Mariupol in Yelenovka. States that consider themselves civilized to recognize the Russian Federation as a terrorist state. Russia has been proving this status with its daily actions for many years. Every day, your army and intelligence agencies commit war crimes. Connivance with these crimes or silence is complicity,” the Azov command said in a statement.

Pavel Zhebrivsky, former chairman of the Donetsk OVA, now chairman of the Ukrainian Brotherhood of Combat, called to start large-scale protests in Ukraine against Russian crimes against Ukrainian prisoners and spread them around the world. “Now, on so-called ‘legal grounds’, they can condemn those who left Azovstal. Without raising a huge wave of mass resistance and mass actions in Russian diplomatic institutions around the world, we can hardly expect a proper reaction and life-saving of our prisoners of war,” said Zhebrovsky.

For her part, the head of the Civil Liberties Center, Alexandra Matviychuk, who has experience participating in negotiations on the release of Ukrainian prisoners, called the recognition of Azov by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation a “terrorist” organization that has nothing to do with the law. “This is a division of the National Guard within the framework of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Recognizing it as a terrorist organization is like recognizing as a terrorist organization all the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which are defending their country from a terrorist invasion”, DW Matviychuk said.

Weakness of international organizations

The human rights activist is sure that Ukraine must demand a reaction from the West. But now the world is at a stage in the development of events where statements condemning the actions of the Russian Federation will not affect Moscow, noted the human rights activist. Meanwhile, Verkhovna Rada’s human rights commissioner Dmitry Lubinets said on Ukrainian television that the United Nations, which acted as guarantor of the safety of Azovstal’s defenders after his release, had not yet responded to Ukraine’s request about the terrorist attack. in Yelenovka in the temporarily occupied Donbas.

“We have communication with the International Committee of the Red Cross. The situation with the United Nations is worse. I send letters and requests. I did this the first day after this tragedy. But I have not received any signal, even unofficially. I say it is public.” , said the ombudsman.