“Prava Ludiny” (human rights) monthly bulletin, 2000, #12

Copies to the Supreme Rada of Ukraine, the Cabinet of Ministers, political parties, public organizations, non-government investigation institutions and funds, to mass media.

Respected Mr. President!

We belong to the new generation of Ukrainians, for which the independence of Ukraine has become the basis for comprehending the world and our place in it. Now we are getting education abroad and want to make our contribution to the development and blossoming of democratic Ukraine. Being citizens of Ukraine, we may not keep silence, when principles of democracy and superiority of the right stipulated by the Constitution are ignored in our country. Being governed by the civil and moral responsibility, we jointly protest against it and appeal you to heed our voices.

Concerning the volume of power concentrated in your hands during the later six years, you bear the greatest responsibility for the situation in the country and for the direction of its development. During all the time of being the head of the state you more than once promised to promote democratic changes in the country and its integration to the European community. Alas, actually the democratic values have been sacrificed to meet the needs of the state authorities. The so-called ’support of millions’ at the last election you got only owing to the administrative pressure on the elective process, manipulation with the public thought and the biased count of the votes. So the ’support of millions’ really was the demonstration of force of individuals.

At the time when the public accusations tie you directly with journalist G. Gongadze’s case, the criminal investigation experiences the pressure, and the state mass media describe the investigation and events around it in a manner far from being objective. The weighty proves presented by O. Moroz, S. Golovaty and other MPs are considered by the General Prosecutor as false even before their detailed study. Refraining from attracting foreign experts and close cooperation with MPs, you do not permit to keep the case investigation transparent and independent. Basing on the above arguments, we come to the conclusion that you are unable to guarantee the fulfillment of the Constitutional rights of the Ukraine people. Moreover, you admit the violation of such rights. That is why we are sure that the only dignified way for you is to retire.

We want to point out that by this letter we are not going to commit the coup d’etat, as you and your assistants often classify such actions. On the contrary, we want to put an end to illegal actions of the authorities promises of the ’brilliant future’, which vainly expected our parents in the Soviet times. We have no time to waste and we want to live in a free and democratic Ukraine just now!

57 signatures of Ukrainian students – members of the public organization

’Forum of Ukrainian students in America and Europe’

Note: Forum of Ukrainian students in America and Europe unites students from Ukraine, who study various professions in universities of the USA, Canada and Western Europe and encourages their active participation in the civil life of Ukraine. The e-mail address of the Forum: [email protected]

PL commentary. Vivid and emotional appeal of M. Svistovich expresses well the mood of the inhabitants of the tent camp on the Nezalezhnost Square. The growing pressure of the power on mass media, on the will of citizens, especially during the presidential election, the initiation of the referendum and how it was conducted -- resulted in the increasing protest of the society that exploded after the disclosing of the audiocassette with the accusations of the top state officers.

One cannot help sympathizing these boys and girls. But it is unreasonable to demand the retirement of the retirement of the President on the basis of unproved accusations – in our opinion it makes all the action null and void. Besides, if one tries to understand what namely the picketers demand and imagine the consequences of their demands if they were realized, then one should conclude that the success would be illusory. The position of the students’ Forum seems more reasonable and well-grounded.

In general, the replacement of the persons at the top is not worthy much without the changes in the society, which must be able to control the power. In our opinion, people must demand the adoption of laws on the parliament and non-parliament control over the power, it is necessary to care about the openness of the power and independence of courts. Unfortunately, the young forget about this.

I want to turn to everybody! To every citizen of Ukraine! To foreigners who stay on the Ukrainian land! To international human rights protection organizations! To Ukrainian and foreign journalists!

We have declared that we shall not stop. We shall not stop fighting with the cynicism and crimes of the authorities, with the concealment of truth, with protracting the investigation of the disappearance of journalist Georgiy Gongadze!

I do not want to use bright epithets to describe the crimes of our authorities, their disregard of laws, the cruelty of the law-enforcing organs. All know this.

On 19 December 2000 at 11 a.m. the demonstration will begin. But nobody knows when and how it will finish. Awful accusations are presented to President Kuchma and minister Kravchenko, who has under his command the most numerous bodies of law-enforces. If the accusations appeared to be true, there will be no retreat. Compromises and reticence are impossible here. A beast driven to a corner will desperately fight. That is what the agonizing power is doing.

The situation is not critical yet, but the tension is growing every day. Until nothing is proven officially the power will not apply forcible methods. Yet we observe that the power has recently resorted to the most desperate and senseless means, which cannot be explained by any sound logic. Personal search of MPs, the attack at the picket near the palace ’Ukraine’ committed in the presence international public, sending protesting law-enforcers to the Nezalezhnost Square. All this proves that the power is loosing nerves. So it is probable that violence will be applied against peaceful protestors. And nobody dares to anticipate the degree of its brutality.

I personally am not frightened. Other participant of the action ’Ukraine without Kuchma’ cannot be frightened too. We know what we are doing and we are prepared to all. But our column will contain several hundreds of boys and girls of 18-19 years old. The majority of them are students. They have had to time do anything in their life, to form their families and to give offsprings. They have everything in the future, and it will be tragic, if the future will be terminated by force, at least for one of them.

They are full of daydreams and illusions, they cannot imagine the life in the country ruled by criminals. They are still children, who close their faces with kerchiefs, when fearlessly going upon bayonets, because they are afraid of their mummies, who can learn that their children are risking their lives. Regardless of their youth, they have demonstrated adult wisdom and made their decision. Nobody can stop them, they will not obey anybody: neither parents, nor deputies. All the same they will march in this column, for they know that the truth is in their ranks.

I appeal to all with a demand to protect their youth. And there is one way to do it: to come on 19 December to the Nezalezhnost Square and to take part in out action.

On 15 December 2000 there was about a dozen of leaders of various political parties at the meeting. What speeches they delivered! What words were pronounced! What appeals were uttered!

Gentlemen! Where are you now? Why have your words been not supported by real actions? Why most of you have never come again to our tent camp? Where are your people? Why those members of your parties, who came to the tent camp, came there by their own initiative? Why do you passively observe how young girls, who never gave birth to children, catch cold sitting on the cold granite? Are you so poor that you cannot provide 2-3 tents, a dozen of camp beds, sleeping bags and mattresses from each party?

I appeal to the rank and file members of the parties! If you leaders, who once bravely and even heroically fought for independence and democracy, are unable now to do something real, come without them, come for your own money, for here not the lot of L. Kuchma or O. Moroz is decided, but destiny of Ukraine.

I appeal to members of all three Rukhs. To the block, which plans to become the new center of the unification of social-democrats. Where is your bravery and resolution, which flows in torrents from the pages of your party newspapers? Why do you hide your head into sand like ostriches?

After all, the aim of our action is to check the veracity of the denunciating materials and to raise the curtain of secrecy. What are you expecting? A further development of events with the aim to attack later the lower dog?

I guarantee that you will fail this time!

It Kuchma looses without your participation, you will find yourselves on the political rubbish heap, if we loose, you will find yourselves in the same place. The oligarchs then will not need you. Use your heads, gentlemen, join our action! Join us regardless of your intentions (to learn the truth and regain justice, not to give the all the glory to the left, to revenge for your personal humiliation), but do not stand aside! Your silence becomes incomprehensible!

I appeal to the Democratic Union, to the People Democratic party, to the party ’Labor Ukraine’! You also know where the truth lies. Do not pretend that you do know this, do not make a laughing stock out of yourself. Your hand are clean of blood, keep them clean!

I appeal to my former colleagues in the students’ hunger-strike of 1990! Where are you hiding, you, who were called the flower of the nation ten years ago? Why not all of you are present here? Why many of those, who came to the meeting on 15 December, did not remain in the tent camp? Have you petrified as out authorities, against whom we fought then?

Oles, Marek, Oleg, Slavko! Drop all you current affairs! Call together our former combatants, lead them here! Here you will see such children like we had been on that hunger-strike. They, like we, want a better Ukraine.

I appeal to Dmytro Korchinskiy! We both were members of the students organization ’Gromada’, when all current great patriots were hiding in cracks. You came to us on 15 December, gave many interviews and disappeared. You called your organization ’The shield of Motherland’. It is a tall order! I wish you to be worthy of this high title. On 19 December you will have the opportunity to confirm this title. Be the shield protecting the children, who will march to the President’s palace.

I appeal to all people! Never believe the misinformation that flow from TV and radio channels, and newspaper channels of the mass media controlled by the government! Do not look for the mythical sponsors and orderers of our protest! Come to our tent camp, and I will personally show you the conditions under which we exist. If we had those, who ordered the protest to throw down the President, we should surely have more tents (we sleep in shifts), sleeping-bags, camp-beds and warm clothing.

You could say that our sponsors are economical here as well. But it is easier to buy this comparatively cheap equipment, instead of hiring new people to substitute those who got to hospitals because of excessive cold. Come to us and you will see that there is no hint of sponsors’ money, these people have come to the square by the order of their hearts, having dropped their work and education, having risked with all. One cannot by such people!

I appeal to the members of foreign embassies, of international human rights protection organizations, Ukrainian and foreign journalists! You speak and write much about the freedom of speech and democracy. We are weaponless. Go with us! We do not need support, just stand by our side and observe. You have nothing to be afraid of! Nobody will touch you! If you were plenty, no one will dare to spill blood!

I appeal to law-enforcers! Boys! You are human like us! You also have children, brothers and sisters. You, like ourselves, try to survive. We have nothing against you! We know that most of you sympathize with us. In civil clothes you come to our tents and express our sympathy in whispers. But on Thursday you will be given an order. You have time to come to a bookshop and buy the Constitution of Ukraine. You have the time to learn that nobody under no circumstances is obliged to execute criminal orders. You gave an oath to serve Ukraine, not to Kuchma or Kravchenko! Keep your oath!

I appeal to Viktor Yushchenko! Everybody knows that law-enforcing ministers are not your subordinates. Yet your word may be weighty on the balance. Nobody needs public speeches! Just have a personal talk with Kravchenko and Derkach and ask them to be reasonable.

I appeal to Yuri Kravchenko and Leonid Derkach! Your guilt is not proved yet. If you are innocent you have nothing to be afraid of! And even if you have already committed some sins, do not multiply them, do not let you dogs out of kennels!

I appeal to everybody! Come to Nezalezhnost Square at 11 a.m.! We shall march to the President under any circumstances! But if we were few, something incorrigible may happen. But if the people marches, not a handful of braves, everything will end well. And entire Ukraine will be the winner!

Mykhaylo Svistovich,

A participant of the students’ hunger-strike of 1990,

A participant of the action ’Ukraine without Kuchma’

On 12 December 2000 Igor Malyshenko, the first secretary of the Nikolayev oblast committee of the socialist party, was brutally beaten at the doorway of his own house. The party members responded with the appeal of protest.

The victim was taken to a hospital with the cerebral brain concussion.

The appeal, distributed among the regional mass media, reads: ’There is no doubt that this hoodlum act was committed with the purpose of to intimidation’.

The socialist party members are sure that the beating of their regional leader Malyshenko was organized by those, who conducts a dirty campaign against the people’s deputy of Ukraine Oleksandr Moroz.

In their opinion, this brutal act was a reaction to the distribution of materials about the connection of the President and his clique to the disappearance of Georgiy Gongadze, the editor-in-chief of the Internet newspaper ’Ukrainska pravda’.

The appeal stresses that ’similar actions brutally abuse human rights in Nikolayev’.

Until now it is not known what the local militia does for disclosing the crime.

Yuri Videnko, the head of the regional organization of the Popular Rukh of Ukraine, also condemned this act in the interview with out correspondent. He believes that ’the recent events testify of the existence of unpunishable gangsterism in the region. Activists of the Rukh also suffered from such kind of gangsterism’. 

According to the poll of visitors of the newspaper ’Day’ web-site in the Internet, the answers to the question ’In which way would you like to pay for medical services?’ were distributed in the following way:

officially (medical insurance, paid services) – 77%;

non-officially (presents and ’envelopes’ to doctors) – 3%;

in no way, medicine must be free – 14%;

other ways – 6%;

no answer – 0%.

140 persons were questioned, among them 83% of males and 17% of females. The most participants have higher education (81%), the age of the respondents is from 20 to 30 (41%) and from 31 to 40 (27%).

According to the data of the Ministry of health protection, this year patients paid for the hospital nutrition and medical drugs about six billion hryvnas.

According to the budget-2000 the expenses equaled Hr 4.2 billion. Next year the increase of Hr 821 million is planned, while the real demand equals not less than Hr 12 billion.

In the situation when neither the state budget nor the local one are able to satisfy the medicine demands, the only promising decision can be the introduction of various kinds of medical insurance.

The Minister of health protection informed that the draft of such a law is under preparation, but, even if the Parliament adopts the draft in the nearest future, the implementation of the law will demand some time and Hr 300 millions. During this time it is necessary to prepare about 10 thousand of the needed specialists, and, what is the most important in our opinion, there is a need to conduct explanatory work among the population. Since, without the trust and interest of the public in the introduction of insurance medicine we can get another bureaucratic structure that will waste money and disregard the interests of citizens, who want to get adequate medical services.

By the materials of the newspaper ’Day’ , No. 214, 22 November 2000

The journal ’The Wall Street’ has published the results of the study organized by the foundation ’Heritage’ (USA). In the annual rating of the economic freedom Ukraine appeared on 133rd place, having lowered by 17 points compared to the last year. According to Ariel Cohen, an expert of the foundation, the fiscal pressure and the interference of the government in the economic control increased, the government uses obscure standards on giving licenses on import, the policy of trade also worsened.

The results of the study confirm that there exists a direct relation between the level of economic freedom and the level of income per capita. According to the data of the world bank, the income per capita in ’unfree’ and ’repressed’ economies in 1998 made about $2800, whereas in ’prevalently free’ economies it was four times larger, $11054, and in free economies it was two more times larger, $21200.

The experts also remarked that the indexes deteriorated just during the period of post-election ’window of opportunities’ and the activity of the allegedly most liberal government. But the image of a reformer and the actual processes in economy are different things, as the Ukrainian experience witnesses.

Our informant

Dear colleagues!

On 5 December 2000 the parliamentary hearings on the closure of the Chernobyl atomic electric station (ChAES) was held, and on 15 December the station was ordered to be closed. On this day you must recollect what was the Chernobyl catastrophe for the entire planet and especially for us living in the vicinity of Chernobyl. Recollect that the reason of the catastrophe was a chain of slight and grave violations of the operating laws, as well as the violation of instructions, norms and standards. Try to understand whether it is possible to violate the safety rules in the atomic power engineering, in particular when atomic stations are widened, as in the case of Khmelnitsky and Rivno stations.

If you share, partially or entirely, the ideas of this appeal, please support us by sending your considerations to the Supreme Rada of Ukraine by the address: To I. S. Pliushch, the Head of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine, 5 Grushevskiy St., Kyiv-19, 01019; fax (044) 293-1001.

Thanks you in advance.

Sergiy Fedorynchyk, the head of the information center of the Ukrainian ecological association ’Zeleny svit’

An open letter to Ukrainian MPs concerning parliamentary hearings on the closure of the Chernobyl AES

Copies:

To Prime-Minister of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko

To first vice-Prime-Minister Yuri Ekhanurov

To vice-Prime-Minister Yulia Timoshenko

To Head of the President’s administration Volodymir Litvin

To Secretary of the Council on National Security Evgen Marchuk

To Minister of power engineering Sergiy Ermilov

To Minister of ecology and natural resources Ivan Zayets

To head of the administration of nuclear regulation Oleksandr Smyshliayev

To General Prosecutor of Ukraine Mykhaylo Potebenko

A Copy: To the President of European Bank of Reconstruction

and Development Jean Lemiere

ON THE CLOSURE OF ChAES, WIDENING OF KHMELNITSKY AND RIVNE ATOMIC STATIONS AND ENERGY PRODUCING POLICY OF UKRAINE FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF SAFETY

Respected people’s deputies!

Lately we happen to hear the opinions of some MPs concerning the opportunity of shifting the term of the closure of the ChAES. These opinions cause an extreme worry if the Ukrainian and international public. Any speeches and actions concerning the atomic energy production must be regarded firstly from the viewpoint of safety. The safety of the atomic power production must be a top priority goal and internal need that will force everyone to self-control all the works concerning this safety. This means that we must strictly obey the law ’On the application of nuclear energy and radioactive safety’, as well as all norms, regulations and standards. The State administration of nuclear control in Ukraine (SANCU) determined the date of the closure of the ChAES no by a rule of the thumb, but taking consideration of the existing norms of safe AES operation and the corresponding computations. The ChAES has practically exhausted its resource. Letter No. 73-03/0871-7C of SANCU reads that ’the main technical constraint as to the exploitation lifetime of the energy block No. 3 of the ChAES is exhausting the gap between the technology channels and the graphite layer… The term cannot be prolonged’. That is why any negotiations about the postponement of the closure may be carried out only having the document in writing, which must be based on the norms and computations presented by professionals in charge. People, who chatter on this topic without the proper basis, act in the extremely irresponsible manner, regardless of their motives.

The date of 15 December for the closure of the ChAES was named before the international community by the Ukrainian President himself. Even mere talks about shifting this date by state officers cause a great damage to the international reputation of Ukraine. All the world community and the Ukrainian people have awaited this day for 14 years. The closure of the ChAES will be, as a popular song sounds, ’a great victory causing tears’.

In this connection Ukraine expects, with understandable reasons, the international financial aid. Yet, there is no reason to use this aid for building of blocks No. 2 of Khmelnitsky AES and No. 4 of Rivne AES (Kh2/R4 in what follows). It is possible that the international aid will be needed for the closure of these blocks as well. After a thorough analysis of the documents concerning the state of power engineering, project documents, legal acts, exchange of letters with state organs concerning the projects Kh2/R4, one is obliged to conclude: AT THE GIVEN MOMENT BUILDING ADDITION BLOCKS Kh2/R4, FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF SAFETY, IS AN ECOLOGICAL, ECONOMIC AND LEGAL ADVENTURISM!

Up to now we have no positive conclusions of the ecological expertise of estimation of the influence on the environment, that would guarantee admissibility of the project, and no technical and economical confirmation (TEC) of these projects, made keeping the demands of the Ukrainian legislation. According to the law ’On investment’, financing of construction under such conditions contradicts the law. Nonetheless, these activities are done owing to the passivity of prosecutor’s office.

V. Shcherbytsky was the one who wrote in his secret letter to the Central Committee of the CPSU about the dangerous geological conditions on the site of Rivne AES (deep tectonic breaks and karstic caves in the ground). In this letter he also informed about serious emergencies in the first block of the ChAES on 9 September 1982 and 25 February 1983, as well as about accidents in the work of 2nd and 3rd blocks. It the reaction in Moscow were correct, there might be no catastrophe at the 4th block in 1986!

The site of Khmelnitsky AES has not sufficient quantity of water for cooling two blocks -- that was a conclusion of independent ecological expertise headed by academician D. M. Grodzynsky. What is then the basis of the National Energy Program of Ukraine till 2010 (NEPU-2010), which suggests the widening of the KhAES up to four blocks?

Such a contradiction to the common sense has appeared because the Supreme Rada adopted this Program (on 15 May 1996), violating Article 9.2.3 of the Regulations of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine. Concretely, the discussion of the NEPU-2010 was abridged, no decision was taken about the additional scientific, economic, financial and legal expertise of the draft of this Program or about its public discussion. Article 9.2.4 item 2 of the Regulations of the Supreme Rada was also violated: the approved Program and the report on its fulfillment have never been published in the proper sources, ’Golos Ukrainy’ or other official editions. The NEPU-2010 is made inaccessible at all for the Ukrainian public: it is classified as ’For service use only’, although such category of secrecy is not stipulated in the Ukrainian legislation. In spite of the repeated requests to the Ministry of power engineering, Ministry of economics, Cabinet of Ministers and corresponding committee of the Supreme Rada we have not managed to clarify who namely, in which state body and on the vase of which legal document made the NEPU-2010 secret.

The decision about the widening of Kh2/R4 may be taken only on the base of the well-grounded proof of its economic expediency. This must be done in the framework of the TEC prepared according to the conventional procedure. The TEC for the first stage of the KhAES exists prepared in 1974, and TEC for the second stage of RAES prepared in 1982. Since that time all political, economic and juridical conditions have changed, and all the changes result in the essential increase of the worth of electric energy produced by an AES. There exists no calculations of the cost of closing Kh2/R4 and long term (for thousands years!) storage of radioactive waste. Shall we have enough profits to recompense these expenditures? The experience of the ChAES has demonstrated that the closure of an AES may be more costly than its building. The Ministry of economics of Ukraine tried to keep away from the problem, it did not consider and approve the above-mentioned TECs. These TECs are not only archaic, but also illegal, since they do not satisfy the Demands of the State Constructive Norms (ДБН A.2.2-3-97) and the law ’On the application of nuclear energy and radioactive safety’. In particular, a number of rules listed in Article 37 of this law concerning the procedure of taking decision about the allocation of nuclear objects were broken. The projects Kh2/R4 are also doubtful from purely technological considerations. These energy-producing blocks can operate in the mode of providing the basic load, but not the peak one. On introducing one million kW of basic load it is necessary to introduce two million kW for maneuver load. So Kh2/R4 needs the additional four million kW for maneuver, and the production of this power is not planned. Specialists confess that after the introduction of energy blocks Kh2/R4 the work of the energy-producing system of Ukraine will become less stable!

According to the technological regulations, when the frequency falls below 49.0 Hz (and this may occur after emergency switching out of even one atomic block), almost all blocks of an AES would automatically unload by 10% from their nominal power that causes the chain reaction, and in five minutes all the blocks of the AES would completely switch off the energy system, which would result in catastrophic consequences within and without the country. This threat is confirmed by actual facts. On 4 February 2000 at 4:04 p.m., as a consequence of switching off the 2nd block of Zaporozhye AES the first automatic guard level acted, and the frequency of the electric current in the system diminished to 49.1 – 49.2 Hz. This automatically resulted in the fall of the power of 1000 MW because of the emergency switch-off of the 1st block of South-Ukrainian AES, which, in its turn, resulted in the diminishing of productivity of other blocks of the AES by 10%. The increase of the frequency from 49.0 to 49.4 Hz was carried out during next 4 minutes 39 seconds by way of switching off of the provision centers throughout the country. Thus, the collapse of the national energy system had to occur in 21 second, and the main reasons were the technical peculiarities of atomic energy producing blocks! Abolishing moratorium on the building of atomic energy blocks in 1993 the Supreme Rada did not act according to the legal procedure. The fact that no legal justification of this decision has not appeared during 7 years after the abolishing the moratorium, testifies that the decision of the Supreme Rada made to meet the request of the government was erroneous. The composition of the government since than has changed five times, but the neglect of safety never changed. The current government has to act in another way! Unfortunately, Ukrainian mass media neglect safety rules as well, executing orders of the proper elucidation of the Ukrainian energy producing policy, without any analysis of the real reasons of the crisis phenomena. This superficial manner resulted in the ban of critical materials about the problems of atomic power engineering, although the problems were growing all the time. All energy production blocks of Ukrainian AESs, without any exceptions, have no permanent licenses for exploitation, while the operation according to temporary permissions is forbidden by the Ukrainian legislation and international agreements. If to be unbiased, one should stress the question in a quite different way, when elucidating problems of energy production. There is no crisis of energy producing potential in Ukraine, what exists is crisis of payments caused by inability (and sometimes unwillingness) of the customers to pay for energy. The total potential in Ukraine in 54 million kW; at peak hours the demand reaches only 28 million, while at the rest of the time it is even less. The supercilious potential is not normally demanded. Specialists assert that if to organize the energy market properly, then Ukraine, using the existing potential, could meet all her needs, and even sell some energy abroad, thus accumulating finances for the modernization of existing facilities. The present government has already made some useful steps in this direction. Diminishing pay arrears to the AES workers is very important, since such arrears are incompatible with safety. It is clear that certain persons and structures, which get profit from the existing disorder at the energy market, are interested in regaining the status quo. They frantically attack the government under each pretext and use any kind of arguments. To this end they try to shift the term of closure of the ChAES; besides, they attempt to relate the obtained international financial assistance with the ’necessity’ to widen Kh2/R4. These negotiations serve for the destabilization of the situation in Ukraine, in Western countries they can be understood as blackmail and intimidation, and this does not encourage leading the country out of the critical situation. The government has a duty soberly, accounting for safety, observing laws, economic expediency, ecological permissibility and public opinion to reconsider the dangerous situation with the projects Kh2/R4. It is the Supreme Rada that can most successfully create favorable conditions for such reconsideration, accounting for long-term interests of the society, instead of fanning the fire of hysteria and speculations of the circles that favor the crisis in the power engineering. In the question of recompensing the closed ChAES it would be instructive to remark on inconsequent and incorrect activities of the West. As President L. Kuchma wrote to British Prime-Minister T. Blaire in April 1998, the widening of Kh2/R4 ’was suggested by Western partners as an alternative to the Ukrainian proposition to build the vapor-gas electric station’. It was the countries of the Big Seven that suggested to include this variant to the Memorandum on mutual understanding in 1995, although the Ukrainian proposition was the best to solve the problem of maneuver potentials for peak loads of the energy system.

It goes without saying that the most profit from the widening of Kh2/R4 will be received by the nuclear companies of France, Germany and the USA, which have already concluded preliminary contracts for getting credits that in the final count will be given to Ukraine. In this way the money extracted from Ukrainian taxpayers and customers will, through these credits, enrich Western companies, which are loosing the market because of the decrease of demand of the atomic energy in the West. The European Bank of reconstruction and development, declaring its devotion to observing national and international laws, actually intends to credit Kh2/R4 on the basis of the doubtful document, which have no legal leg to stand upon in Ukraine. Thus, the report on the estimation of the influence on the environment, written by the British firm ’Mowshell consulting’, skipped all acute problems, does not meet the demands of the Ukrainian legislation, in particular of the State Constructive Norms (1995), and was not approved by the Ministry of ecological resources of Ukraine. And the American firm ’Stone and Webster’ wrote: ’The proof of the economic expediency of widening Kh2/R4 uses a number of fantastic arguments’. This work was sharply criticized by international experts, it does not obey to the State Constructive Norms of 1997 (concerning the demands to the TEC of investments) and was not approved by the Ministry of economics of Ukraine. This year the firm ’Stone and Webster’ went bankrupt, since they could not fulfil the contract on closing an AES in the USA. Such international intermediaries do not carry any responsibility for their conclusions!

Criticizing the project of widening MKh2/R4 and realizing the complexity of the situation in Ukraine, public organizations have their own convictions about the priorities of its development. The mainstream of the Ukrainian energy policy must become the increase of efficiency and the development of the maneuver potentials instead of the basic ones, especially of nuclear origin. This position is shared by Ukrainian citizens, who took part in the public hearings concerning the problems of energy production policy. Such hearings were held in 12 towns of Ukraine: Nikolayev, Severodonetsk, Chortkov, Iziaslav, Piriatin, Lugansk, Nizhin, Nikopol, Slavuta, Artemivsk, Cherkassy and Marganets. Nobody of the participants ever suggested the immediate closure of operating blocks of the AES, which testifies of their common sense. On the contrary, many expressed their protest against the widening of Kh2/R4. It is consistent with the results of the poll held by ’SOCIS-Gallup’: only 14% of the pollees supported this project.

The main conclusion of the hearing is as follows: THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE TO ECONOMICAL SPENDING OF ENERGY IN UKRAINE! Thus, all possible internal and external resources, in particular Western credits and grants, must be directed not to building additional nuclear mastodons, but to development of energy saving.

Respected people’s deputies! We beg of you: 1) to support Ukraine in keeping her obligation concerning the closure of ChAES; 2) to turn to the General Prosecutor’s office with the request about the prosecutor’s reaction to the violations of the Ukrainian laws in financind the widening of Kh2/R4; 3) to put the moratorium on the negotiations of the government with the Europe bank of reconstruction and development about the financing the Kh2/R4 project until the state ecological expertise gives the positive conclusion and the TEC of the project is prepared; 4) to discuss in the proper committees of the Supreme Rada the situation with the TEC and the complex state expertise of the project; 5) to publish the existing variant of NEPU-2010 and invite the public to participate in discussing the new variant of this NEPU-2010; 6) to hold Parliamentary hearings for the comparison of two policies: the widening of Kh2/R2 and the investments aimed at the increase of the efficiency; to suggest to local authorities to organize similar hearings in their regions and to use the results at the Parliamentary hearings; 7) to support the government measures aimed at ordering the energy market and the development of economical spending of energy; 8) to strengthen the relations of the Supreme Rada with the public; 9) to admit to the Parliamentary hearings a representative of the Coalition ’For the energy safety, access to information and citizens’ rights’, that includes our organizations, to reflect the opinion of the ecologically oriented part of the public.

Sincerely yours,

The head of the National ecological center of Ukraine Sergiy Tarashchuk

The head of the Ukrainian ecological association ’Zeleny svit’ Mykola Korobko

Frolov, the head of Severodonetsk militia, handed to the town court the claim about protection of this honor and dignity, but the order about his transfer to another post has been already issued. Now he will head the Kremlinsky district militia. But the events that had preceded this transfer were rather amusing.

Frolov became the head of Severodonetsk militia in 1995, and, according to the standard procedure, had to undergo the rotation this year, that is he had to be transferred to another place. Yet, according to the rumors spread in the town in summer, the long awaited by some people rotation might be postponed or cancelled at all. Unfortunately, having no document, we cannot be more specific.

That was why, in August, a group of pensioners turned to MP Yu. Ioffe with the appeal to interfere and thus promote the rotation. In their letter they described some events, which showed that Frolov was not a suitable person to head the local militia. In particular, they reminded how Frolov personally concealed the fact of beating a minor by the local mayor. As to dealing in hard currency, which unpunishable flourish at the town market, the authors of the list consider that it is possible only under the roof of militia, as well as the large-scale deals with non-ferrous metals in Severodonetsk.

The MP passed the letter to the Ministry of Interior. Maybe, that was the reason, why the rotation did occur. The reaction of the town authorities and personally Frolov was very acute. Town mayor V. Gritsyshin turned to the oblast administration with the request to cancel the order about the rotation, since, in his opinion, this is a nonsensical act. The Severodonetsk militia quickly carried out the investigation to find the author of the letter. Several persons, who signed this letter, were summoned to militia, where they wrote explanations under which circumstances they signed the document. Since usually complaints in our country return to those, who are complained at. This is one of the totalitarian methods to uproot both dissatisfaction and the dissatisfied.

Having found, as he though, the ’culprit’, the head of militia, through his uniformed subordinate, sent a copy of the suit appeal to pensioner O. Novokhatsky. By the way, Novokhatskiy has not received yet the subpoena.

In the personally undersigned application the militia head asked the court to acknowledge the information presented in the letter as false, he demands to publish the refutation in the newspaper ’Severodonetskie visti’ and fine the offender for the moral damage in the sum of one thousand hryvnas.

Certainly, representatives of our human rights protection organization will actively participate in the trial. And we shall certainly defend the pensioner, for we regard inadmissible the persecution of private individuals for their opinion of the authorities.

And now we want to pose several concrete questions:

1. What was the legal base for identifying the author of the letter, which was carried out by militiamen in their work hours, using the service transport and getting salary for this? Is not an insult of a militia head his personal affair that he, like all other citizens of Ukraine, must solve personally, according to the civil code instead of using militia as a personal property? So, is what has happened a misuse of power, and is it needed to start a criminal case against Frolov according to Article 165 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine?

2. Is the militia head competent enough in juridical questions, if he demands to refute the information not in the way stipulated by the civil code (namely, in the same way, in which the information was distributed), but in some other way? As far as we know, the letter actually signed by Novokhatsky was not published in any newspaper, then why the refutation must be published in a newspaper? Moreover, Frolov got the letter in an illegal way, which means that the letter may not be used as a proof at a trial.

3. It is difficult to believe, but the militia officer, who came to Novokhatsky and stayed in his flat for more than 10 minutes, refused to give his name! Maybe it would be more proper to speak not about the rotation of Frolov, but about his dismissal from the ranks of militia for professional incompetence, if his subordinates ignore the law at such an extent?

During the spring and autumn recruiting campaigns of 2000 representatives of the Kharkov Union of soldiers’ mothers took part in the work of the recruiting commission, where the reports of military commissars of many districts of the city and oblast were delivered.

The main problems, which arose during the campaign were the recruiting of the sick and non-coming of recruits to recruiting commissions.

The problems with the sick were, after all, somehow solved: they were given the opportunity of the additional medical examination, delays for treatment with the following examination to determine whether they became able-bodied. But the question of non-coming was comparatively new. When asked about the reason of non-coming the recruits referred to not receiving of call-up papers. The matter is that some changes and additions were introduced to the Ukrainian law ’On the total military duty and military service’. So, Article 15 of the new edition of this law stipulates: ’In the case of not receiving the call-up papers, recruits must come to recruiting commission during one month from the publication of the President’s decree’. I personally understand the boys, who cannot afford buying newspapers and thus are unable to learn about the President’s decree, which was published as early as in August. Besides, nobody instructed them on the changes and additions in the law, since in many schools there are no qualified teachers of military training. It is clear that such information must be conveyed to recruits-to-be by such teachers or teachers of jurisprudence. That is why in every educational establishment for younger pupils there must be ’a room of a recruit’. The necessary information concerning the operating laws concerning recruits and their rights, such as advice of the union of soldiers’ mothers, doctors and lawyers, must be available. Having in mind that one of the goals of the Kharkov Union of soldiers’ mothers is education, while the recruiting commissions are also interested in informing recruits, this form of informing recruits’ interested the military, who also would be able to convey the needed information to recruits. And during the work of the recruiting commission the oblast military commissar ordered to all heads of district recruiting commissions and district military commissars to participate at once in organizing such ’rooms of a recruit’.

On 28 November 2000 the public at last heard the long awaited report of Nina Karpacheva, the Ukrainian ombudsperson. MPs got a 400-pages long report on the state of observing human rights and freedoms in Ukraine and about the activities of the ombudsperson and her staff.

Without having the text, it is rather difficult to comment the content. Although, according to the law, the report had to be published in ’Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy’ (’Proceedings of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine’), it was printed only in a few copies for MPs and members of the state administration. Financial difficulties were given as a reason. It is understandable, where they found financing to print ’Visnyk Upovnovazhennogo z prav ludyny’ (’The ombudsperson’s Herald’) in a great number of copies on very expensive paper. It would be more reasonable to use financing for printing the report. It would be also desirable to get a report on expenditures, because reproaches were heard as to the optimal use of the finances.

So, without having the text, we shall use the information, which got to the press: the newspapers ’Dzerkalo tyzhnia’, ’Day’ and others.

According to Karpacheva, all the human rights in the Ukraine are abused systematically and massively. Since 14 April 1998, when she began to work as the ombudsperson, more than 100 thousand persons turned to her, including 260 MPs. 56% of the complaints concerned violations of civil, 20% -- of economic, 16% -- of social, 5% -- of personal, 3.3% -- of political rights. 2500 cases were taken into consideration. Every fifth of them was concluded positively for the complainer. The law-enforcing organs, the Ministry of Justice and general courts (especially as to too long consideration of cases) abuse human rights most often. In especially urgent cases Karpachova presented 128 cases to the President, Supreme Rada, state administration and other state structures.

The massive abuse of human rights is connected with the pauperization of the population. According to Karpacheva’s data, 80% of the potential clients cannot afford to use advocate’s services. Average wages, salaries and social payments are lower than the survival minimum, regulated by law; this is also a violation of the Constitution. Nowadays the survival minimum equals Hr 270, while, according to the data of the Ministry of statistics, the average monthly pay in per capita in January-September equals Hr 135.7.

Nina Karpacheva focused her attention on the application of torture during the detainment and investigation. The ombudsperson affirms that this is a daily routine. According to her data, during the last two years 194 criminal cases concerning such facts were started, 285 militiamen were brought to the criminal responsibility. These year 200 criminal cases were started.

Karpacheva also turned her attention to the problem of suicide. The monitoring showed the following results: from 1990 to 1999 the number of suicides was larger than 133 thousand, the number of children suicide also increased.

How can we assess the ombudsperson’s activities? Her data, as to the proportion of the complaint considered by her staff (20%) are, on the whole, expected. Ossibly, the results could be better if she established ties with human rights protection organizations. As far as I know, such ties are absent. Unfortunately, we heard nothing about the ombudsperson’s Constitution presentations, although there were many blatant abuses of the Constitution, and, correspondingly, there were many complaints to the ombudsperson. The public has insufficient information on the ombudsperson’s activities. Accidentally there appear brief notes in various newspapers, but it is too little. According to these notes, Karpacheva’s attention is focused on the slave-trade (especially women trade), and she is said to prepare a special report about this. I believe that there are other topics which deserve to be analyzed in special reports: insufficient protection of the poorest layers of the population by the state, the brutal violation of the freedom of expression, an extremely limited access to justice, and others.

Let us sum up: until now the authority of the ombudsperson has not reached the proper level. But Nina Karpacheva is not the only person to blame. Generally speaking, this is a result of the common nihilistic attitude to human rights on the side of the administration, society and man in the street.

On 19 December Mykola Rudenko, a writer, human rights protector, founder of the Ukrainian Helsinki group (UHG), has reached the age of 80 years. This day the overcrowded hall in the Kyiv city house of teachers greeted Mykola Rudenko. The celebration was organized by a member of the Kharkov Group for human rights protection Vasyl Ovsienko, he was also the presenter. The Kharkov Group joins the numerous congratulations and wishes and greets Mykola Rudenko with his birthday and awarding him by the title of the Hero of Ukraine. We wish him health, inspiration and new creations. We present below Mykola Rudenko’s biography.

Mykola Rudenko (R. in what follows) was born to a miner’s family in the village of Yuryevka, the Lugansk oblast. He early lost his father, who perished in the mine in 1927. The family with three children decided to go in for agriculture. All work hard, but in a year the land and the cattle had to be given to a kolkhoz, which R.’s mother had to join. The famine of 1932-33 was never forgotten by R. In the age of eight because of a trauma R. stopped to see with his left eye.

He began to compose verses in his childhood, some of them were printed in newspapers for pioneers. He was a winner of a competition and got a scholarship from the Ministry of Education, thanks to which entered the philological faculty of Kyiv University in 1939. He studied only to months. R. entered the Communist Party in 1939 after finishing the secondary school, at the mine, where once his father had worked. In 1939 was recruited to the army (he concealed that he could not see with his left eye). On 4 October 1941, in the first battle under Leningrad, he was gravely wounded with an explosive bullet. After a long cure he was appointed a political instructor (politruk) of a near-front hospital. Was awarded with the Red Star Order and several medals. On his demobilization in 1946 R. did not return to the university. Having published in 1947 the collection of verses ’Z pokhodu’ (From the march) he was accepted to the Union of Ukrainian Writers (UUW). Worked as a executive secretary in the publishing house ’Radianskiy pismennik’, was an editor of the magazine ’Dnipro’ (’The Dnieper’), the secretary of the Communist Party committee of the UUW, a member of the Kyiv city committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine.

R. is the author of many poetical collections, novels and narratives, in particular, ’Veter v litso’ (1955, The wind to the face), ’Posledniaya sablia’ (1959, The last saber), of science fiction books ’Chudesny bumerang’ (1966, The wonderful boomerang), ’Sledami kosmicheskoy katastrofy’ (1962, Following the track of a cosmic catastrophe).

At first he demonstrated some disobedience in 1949, when, in the form of criticizing ’cosmopolites’, the authorities destructed Jewish writers. They demanded negative characteristics for such writers from R. as the party secretary of the UUW. He clearly sabotaged this order, which, to tell the truth, did not facilitate the lot of the victims. That is why in autumn of 1949 the authorities attempted to exclude R. from the Communist Party for some ’shortage of the member fees’, but the meeting decided to limit the punishment to a stern reprimand. From 1950 R. did not occupy any ruling position, thus loosing all the privileges of the Soviet nomenclature. Nevertheless, ’I remained to stay at the party’, R. said later in an interview, ’I believed too much in the great affair of the Communist Party, I was a faithful Stalinist, I wrote many verses dedicated to our leader, I wrote even a long poem about Stalin’.

Dethronement of the ’personality cult’ of Stalin at the 20th Congress of the CPSU made a terrible impression on R. R. himself regarded his speech at the plenum of the directorate of the UUW as the beginning of his dissident activity. In this speech he accused the Soviet bureaucracy of the rusification of Ukraine, of creating the personality cult and of possible resurrection of this cult. In 1960 R. wrote a letter to Khrushchev about the necessity of reforming the existing state system under the new conditions. He wrote that the administration machine (the party must not solve all economic questions) and the election system needed urgent reforming. It was the result of ruminations that the root of the problem was not in Stalin; if a paranoiac and a sadist could head the state and party for so many years, then the doctrine laid in the foundation of the state was deeply wrong. Studying the ’Capital’ by Marx convinced R. that the Marxist doctrine was wrong at its fundamentals: in the understanding of the theory of the surplus value. This value is not created by the super-exploitation of a worker, but by the solar energy (photosynthesis), adjusted with the labor of a peasant and his cattle on land. Thus, as early as in the beginning of the 60s R. was convinced that the destruction of millions of Soviet people was not Stalin’s mistake, but was caused by mistakes of the Marxist theory. Well imagining the consequences of his act, on 18 April 1963 R. however sent a telegram to Khrushchev. It read: ’An avoidable catastrophe threatens to the Soviet people. It can be avoided only by the all-national heroic deed. I ask your audience to explain it in details. M. Rudenko’. Naturally, rumors spread that R. got crazy. At the same time R. took his records to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine (CC CPU). In the foreword to his records R. warned that if the party authorities did not reform the administration principles on democratic principles, then the country would await a terrible requital. After this the opinion about R. being crazy became indisputable. Recommendations followed to his relatives to treat R. During 14 later years R. methodically wrote letters to the CC CPU and the CC CPSU, where he explained his ideas; he never got any response. All these time R. was permanently surveyed by the KGB (tailing, wiretapping, etc.). On 14 March 1973 R. wrote a letter to V. Shcherbitskiy, the first secretary of the CC CPU, with copies to the KGB and UUW, protesting against wiretapping and demanding to stop it at once.

In the early 70s R. became friendly with O. Berdnik, supported him when Berdnik was forbidden to publish his works. In 1972 R. was forbidden to publish too.

In 1974 R. was expelled for the Communist party for ’metaphysical perversions of Marxism’. In 1975 he was also expelled from the UUW. R. had to sell his car and country house and found a job of a watchman.

In 1974 R. passed his manuscript ’Energiya progressa’ (The progress energy) to A. Sakharov; he did it through Z. Krakhmalnikova. While discussing this manuscript in Moscow, R. got personally acquainted with A. Sakharov and V. Turchin. After the discussion Sakharov suggested R. to rewrite his manuscript in order to make it more accessible to a massive reader; he promised to publish this treaty in samizdat. In this manner ’Ekonomicheskiye monologi’ (The economic monologues) were created that were published in samizdat in 1975. Besides, R. was proposed to join the Soviet group of the ’Amnesty International’ (AI), and he immediately started active work. On 18 April 1975, one month after R.’s participation in the first meeting of the AI, he was arrested, but soon released giving the promise not to leave the city.

When R. tried to restore his invalid pension, he was coerced to the psychic examination in psycho-neurological hospital for war invalids; it happened in February-March of 1976. Only thanks to doctors’ decency he was not put to the lunatic asylum. It was in the hospital, where R. wrote his poem ’Isoriya bolezni’ (The case history), which was published in samizdat under the title ’Ya vilny’ (I am free), and the poem ’Khrest’ (The cross) about the famine of 1932-33.

After consultations with P. Grigorenko, O. Meshko, O. Berdnik, L. Lukyanenko, I. Kandyba, O. Tykhiy, M. Matusevich, M. Marynovich and N. Strokata he gave an press-conference to foreign journalists at the Sakharov’s flat in Moscow on 19 November 1976. At this press-conference R. declared about the creation of the Ukrainian Helsinki group (UHG). In the same evening R.’s flat in Pushcha-Voditsa near Kyiv was stoned. That was the way, in which the KGB ’saluted’ the creation of the UHG. On 23-24 December 1976 R.’s home was searched; during the search 39 USD were stealthily put by the KGB. Soon R. published the UHG Declaration and Memorandum No. 1. In the part ’Typical violations of human rights’ of the Memorandum he made public the data about the famine of 1932-33, about the repressions of the 30s, the UPA destruction, the repressions against the figures of the sixties, the list of political concentration camps and Ukrainian political prisoners. In January 1977 R. wrote the first versions of the Memorandums Nos. 2 and 3.

On 5 February 1977 R. was arrested in Kyiv and sent by plane to the preliminary prison of the city of Donetsk, where the criminal case was started against him and O. Tykhiy.

The trial was held on 23 June – 1 July not in a courtroom, but in the ’Lenin’s room’ of the ’Smeshtorg’ office in the town of Druzhkovka of the Donetsk oblast. There was ’procedural justification for it’: O. Tykhiy was born and lived in the vicinity. The signboard was removed from the office. The questioned witnesses were removed from the improvised courtroom. One of the witnesses of the accusation was professor Illya Stebun, who once had been defended by R. from accusations of ’cosmopolitanism’. R. was condemned by the Donetsk oblast court, according to Article 62 part 1 of the Criminal Code of the UkrSSR, to 7 years of stern regime colony and 5 years of exile. R.’s publicist essays, fiction and oral sayings were qualified as slanderous. The court confined itself only to the confirmation of this accusations. For example, about ’Energiya progressa’ the verdict states that the work ’is that of an enemy, since it contains insinuations against the Soviet administrative and social structure’. The verdict also does not contain any proves that R. had intentions to undermine the Soviet regime.

Special orders of USSR and UkrSSR Glavlits (state censorship committees) R.’s creations were withdrawn from circulation (libraries and shops) – all in all 17 books.

R. did his tern in colonies ЖХ-386/19 (the settlement of Lesnoy) and ЖХ-385/3 (the village of Barashevo, Mordovia). At first, since R. was a 2nd group invalid of the WW2, he was driven to hard physical works.

In September 1981, after R.’s wife arrest, he was sent to perm political concentration camps in order not to permit them to meet.

R. was often put to the punishment block for the participation in prisoners’ strikes, tearing off the strips with his name and refusal to work. The head of the colony said: ’You have lost the right to be called a 2nd group invalid of war’. Having qualified R. as 3rd group invalid, the colony administration began to send him to hard works.

On 31 January 1984 R. was sent and in 5 March 1984 he came to the place of his exile, the settlement of Mayma of the Gorno-Altaysk autonomic oblast. Three years later, having finished her term, his wife joined him. R. was released in December 1987, but it appeared that they had no place to return: their apartment in Kyiv was confiscated after the arrest of R.’s wife. In the end of 1987 R. with his wife left for Germany and then for the USA. In 1988 he was deprived of the Soviet citizenship. He headed the Ukrainian representation of the UHG, later the UHS.

In September 1990 R. returned to Kyiv. His citizenship was returned, and he was rehabilitated. In 1993 he was awarded with the T. Shevchenko literature state prize for his novel ’Orlova balka’ (The eagle’s ravine). In 1996 R. was awarded the Order ’For services’ of 3rd grade for the great contribution to the development of the Ukrainian literature and for his human rights protection activities.

R. was a member of the Ethics commission of the Ukrainian Republican party (URP). Now he is a member of the Ukrainian Christian party.

In 1998 R.’s book ’Naybilshe dyvo – zhyttia. Spogady’ (The greatest miracle is life. Memoirs) was published.

A new three-volume edition of selected works by Mykhail Kheyfets was published in the historical and literary series devoted to the resistance to the totalitarian regime in the USSR. The series is published jointly by Kharkov Group for human rights protection and the publishing house ’Folio’.

Mykhail Kheyfets is a man of letters and publicist from Leningrad, who worked mainly in the genre of historical prose. In 1974 he was condemned to four years of incarceration and two years of exile for the foreword to a five-volume samizdat edition of Iosif Brodsky, who had been recently driven from the USSR.

From the captivity in the stern regime concentration camp Kheyfets managed to pass outside (and farther to Paris) two books: ’Mesto i vremia’ (’Place and time’, ’one of the most important documents of recent years’, according to the opinion of the magazine ’Kultura’, the main organ of the Polish emigration of that time) and ’Russkoye pole’ (’Russian field’). These two books came to the first volume of the selected works and they were not published before in the former USSR. The second volume contains the book ’Puteshestvie iz Dubrovlaga v Ermak’ (’The journey from Dubrovlag to Ermak’), written by Kheyfets during his exile in Kazakhstan, as well his comments to ’Zapiski nezagovorshchika’ (’Notes of a non-conspirator’) by Efim Etkind; these works have been published for the first time. In the appendix a remarkable, in my opinion, essay ’Iosif Brodskiy i nashe pokolenie’ (’Iosif Brodskiy and our generation’) is published. It is for this essay that Kheyfets was condemned. The essay was kept in the archives of the Leningrad KGB and extracted from there by V. Ioffe, the co-chairman of the Petersburg ’Memorial’ specially for our edition. The third volume contains those literary works about Soviet concentration camps that Kheyfets wrote abroad. Living in Israel, Kheyfets learned that almost all his colony mates, Ukrainian and Armenian national-democrats, were arrested again. In order to attract the attention of the world public to the prisoners of consciousness, he wrote two new books: ’Ukrainskie siluety’ (’Ukrainian silhouettes’) and ’Voennoplenny sekretar’ (’The POW secretary’), containing essays on the two Ukrainian poets Vasyl Stus and M. Rudenko, a journalist Viacheslav Chornovil, a leader of the National united party P. Ayrikian and other political prisoners. The book ’Ukrainian silhouettes’ was assessed in its time as one of the best descriptions of the Ukrainian resistance of 70-80s (in the American magazine ’World literature today’) and translated to Ukrainian and German. It should be noted that, as well in the case of Brodsky, Kheyfets at once appreciated Stus’ great poetical talent (’There is nobody better in the Ukrainian poetry now’). He specially learned the Ukrainian language in order to understand better Stus’ poetry, he even tried to translate it to Russian. The books are illustrated by campmates of Kheyfets: Boris Penson and Mark Dymshits, as well as a number of photos of political prisoners from the archives of the author, Kharkov Group for human rights protection and Moscow ’Memorial’. Mikhail Lemkhin, a well-known photographer now residing in San Francisco, sent several photos especially for our edition. Most of the illustrations is published for the first time.