Hard Questions for the Ukraine

...Yet perhaps the most interesting queries were those of the Canadian delegate, who broached the subject of the Ukraine's constitutionally guaranteed right to secede from the USSR Observing that in his own country there was a secessionist movement in Quebec, he asked what practical steps the Ukraine could take to exercise its secession rights Another delicate question involved the crime of "parasitism," officially recognized in the USSR and often used against dissidents How is parasitism possible, asked the Canadian jurist, if the state guarantees everyone work according to his training and abilities...

...He addressed himself first to the matter of secession The Ukraine, he said, has the right to withdraw from the USSR, but such a move has never been discussed because the Federal state has been successful in solving many difficulties, particularly economic ones, arising from World War II Moreover, any move to secede would have to be decided by a popular referendum He neglected to mention, though, the case of the Ukrainian lawyer Levko Lukyanenko, who was charged with "treason" and sentenced to death in 1961 precisely for exchanging views with his colleagues about the possibility of the Ukraine's secession from the USSR One of the problems that engaged Lukyanenko and his friends was the lack of any mechanism, including a popular referendum, for exercising the right of secession Lukyanenko's sentence was eventually commuted to a 15-year prison term that he served fully-only to be sentenced again in 1978 to 10 years in a labor camp and five years of internal exile for his activities on behalf of the Ukrainian Helsinki group...

...The Norwegian member followed up on the sensitive issue of nationalism Is there a nationalist movement in the Ukraine, he wanted to know, and if so, why does it exist...

...is a free-lame journalist based in Munich...

...Kochubei concluded by insisting that any citizen could monitor observance of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights if he did so within the confines of the law How narrowly restricted those confines really are is evidenced by the fate of the 18 Ukrainians who banded together to monitor the Soviet Union's compliance with the Helsinki Agreement Eleven of them are either in labor camps, under arrest, or in exile...

...Jordan's representative on the Committee expressed concern that the word "political" was missing from the long list of rights that Ukrainian citizens were said to enjoy The delegate from Ecuador pointed to gaps in Kochubei's report, especially m such areas as freedom of association, freedom to join political organizations, the right to strike, and the right to express critical views Tunisia asked why atheistic propaganda was authorized, but not religious propaganda...

...Kochubei's approach to nationalism generally was equally interesting He explained that in the Ukraine people who called themselves nationalists were those who "sowed discord " They had collaborated with Hitler's Fascists, he said, and some of them had fled to the West, where they continued to cause trouble The Ukrainian people, he added, consider the nationalists aliens Kochubei's views on nationalism and self-determination would probably receive a warm reception among Iran's ayatollahs How the Kurds and other national minorities would respond is, of course, another matter...

...The remainder of what Kochubei had to say about civil and political rights in the Ukrainian SSR will be strikingly familiar to readers of the Soviet press Oppression cannot exist in the Ukraine because the Revolution of 1917 eliminated class antagonisms, privacy of postal and telephone communication is guaranteed and inviolable, a variety of jobs exist for everyone, parents are free to provide religious instruction to their children, emigration and travel abroad is restricted only m cases bearing on state security, and every citizen is free to express his opinion...

...Kochubei preceded his responses by remarking that the questions themselves had been prompted by a terrible misunderstanding It seems that many of the legal acts and other pertinent documents were made available to the Committee members only in the Ukrainian language According to the chief Ukrainian delegate, such delicate questions would never have been raised had the jurists not been besieged by linguistic difficulties (an interesting argument in the light of the Soviet contention that Ukrainian has "long since entered into the international arena") Nevertheless, Kochubei still found himself facing the unpleasant task of satisfying the international panel's curiosity...

...West Germany inquired how the Ukrainian government would look upon citizens wishing to monitor observance of the Covenant's provisions in the Ukraine Kochubei could not have failed to miss the reference to the Soviet Helsinki groups, most of whose members, like Anatoly Shcharansky and Mykola Rudenko, have been tried and sentenced to harsh prison camp terms as "criminals...

...The representative from Great Britain, for example, asked if there is a division of responsibility between the Ukrainian SSR and the Soviet Union in implementing the Covenant He was also interested in knowing whether Kiev could adopt standards that differed from Moscow's These were reasonable questions, since the Ukrainian SSR is ostensibly a sovereign state, but at the same time a part of the "unitary, federated, and multinational" USSR The British delegate also wondered about the trials of Ukrainian human rights activists and the long prison terms meted out to them Other countries, he noted, find this treatment difficult to understand and reconcile with the Covenant's provisions...

...The focus of the exchanges between the Committee and the Ukrainian delegation, headed by Yury Kochubei, was the recently adopted Ukrainian Constitution In his report, Kochubei declared that the Constitution "in practice protects and guarantees the fulfillment of all of the provisions of the Covenant " Indeed, he said, newly enacted legislation "concretizes the provisions of the Constitution and testifies to the further development of Socialist democracy ". Romania and East Germany backed his claims Other members of the Committee, however, posed a series of questions that reflected serious doubts about the Ukraine's performance in the area of human rights...

...The findings of the United Nations Human Rights Committee will be presented sometime in the course of the just-convened General Assembly session...

...Roman Solchanyk, a new contributor to The New Leader...

...THE NEW CONSTITUTION Hard Questions for the Ukraine BY ROMAN SOLCHANYK Geneva Representatives of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic had a difficult time at the seventh session of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, held here last month Composed of 18 internationally recognized jurists from various countries, the Committee is an outgrowth of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by 59 nations It was established to monitor the progress of member states in guaranteeing their citizens the fundamental human rights proclaimed by the document Kremlin spokesmen proudly point out that the Soviet Union, together with the Ukrainian Byelorussian SSR, which have independent status in the world organization, were among its first signatories...

...He was interested, too, in the right of Ukrainian citizens to express patriotic sentiments Finally, Yugoslavia requested information about the powers of the so-called Comrades' Courts in the Ukrainian SSR...