"There is no ban on men traveling abroad," stated lawyer Rostislav Kravets, Part II.
The situation for draft evaders is deteriorating. At the beginning of the year, parliament passed a bill introducing the practice of absentee fines for violators of military registration rules. However, according to lawyer Rostislav Kravets, even the "old" fines from the TCK are outside the legal framework.
What does the TCK search mean, do courts cancel fines for violations of military registration rules, and why is the exit of men abroad during wartime not regulated by law? Read about this in the second part of the interview with the lawyer.
Is it legal to film TCK employees? Why is Kravets referred to as the "devil's advocate," and do people ask him for help to "dodge"? Find out more in the first part of the interview.
"Black Hole" of Legislation
– In May, the legislation on mobilization was updated. In your opinion, what's wrong with the new law?
– Any changes and reforms are carried out with the sole purpose of avoiding accountability for what is not done. The existing legislation, both before and after this new law, is sufficient, yet it continues to be reformed endlessly. In three years of war, there has not been a single instance where a deferment from mobilization or reservation has adhered to the rules that existed three months prior. Each time, something new comes up. Why? So that no one is held accountable.
I believe the changes that have been made have further harmed the state and eroded public trust in it. They have stripped individuals of the opportunity to resign from military service. For example, changes were made, as I mentioned with Marianna B. and Fedor V. (who insisted on this) that if a child is disabled, the individual has the right to a deferment but cannot resign if there are other individuals who can care for the child. What was the purpose of this? To make everyone hate you? The same applies if there are close relatives with disabilities.
Similar issues arise with the liquidation of the MSEC. Why? What will be different? Everyone believes that people received illegal disabilities. Then hold them accountable! Why aren't you holding them accountable? No! We will destroy all databases so that no one is responsible. The same goes for prosecutors. When this scandal broke, I immediately said to wait before condemning them all, because when they are checked, it may turn out that they are indeed disabled. It turned out (the Office of the Prosecutor General, in response to a request from the Anti-Corruption Action Center, could not confirm the fact of unlawful disability claims by any of the 67 prosecutors from the Khmelnytskyi prosecutor's office, — Editor ) Who apologized to the prosecutors? Have they proven that they illegally obtained disabilities? No. If they obtained them unlawfully, then please hold them accountable and recover the funds they received. No. Let's liquidate the MSEC and the same people will evaluate the loss of functionality.
– Another concern for people is the TCK search. When the police mention this, it leads to much debate: should they detain individuals for this or not, as it is an administrative offense?
– This is a "black hole." As of today, no one can clearly tell you where the search comes from. A person is driving, gets stopped, and is told: "You are wanted." They update "Reserve+" and see that they are not wanted. Just wait, it will come. And 2-3 hours later, the notice appears in "Reserve+" that they are wanted. Who entered that? Who investigated this?
Well, let's assume everything was entered correctly, the person failed to show up somewhere, and the TCK issued a search (by the way, legislation regarding this search database has not yet been adopted). What does the search entail? It is the search for a person who has committed an administrative offense. According to the law, the police must detain this person and deliver them to the TCK. If the individual does not want to go there voluntarily, the police must draft a protocol for administrative detention, call for pro bono legal assistance (if the person needs legal help), and then deliver them to the TCK, here’s the catch (!), for drafting a protocol on violations of military registration rules. However, there is a problem. According to the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses (Articles 210 and 210 with a note "1"), these fines do not apply if the owner of the Unified State Register of Military Obligated has access to other state registers. Period.
The only thing a person can currently be fined for is the loss of military registration documents.
We are proposing new laws on "absentee fines" (the corresponding bill No. 12093 was passed in the first reading, — Editor). It seems that people are living in a parallel reality. You yourselves passed this law in May and increased the fines from 850 hryvnias to 17,000. At the same time, initially, it was the Ministry of Defense that stated there were no grounds for applying fines because they have access to the registers. So, they have access to the registers, cannot apply fines, but the Verkhovna Rada introduces changes to enable the application of fines. Is this some kind of absurdity?
– But then, these fines are not always overturned in courts.
– We have a 99% overturn rate. We recently lost one fine (the first one we lost), but I believe the personality of the judge played a role. I don’t know how a fine can be upheld when the law is written in such a way.
"There is no ban on leaving the country"
– Let's address the topic you often discuss: the ban on men leaving the country. It seems that there is no ban. Look at Article 33 of the Constitution: "Everyone who is lawfully present on the territory of Ukraine is guaranteed freedom of movement, free choice of residence, and the right to leave the territory of Ukraine freely, except for restrictions established by law."
– This is important. "Established by law." Show me at least one law that prohibits leaving the country. There is none. There is a law on the crossing of the Ukrainian border by citizens. There is Article 6, which outlines cases in which exit is prohibited. There is no case related to the introduction of martial law. There is not a single case prohibiting men aged 18 to 60 from leaving.
– But there is the law "On the legal regime of martial law"…
– And what does it say?
– Article eight. The military command, together with military administrations, may "establish, in the manner determined by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, a special regime for entry and exit, restricting the freedom of movement of citizens."
– And where is it established?
– Well, where? There is a Cabinet resolution .
– Can you find the word "prohibited" in it? Find the word "prohibited" in the resolution. You won't find it. It says "permitted" (the specified Cabinet resolution lists categories of individuals entitled to cross the border during martial law, — Editor). We are a democratic country. In a democratic country, everything is permitted unless explicitly prohibited. If we were a totalitarian state, then indeed, everything is prohibited unless allowed. There are decisions on this matter from both the Constitutional Court and international courts. Where is the ban on leaving the country? There is none. No one has established it.
We are currently waiting for a decision from the European Court of Human Rights, where two students were prohibited from leaving the country. We should receive a conclusion around March.
– When this conclusion is received, what will it affect?
– Nothing. It will be a complete disregard for human rights and laws.
– Ideally, how should it be?
– Well, look at what they write when refusing to leave the country? "Not all documents were provided." Period. What do you mean "all"? The Supreme Court has finally issued a [ruling] stating that it is necessary to clearly indicate which specific documents were not provided. What is missing? Which documents are not properly processed?
There are cases where they take your passport, it disappears somewhere, they tear out a page from it, and then say that you have a counterfeit passport, as this page is missing, so we cannot let you through.
– Okay, if everything is resolved by law, why is this law not in place? In your opinion?
– Four bills have been proposed during this time. Even in that law (on military registration, which came into effect in May 2024, — Editor), there was