login | registration | forgot the password
today 26.09.2016 16:56
(by Kyiv time)

navigation

Kharkiv Human Rights Group Social Networking



MINISTRY OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS OF UKRAINE AND HUMAN RIGHTS

During the 2013, the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine continued to function as a "complex" violator of human rights, because reforming strategic objectives, working principles and structure of this major law enforcement agency were not reviewed and dealt with by the state. At the same time, the negative trends in the activity of the MIA of Ukraine hampered its further development; for all that these same trends promoted awareness of the public and inspired public monitoring of the militia.

Among the shortcomings of the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs system it is possible to distinguish the following.

Abandonment of reformation

The Law of 2002, the overall strength of the Ministry of Internal Affairs was determined to the tune of 324,400 servicemen, including 240 200 of the so-called "certified" personnel (rank and file and command personnel), i.e. uniformed persons who have special ranks. Besides, the Ministry of Internal Affairs includes internal security troops with the level of strength of 33,300 as of December 30, 2005, including 32,700 servicemen.[1]

In this way, in 2005, per 100,000 of population there were 577 militiamen / servicepersons who could maintain public order with the use of standard-issue weapons and special facilities. This figure was 1.9 times the average number of police officers per 100,000 of population of European countries (300 policepersons) and 2.6 times higher than the amount recommended by the UN or 222 policepersons officers per 100,000 of population.

The course of European integration allowed Ukraine to reduce slightly the number of "uniformed persons", which on 21/11/2013 permitted V. Zakharchenko to inform about the actual strength of the Ministry of Internal Affairs as 171,000 rank and file and command personnel.[2] Together with 27 210 servicepersons of internal troops it made 198,210 of uniformed personnel who have special or military ranks. However, even this number was 1.5 times the average European rate and was almost twice as much as recommendations of the UN anticipated.

Overall, in 2013 Ukraine the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs employed 261,000 people including personnel of internal troops, cadets and civilians. With 21,840,000 of economically active population this means that every 83rd working citizen today receives a salary from the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine.

Among many projects of reforming the Ministry of Internal Affairs the last attempt was associated with the draft law "On Police" dated 03.07.2012 and even the presentation of the new militia uniform.[3] The project was based on the recommendations of the Coordination Center for Implementation of Economic Reforms under the President, which did not foresee any major changes in the functioning of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, apart from the "takeover" by the latter of the units of the Ministry of Emergency.[4] The project was developed in typically corporate manner, without discussion and consultation with the public. It was assumed that the reform of the Ministry of Internal Affairs would start at year-end in 2012, immediately after the entry into force of the new Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.

On April 13, 2013 ended the deadline set by the President when the Ministers of Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Justice had to submit the worked-out Reformation conception, since Ukraine had committed to the European Council to reform its law enforcement agencies by 2015. However, after meeting of O. Lavrynovych (Ministry of Justice), V. Zaharchenko (MIA) and V. Yanukovych in April 2013 it was announced that the reform of the Ministry of Internal Affairs would be postponed for 2015. This position was not changed even after later mass protests caused by brutality of militia against the participants of the "Vradiyivka March" and Yevromaidan.

Militarized model of activity

Despite the transition of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to the contract basis and cancellation as of 2014 of the compulsory service for young people, the Ministry of Internal Affairs retained the draft procedure for the internal forces. In addition, to improve the quality of manning of internal troops by draftees, the MIA of Ukraine in 2013 introduced the assignment of military units to educational establishments "in order to organize military and patronage work aimed at military professional orientation and patriotic education of youth".[5] Moreover, the MIA's concern about clearly militarized orientation of training runs counter to the course at developing civil service model of the MIA declared in 2011.

The cancellation of draft confirmed the confidence of the armed forces to overcome potential external dangers in case of occurrence; however, the actions of the MIA testified to the opposite or lack of confidence in the ability to carry out militia functions without constant involvement of military units. Thus, the population of Ukraine is under threat of being held hostage in a situation when the Ministry of Internal Affairs having its own armed forces beyond the control of the minister of defense may become an independent player in the implementation of the state military doctrine. Especially, as the internal troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs are armed not only with small arms and armored vehicles, but also with grenade launchers, AAC guns, artillery equipment with artillery, mortar and grenade-launcher ammunition[6].

In addition, the events of 2013 drew attention to the fact that the "traditional" mobilization of internal troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs to maintain public order is not only morally unacceptable in peacetime, but also directly contradicts article 17 of the Constitution, according to which “the military units cannot be used by anybody to limit the rights and freedoms of citizens.” Given the fact that the troops in the modern state have very specific purposes, at the level of parliament and the government the question was brought up to withdraw military forces from the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine and reallot them to the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Defense.[7]

Along with the wide use at its own discretion of its own military units, the Ministry of Internal Affairs during 2013 continued to stick to mostly militarized tactics in maintenance of public order. Despite the experience acquired during the “Euro-2012” concerning the non-conflict management of mass actions, in 2013 during management of peaceful assemblies the personnel of the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs resorted to mostly brutal variants of response like in the case of mass riots. This included numerous cases of termination of peaceful assemblies in the event of minor breaches of public order by individual members of assembly; demonstrative readiness to launch more drastic coercive methods, equipping personnel according to instructions reserved for the case of mass unrest only, widespread detention of peaceful assembly participants in situations which gave no obvious cause for such response; actively collect on-line information about participants of peaceful assemblies.

Even in his public speeches the Minister of Internal Affairs to his staff used the word "activist" as an equivalent for the words "storm troopers" and "provocateurs", which should paid particular attention to[8].

In September 2013 one of the consequences of militarized pattern of activity became the insistent proposals of the MIA to make Ukrzaliznytsia to enter passport data in the passenger’s ticket. The Ministry of Internal Affairs gave grounds to it like protection of human rights and combating terrorism and necessity to “find people who present operational interest” and “identify persons who are exposed to the observation control”.[9] In this way the MIA of Ukraine ignored the fact that there are simply no juridical definition of these terms in Ukrainian legislation, and the use of so -called “observation control" in the practice of Russian law enforcers the European Court ruled illegal as early as in 2011, because it violated the right to privacy (“Shymovolos against the Russian Federation"[10]).

Opacity of financial activities

According to art. 24 of the Law of Ukraine "On Militia" funding and logistical support for the militia are carried out at the expense of the State Budget of Ukraine, funds received under the contracts from the ministries and other central executive authorities, public bodies, enterprises, institutions, organizations and individuals, as well as other sources not prohibited by law.

However, the current implementation of these legal provisions is problematic for two reasons. First, the annual budgetary financing of MIA does not exceed 40% of the prescribed amount. Second, the Ukrainian legislation contains no juridical clarification of what "the sources not prohibited by law" are, which can be used by law enforcement agencies.

For a long time the MIA kept trying to tackle these problems in two ways. The easiest way was to increase the annual application for state funding which brought the MIA budget up from ₴11,167 mln. in 2009 to ₴15,056 mln. in 2013. In 2014, instead of tackling the system problem of chronic underfunding, the MIA followed the traditional road again asking for more taxpayer's money up to the tune of ₴18.3 bn.

However, despite the maximum closedness of financial operations of the MIA for public control, there are notorious cases of budget squandering. Thus, in November 2013 the Kharkiv State Motor Vehicle Inspection Management entered into an agreement to purchase three upmarket Toyota Camry cars not only at value of complete set, but with ₴36,486 overpayment at that[11].

Another way to cover the deficit financing consists in introducing a wide range of paid administrative services of MIA and formation of the so-called “special fund”. Procedures of the latter, as shown by 2011 survey, are not transparent to the public and are related to systemic violations of the rights of citizens (soliciting “donations”, unreasonably high tariffs, monopolist pricing, and lack of service standards). Due to these circumstances every year this special fund can accumulate sums up to ₴2.5 bn, with which later the MIA covers the lack of budgetary financing[12].

According to the survey of ten regional centers of Ukraine, every third citizen (33.9%), who received administrative services from the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, considers this system inefficient because of constant lines, complexity and intricacy of procedures; difficulties with finding reliable information on the procedures, fees, contacts with professionals. Every year at least two million people suffer from the imperfections of administrative services of the SMVI and MIA licensing system.

The experts maintain that the existing scheme of service for citizens rendered by the MIA is actually outside the legal regulation which creates a favorable ground for abuse and manipulation. 28.8% of respondents had to pay bribes only for the registration and re-registration of vehicles, 17.3% had to do the same for the issue of driving licenses for the right to drive vehicles.

Unadapted to the requirements of state laws departmental acts have no safeguards against corruption, bureaucratic indifference and negligence of officials. The opacity of procedures, involvement of commercial intermediary entities for providing services, introduction of associated paid services, and lack of control over the quality of their rendering turned Ukrainian militia from the agency protecting rights of consumers of administrative services into one of the biggest offenders in this field[13].

Unaccountability to civil society

Formally following the legal requirements regarding open information policy and advisory work of the agencies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine in general has failed to change its closed and biased policy in dealing with the public.

On 03.12.2013 the MIA registered its Order no. 230 about the revised procedure for conducting official inquiry into an incident. Despite numerous proposals of NGOs and expert advice, the wording of this document completely ignores the possibility of participating in the investigation of the applicant who is a victim of the illegal actions of the militia. Under the terms of the order, the victim can only be questioned to the point of her/his application; however, s/he has no right to engage counsel or experts to study the materials of the investigation, provide additional materials and even get a full response on the outcome of the investigation.

The MIA’s order no. 509 of 27.05.2013 repealed the activity of mobile groups for monitoring of fulfilling the rights and freedoms in the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs which is the only form of public control over the militia places of imprisonment that had been operating since 2006. The order was worked out in secrecy without public discussion and without suggestion of alternative forms of public control over the militia. The official representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs explained the cancellation of the order by the development of the national preventive mechanism against torture (NPM) in the Office of the Ombudsman ignoring the very fact that the NPM is a form of parliamentary rather than public control. The same ideology of NPM provides assistance to various forms of public control over the authorities.

During the 2013 the civil observers recorded numerous violations of the principle of public accountability by the militia officers during public performance of their duties. Usually it showed itself in the refusal contrary to the Law of Ukraine “On Militia” to identify themselves and their positions when communicating with citizens, in illegal banning on photo and video in order to avoid personal identification.

During peaceful actions, the problem of anonymity and unaccountability of the personnel of the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs found itself in the limelight.

Thus, during the peaceful gathering near the Mezhyhirska residence of the President of Ukraine on April 15, 2013 the public observers recorded the group of people in similar black uniforms without insignia. These men wore bulletproof vests, carried rubber batons, walkie-talkies and other special means of passive defense. The group operated in cooperation with the personnel of the Headquarters of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine in Kyiv Oblast, militia unit "Berkut" and persons in civilian clothes with means of video recording and walkie-talkies. The group actively interfered with the holding of peaceful assembly, impeded the free movement of participants, and then, without any warning, along with other officers of the bodies of MIA of Ukraine, blocked a group of protesters, and surrounded them without any requirements or explanations. Moreover, the unknown persons in black uniforms arrested one of the activists of the peaceful assembly and took him to the service bus of a body of MIA. In response to official requests all law enforcement agencies of Ukraine denied the belonging of unknown people to their employees. Only after five-month-long correspondence the Headquarters of the MIA of Ukraine in Kyiv Oblast had to admit that unknown persons were employees of their unit "Berkut".[14]

The events of forceful dispersal of "Vradiyivka March" and Yevromaidan only accentuated the problem after the Prosecutor General acknowledged that the investigation, even having relevant video recording, was not able to identify individual employees of "Berkut", which illegally and very severely had beaten the participants of the peaceful assembly[15].

Corruption among the personnel of the bodies of MIA

Illegal getting posts and special ranks as perhaps the only kind of "inside"  corruption in the in the bodies of MIA up to 2005 has now given way to a developed system of "tariffs" covering almost all areas of activity of law enforcement bodies.

Due to the open letter of the personnel of the Headquarters of the State Motor Vehicle Inspection in Kirovohrad Oblast dated May 2013 to the Minister of Internal Affairs it cropped up that every SMVI crew had to hand their chiefs ₴400 out of daily take of bribes; weekends and holidays are sold by chiefs of local STA companies for ₴250 and ₴3,000 respectively[16]. At the same time the SMVI personnel of Ternopil Oblast addressed their the minister and wrote that after the shift each crew had to hand in money to the tune of $500, as well as weekly and monthly delivery of "shadow revenue" for leaders at all levels of regional SMVI agencies[17].

In an open letter the employees of the Bakhchisarai Regional Department published the fact that the chief of the regional department had forced them to hand him ₴5-6,000 from each service[18]. In September 2012, a similar statement was made by one ​​half of the personnel of Sumy "Berkut" complaining of their chief’s extortion; then the “Berkut” chiefs staged re-certification and transferred the initiators of the letter to other subunits.

The above failings motivated a number of MIA bodies’ personnel to commit crimes and offenses, because of which the Ministry of Internal Affairs, as the Minister acknowledged, received during 2013 about 195,000 appeals regarding misconduct of law enforcers, or nearly one complaint per certified employees of a MIA body[19]. During the first nine months of 2013 the public prosecution bodies investigated about 11,176 criminal cases concerning the personnel of MIA bodies and 429 cases were submitted to arbitration applying to 547 militia officers.

The corrupt practices and illegal use of violence, especially in the course of the investigation, remain the main components of “militia’s” crime.

Despite the introduction of the state system of secondary legal aid and guaranteed providing lawyers to all detainees the dishonest part of personnel of the MIA bodies quite easily adapted to new conditions. The 2013 poll of lawyers showed the wide use by the personnel of the MIA bodies of illegal practices: falsifying time of detention, pre-trial investigation and collection of evidence against a person without informing her/him about it; preventing information of the lawyer, untimely information of a lawyer on conducted investigative measures, applying pressure on people to make them to refuse from the services of a lawyer and tampering with a lawyer. The interdepartmental actions taken by MIA proved to be ineffective in relation to these phenomena[20].

In 2013 the media reported 68 cases of violence by law enforcement officials as well as nine deaths of citizens that occurred as a result of being kept in militia establishments or communicating with militia officers.

In the summer of 2013, three operatives and the deputy chief of the Sector of the Criminal Investigation of Melitopol City District Militia used the shocker to make the 26- year-old district resident to confess to stealing. Later on the victim's body 30 thermal burns were found. After the event, all four law enforcers kept company and quitted the city department of militia. At first, their actions were qualified as “abuse of power”, but in the end the former militia officers were handed a notification of suspected “torture committed by a group of persons acting in collusion”. The court ruled a preventive measure for the defendants in the form of collateral. For their temporary freedom two former militia officers stood bail to the tune of ​​80 times the minimum wage (97,440), other two militiamen paid 57,350. The former law enforcement officers fully deny their guilt.[21]

During the first 9 months of 2013 the prosecuting authorities conducted 3031 pre-trial investigations of criminal cases against law enforcement bodies personnel accused of abuse. Of these, according to art. 365 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (abuse of power) 2,638 proceedings, art. 364 (abuse of power) 192 and under art. 127 (torture) 48 proceedings. However, only 49 criminal proceedings concerning 96 militia officers were passed to court with imputation of guilt. Of these, 43 proceedings against 80 people were under art. 365 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (abuse of power) and 5 proceedings against 15 militia officers under art. 127 (torture).

As can be seen from the distribution of the proceedings, the prosecution continued to classify most of the facts of brutal treatment as abuse of authority or misuse of power avoiding art. 127 (torture). This erroneous practice has long been hiding the real extent of the problem of torture, which is not conducive to criminal prosecution of violence by militia officers. Although only in 2013, according to the decisions of the European Court, as compensation for brutal treatment by the militia the state had to pay ₴1,210,000.

Owing to the vast wave of protest actions (12% of which occurred because of the illegal actions of law enforcement agencies) 2013 revealed new features of violations of human rights for the realization of peaceful assembly. The first feature relates to the failure to proper mediation of the personnel of MIA bodies with the organizers and participants of peaceful assemblies. The vast majority of NGO activists' reports stated that in 2013 the interaction of the bodies of the MIA of Ukraine and participants of peaceful actions was limited to informing about the line of march and fact-finding about application for the event.

Under conditions of potential conflict, no one conducted mediation and purposeful negotiations with the participants of protest rally because of the lack of trained professionals in the MIA bodies. And in some cases interaction and mediation took place rather due to personal qualities of individual militia officers than because of standard legal requirements of the MIA of Ukraine. And in some cases interaction and mediation took place rather due to personal qualities of individual militia officers than because of standard legal requirements of the MIA of Ukraine.

The second feature is connected with the wide involvement by political forces of mercenary athletes who have committed violent actions against protesters in most oblasts of Ukraine[22]. It is significant that in so doing during the strongmen's provocations the militiamen were trying to "ignore" the illegal actions of mercenaries and were indulgent to lawbreakers.

Uzhhorod "titushky" beat journalists in the building of the City Rada

On Uzhhorod Day observed on September 28 the Mayor's guards and guys in tracksuits beat reporters and girls-students and threatened them with murder on the premises of  Uzhhorod City Rada. The militia led by deputy chief of public security militia Uzhhorod City Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Vyacheslav Hryhoryev was present during the incident and did not defend the journalists and did nothing to stop or detain the attackers[23].

"The "titushky" have brutally beaten the activists of "Batkivshchyna" and "Svoboda": the militia did not even try to detain them,

On 25.10.13 in Kharkiv Oblast during a protest near the City Rada of Chuhuyiv against illegal land allocation the unknown athletes-'titushky" brutalized activists of All-Ukrainian Associations "Svoboda" and "Batkivshchyna". Ten youngsters of athletic appearance broke fishing rods with the party and state flags, broke the camera of the press service employee and inflicted injuries to several activists. The militia did not even try to detain the attackers[24].

The above errors of judgment and negative trends became most clearly evident during the events of Yevromaidan when by brutal force the special units of militia and internal troops unlawfully inflicted injuries to about 200 participants of a peaceful assembly and media professionals. The reason for this was a series of unprofessional and illegal actions by the Ministry of Internal Affairs:

-        the incompetent assessment of the situation and incompetent actions of the participants of assembly as such which require urgent mass use of physical force;

-        the body of MIA unprofessionally chose the tactics of forcible suppression resulting in unduly injured protesters and law enforcers;

-        the "interference situations" were realized with serious violations of legal requirements, established tactics, and rules for the use of special means.

As a result, militia officers and interior troops massively maimed civilians with repeated blows with rubber truncheons on blow-prohibited areas of the body, fists and feet instead of stabilizing the situation by blocking and removal provocateurs from the crowd. Instead of resorting to the international standards of the means of mediation and distance influence the employees of "Berkut" acted without warning and using only hand-to-hand methods of fighting, which far and away increased the risk of injury to both sides. Some "Berkut" servicemen, contrary to law, were armed with cold weapons[25].

Almost all detainees stated Berkut’s ignoring not only their rights to communication with relatives and informing their lawyers, but their rights to first aid as well. At the same time there were reported cases of ill-treatment of servicemen of internal troops who because of criminal negligence of their commanders were forced to stay for two hours without adequate protection in a situation of collision with aggressive provocateurs and to deter the attackers from the obstacle zone for a long time without relief for heating, as a result of which part of the soldiers got injuries and got their extremities frostbitten.

The course of events also helped to ascertain the involvement of the MIA bodies in organizing provocations against participants of Yevromaidan both personally and through the promotion of illegal actions of titushky mercenaries[26].

RECOMMENDATIONS

1.    The Parliament of Ukraine should initiate the development of optimal models of reform of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine with simultaneous calculation of redistribution of state and local budgets, formation of expert groups on reform and introduction of regular consultations with the public.

2.    To settle conflicts that arise at the level of constitutional provisions regarding appropriateness of involving military forces (internal forces) to protect public order in peacetime and in the absence of emergencies, which necessitate the use of troops.

3.    The Government of Ukraine shall step up its efforts to create the State Bureau of Investigation as specified by the Criminal Procedure Code. Given that the functions of the State Bureau should include the investigation of complaints against illegal actions of the militia, this body must meet five principles established by the European Court, namely independence, adequacy, timeliness, public scrutiny and participation of victims in the proceedings. It would be reasonable to provide for in the structure of the State Bureau the separate department to investigate deaths in custody and deaths due to the use of lethal force by state agents.

4.    The Government of Ukraine shall consider introducing a system of joint with NGOs monitoring of MIA’s activity with greater involvement of the public and NGOs to work in an advisory and consultative bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, experts and temporary working groups, which shall not be limited to existing forms of public councils.

5.    The Government of Ukraine shall improve the mechanism of state statistics so as to provide for separate statistics on crimes that include elements of torture as provided for in article 1 of the Convention against Torture and other brutal, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment and compulsory periodic publication of these statistics.

6.    The Government of Ukraine shall adjust the legal principles and mechanisms of administrative services rendered by the units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine providing for their transparency, protection against monopoly and corruption risks, clear system of quality standards for services and monitoring of their rendering.

7.    The Ministry of Justice shall provide for the implementation of a wide range of legislative activity aimed at:

-        amending the provisions of article 127 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (torture) in order to meet the requirements of the UN Convention against torture;

-        possibility of initiation and conduct of independent public investigations in  support for the Office of the Ombudsman concerning the incidents that occurred with the participation of law enforcement agencies;

-        adjusting the terms of the involvement of law enforcement staff without uniforms to maintain order during peaceful assemblies;

-        proper identification of every law enforcement officer in the performance of his duties in uniform;

-        reduction of discretionary powers of law enforcement officials to restrict freedom of peaceful assemblies.

8.    The Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Interior Affairs of Ukraine shall together regulate the procedure of internal investigations of complaints of citizens so as to fully ensure the protection of the rights of the injured person to a fair and effective trial. Thus, in particular, they shall provide for:

-        full participation of the applicant in an official investigation into her/his case (possibility of study of the investigation materials and their evaluation, presence during questioning of the persons involved in the investigation, possibility of submission of supplementary materials at any stage of the investigation, etc.);

-        the applicant's opportunity to engage in internal investigation of a lawyer or other expert in the field of law, human rights activists and independent experts;

-        the possibility of removal of police officers from their duties for the time of the official investigation (where it is necessary to ensure the objectivity of investigation);

-        implementation of measures to protect against pressure from militiamen applicant and other persons involved in internal investigation.

9.    Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine shall initiate analysis of departmental normative legal documents in the field of maintaining public order and security of citizens during exercise by citizens of their right to freedom of peaceful assembly in order to implement the recommendations set out in the “European Code of Police Ethics”, Declaration “On Police”, and OSCE guidelines on freedom of peaceful assemblies.

10.MIA of Ukraine shall improve the management system to ensure effective interaction with of the chiefs of the MIA bodies with participants of peaceful assemblies ensuring compliance with mandatory gender parity in the formation of groups of mediation.

11.Analyze and, if necessary, upgrade the system of training of the personnel of special units and patrol service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in the domain of human rights while maintaining public order during holding of peaceful assemblies, protection of participants of peaceful assemblies and the basics of mediation, grounds and conditions for the use by the personnel of the MIA bodies of special means and physical force.

12.To charge the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine with developing canonic standards for promoting mass events based on their intensity, potential hazards, economic expedience and other factors ensuring the observance of the principles of non-discrimination and proportionality when it is necessary to limit the freedom of peaceful assemblies, maintenance of free holding spontaneous peaceful meetings.

 

[1] Law of Ukraine dated January 10, 2002 no. 2925 -III "On the general structure and overall strength of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine"

[2] “Ministry of Internal Affairs will become the European-standard agency” // www.kmu.gov.ua

[3] The Bill of Ukraine dated 03.07.2012, no. 10688, "On Police" initiated by V. Hrytsak, V. Konovaliuk

[4] Ukrainian Militia is Being Renamed Police and Starts Politicking // vesti.ua

[5] Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs on August 30, 2013 no. 1493/ 24025 "On Approval of the Regulation on the organization of military and patronage work in the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine"

[6] Order of the Ministry of Ukraine of 02.04.2013 no. 330 "On approval of the Regulation on arms service of internal troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine"

[7] Draft Law on Amending the Law of Ukraine "On Militia" (regarding the re-allotment of internal troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs to the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine) no. 3765 from 12.17.2013 initiated by Pinzenyk V.M.

[8] Address of V. Zakharchenko to his staff // Moments no.11 (“Imenev Zakonu”, no. 48 (5902)

[9] Letter to the Department of Transport Militia of the Mia of Ukraine dated 19.09.2013 no. 23/2-643 “About proposals to implement a software system “Rozshuk-Magistral” // www.pravda.com.ua

[10] Ruling of the European Court of Human Rights dated 21.06.2011 " Shimovolos vs. Russian Federation" [Rus., Eng.] // base.consultant.ru; ECHR acknowledged illegal creation of militia DB "Storozhevoy kontrol" // www.privacy-info.ru

[11] Segodnia Daily / “Upmarket cars for the SMVI”, 12.11.2013.

[12] "Monitoring of proprietary right in the activities of the State Automobile Inspection of the Ministry of Interior of Ukraine: analysis of violations and finding ways to solve problems", "monitoring of the right of property in the activities of the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs: status and actual problems" conducted by Odesa Human Rights Group "Veritas", 2011.

[13] Administrative services of STA and MIA: analysis of legal principles of rendering services and results of sociological research. Scientific and practical edition - Kyiv , 2013 - 92 p.

[14] www.youtube.com, http://newcitizen.org.ua/news/taiemnicyu-lyudey-u-chornomu-z-mezhigirya-rozkrito

[15] Pshonka is for the ID insignia on the uniforms of “Berkut” soldiers // www.radiosvoboda.org

[16] To be manacled with one’s own handcuffs. Militiamen on problems insidethe MIA. Valeriya Burlakova // tyzhden.ua

[17] The SMVI wages war on corruption and overloads the Minister accusing its chiefs. The new appeal was submitted by the personnel of Ternopil SMVI, 13.05.13 // ord-02.com

[18] Bakhchisarai Regional Department: nothing unusual, just ordinary militia corruption // www.ukr.net

[19] “MIA will become a European-type agency” // www.kmu.gov.ua

[20] The joint Order of the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine of 26.03.2013 no. 289/540/5 “On Measures concerning compliance with the legislation during the arrest without the decision of the investigating judge, trial of those suspected of committing a crime, and the choice of preventive measure for the said suspects as detention during criminal proceedings”; Order of the Ministry of Ukraine of 07.08.2013 no. 750 “On the issues of activity of commissions on ethics and official discipline in the bodies of MIA”

[21] The militiamen who wrested admission of guilt from the prisoners with the shocker are tried in Melitopol  //censor.net.ua

[22] The first resonant case was officially registered on May 18, when a group of unknown persons during the rally "Rise up, Ukraine!" in Kyiv attacked the protesters and injured journalist Olga Snitsarchuk and photographer Vlad Sodel . After identification and criminal prosecution of one of the attackers, V. Titushko, such mercenary athletes were called "titushky".

[23] job-sbu.org

[24] censor.net.ua

[25] Berkut has armed itself with knives // http://www.socportal.info/foto/berkut-vooruzhilsya-nozhami

[26] In Kyiv drunk militiamen attack people // uapress.info; A drunk captain and militia inspector provoke the Yevromaidan //

tvi.ua; Maidan activists detained a militiaman with company who had pistol-lighter // http://www.unn.com.ua/uk/news/1281437-aktivisti-na-maydani-zatrimali-militsionera-z-tovarischami-yaki-mali-pistolet-zapalnichku.