Who is guilty in the rotation of the head of Severodonetsk militia?
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?