On 8-9 June 2013, the UN Human Rights Committee reviewed Ukraine’s 7th periodic report on the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and on 23 July 2013, during the 3002nd meeting (CCPR/C/SR.3002), adopted the final remarks.

As a result of the review, Ukraine received 23 recommendations related to combating discrimination and racism, ensuring gender equality and freedom of speech, preventing ill-treatment and domestic violence, and eliminating human trafficking.

On 25 July 2018 the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine submitted the 8th periodic report to theHuman Rights Committee.

After examining Ukraine’s implementation of its international commitments under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Coalition of the LDN and the CSO Hubs Network prepared a joint shadow report.

NGO “Public Holding “GROUP OF INFLUENCE” is a member of CSO Hubs Network.

Download English version of the Report.

Public organizations and experts have said internally displaced persons (IDPs) can vote in Ukraine’s presidential elections, noting the procedure for changing the place of voting, and have urged the Verkhovna Rada to adopt draft law No. 6240. The measure will allow mobile categories of citizens and internally mixed individuals to exercise their voting rights at all levels.

“IDPs, residents of the occupied territories and other mobile categories of citizens within the country can exercise their right to elect the head of state and, in my opinion, should do this,” Hrupa Vplyvu (Group of Influence) Director Tetyana Durnyeva said at a press conference in Kyiv on Thursday.

She recalled that in 2014, about 2 million residents of the Donetsk region could not take part in voting at the presidential election due to the occupation of district election commissions and the terrorist threat. She said at parliamentary elections the same year only a small number of voters registered in the temporarily occupied territory used the procedure of temporary change of the place of voting.

“There are no obstacles to the realization of the right to vote if people use the procedure of temporarily changing the place of voting without changing the voting address,” Durnyeva said, adding that statements and passports with registration in the temporarily occupied territory is sufficient.

Durnyeva said Ukraine’s parliament should adopt draft law No. 6240, which would allow mobile categories of citizens within the country to exercise electoral rights in elections at all levels.

Oleksandr Kliuzhev, an analyst of the Civil Network Opora, thanked the representatives of local self-government who raised questions about the need to adopt the bill No. 6240.

“I think that for the Verkhovna Rada such activities should be an example to finally solve this problem in 2019,” he said.

Kliuzhev said Ukraine has all the infrastructure and public conditions to solve the problem of ensuring the electoral rights of internally displaced persons and other categories of citizens who are mobile within the country. According to him, the upcoming elections will be the first test for the state on the ability to ensure voting for mobile categories of Ukrainians.

Interfax-Ukraine

Internal displacement continues to be a human tragedy for the millions who are forced to leave their homes because of armed conflict, climate change or natural disaster. Although many national governments take adequate measures to mitigate the negative effects of displacement, others are more reluctant and do not extend full rights and services to their fellow citizens. Often internally displaced persons (IDPs) find themselves deprived of the right to take part in elections on equal terms with other citizens. In September 2016, the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) published a white paper, Internally Displaced Persons and Electoral Participation: A Brief Overview, to promote greater awareness of this often overlooked issue. The white paper contains 17 recommendations in support of the implementation of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, the main global instrument for protection and promotion of the rights of persons affected by displacement within their country adopted by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in 1998.

On October 18, 2018, IFES took part in two separate international events commemorating the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the Guiding Principles. In Geneva, Switzerland, the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre organized an interdisciplinary conference, which explored ways to include IDP needs in national development with a focus on the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. IFES International Senior Adviser Hannah Roberts spoke about IDPs’ political participation and presented IFES’ white paper recommendations. Tetyana Durnyeva of IFES’ civil society partner Group of Influence presented a case study on Ukraine.

IFES argues that IDPs’ electoral participation is crucial for reconciliation and preventing marginalization. The political voice of IDPs is crucial for making governments more responsive and accountable, including on the provision of services and solutions for IDPs. Securing IDPs’ electoral rights in their place of origin or current location is key to a durable solution for IDP settlement. “However, realizing such rights in practice is complex and politically sensitive,” said Roberts, “especially given that IDP populations can change constituency electorates and alter election outcomes. IDPs are often seen as predominantly representing the interest of one party, thereby creating an incentive for other parties not to address enfranchisement issues.”

Regrettably, the latter statement reflects the current thinking of the political elite in Ukraine regarding the country’s more than 1.5 million citizens who became IDPs during the armed conflict in the country’s eastern Donbas region and the occupation of the Crimean Peninsula by the Russian Federation in 2014. Since the conflict began, Ukrainian authorities have not removed the legal and practical barriers that prevent IDPs from exercising their right to vote in local elections and in the majoritarian component of parliamentary elections. “To feel equal in our new communities, we need the ability to exercise our constitutional right to vote and elect our local leaders,” said Durnyeva. “In partnership with IFES Ukraine, Group of Influence will continue its advocacy campaign for the right of IDPs to vote in all kinds of elections. We aim at the adoption of draft law no. 6240.” Draft law no. 6240 envisages that IDPs and mobile segments of society, such as economic migrants and student youth, may register to vote at their current place of residence.

The residency registration or propiska system in Ukraine remains essentially unchanged from Soviet times and constitutes a legal and practical barrier for IDP voting rights. Large segments of the population have a registered residence where they do not physically reside anymore. To register a new address is cumbersome, and IDPs often lack the necessary paperwork that would allow them to apply for a new propiska. Additionally, they risk losing their IDP status and access to humanitarian aid and other benefits if they give up their registration at place of origin.

IFES recently commissioned a national face-to-face survey of IDPs to examine their knowledge of and attitudes toward political and electoral processes. The survey found that most IDPs have settled well in their new communities. However, most Ukrainian IDPs surveyed are unwilling to break connections with their home communities to obtain voting rights for local elections. The ability to be actively involved in a future settlement of the conflict is a strong incentive for some IDPs not to give up their propiska in the occupied territories. IDPs should have a choice that would allow them to exercise voting rights now and after a peaceful settlement of the conflict – at their place of origin or current residence. Their choice should not have consequences for IDP status or access to humanitarian assistance.

The lack of full voting rights of Ukrainian IDPs is now the subject of two cases with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasburg filed by Ukrainian IDPs who were barred from voting in the 2015 local elections.

IFES was also represented at a roundtable discussion on IDPs held in Amman, Jordan, on October 18 by IFES International Senior Adviser Harald Jepsen and partner organization Civil Network OPORA Analyst Oleksandr Kliuzhev. The event was organized jointly by the Global Protection Cluster and the Carter Center and included participants engaged in humanitarian relief, development work, human rights protection and elections from more than 15 countries.

In his presentation, Jepsen called on election observers to pay more attention to monitoring the participation of IDPs in all aspects of the electoral process. “Most observer organizations have developed comprehensive guidelines for monitoring the participation of marginalized and underrepresented groups in elections such as women, national minorities and persons with disabilities, but there are no comprehensive guidelines for monitoring the electoral participation of IDPs”. Kliuzhev, who co-authored the draft law no. 6240, is himself an IDP from Donetsk. “There is nothing essential preventing Ukraine from removing the last obstacles for granting full political rights to citizens that have been forced to leave the conflict zone. IDPs in Ukraine are well-integrated in their communities. They naturally want to take part in public life and enjoy the right to vote in all elections, including local. We hope the forthcoming ruling by the European Court of Human Rights will prove the Ukrainian courts wrong and compel our lawmakers to give IDPs the opportunity to vote in all elections.”

The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities (the Congress) of the Council of Europe (CoE) monitored the last 2015 local elections in Ukraine and recommended lawmakers to extend full voting rights to the IDP population ahead of the next 2020 local elections. On November 6, the 35th plenary session of the Congress adopted a report entitled Voting rights at local level as an element of successful long-term integration of migrants and IDPs in Europe’s municipalities, to which IFES provided expert input. Rapporteur Jos Wienen (EPP/CCE, L) noted with regret in his opening remarks that Ukraine has not yet acted on the Congress’ recommendation. An estimated 2.5-3 million Ukrainian citizens are currently disenfranchised because they live far away from their place of official registration.

Speaking at the plenary session of the Congress in Strasbourg, Jepsen named the propiska system a double-edged sword for Ukraine’s IDPs. It is currently preventing them from enjoying full voting rights. On the other hand, the propiska is recognized by the de-facto authorities on territories currently not under government control. Thus, it allows IDPs access to the occupied territories and visits to family members on the other side. “However,” said Jepsen, “the root cause of the problem for IDPs in Ukraine is the propiska system, which needs to be dismantled in the long term.” Jepsen stated that since the beginning of the displacement crisis in Ukraine, IFES has been involved in finding solutions for the electoral participation of IDPs. IFES and its civil society partners held broad consultations in the process of elaborating draft law no. 6240. Stakeholders acknowledged that any solution for IDPs needs to be carefully worked out so as not to compromise the overall integrity of the electoral process.

As a recent International Crisis Group report has pointed out, the current policies of Kyiv toward conflict-affected citizens on both sides of the contact line in Donbas, including IDPs, risks alienating them from their own government. At the end of its plenary session the Congress adopted a resolution calling upon Ukraine to grant its IDPs full voting rights. IFES Ukraine continues promoting electoral rights for IDPs in Ukraine with the support of the United States Agency for International Development and UK aid. It is currently developing a voter information campaign for the 2019 presidential election jointly with its civil society partner Group of Influence and preparing for the next survey of IDP attitudes toward elections and participation in electoral and political processes in December 2018.

from International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) website

On Sunday, November 25, 2018, a ship of the Border Guard Service of the Russian Federation’s Federal Security Service rammed through a Ukrainian tugboat “Yany Kapu”. Along with two small artillery boats “Berdyansk” and “Nikopol”, it was executing a planned sail from Odesa to Mariupol, in compliance with provisions of all applicable multi- and bilateral international treaties and the navigation rules.

Later the same day, as reported by the press center of the Naval Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine artillery boats of the Border Guard Service of the Russian Federation’s Federal Security Service opened fire to destroy a fleet of ships of the Naval Forces of Ukraine. At that moment the fleet has exited the Kerch Strait to the Black Sea and was returning to Odesa. As a result of the attack, six servicemen of the Naval Forces of Ukraine were injured and 23 were captured. All three ships were forcibly towed to the temporarily occupied town Kerch of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Ukraine lost contact with them.

Later, the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation confirmed the use of weapons and reported providing medical assistance to three servicemen of the Naval Forces of Ukraine. Additionally, the Federal Security Service announced opening a criminal case regarding an alleged violation of national borders of the Russian Federation. Their opinion is that the Ukrainian ships “unlawfully entered temporarily closed territorial waters of the Russian Federation”.

We would like to bring to your attention that a wide-ranging series of documents promulgated by the UN articulate its support for independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine, as well as acknowledge Ukraine’s sovereignty over the Russian Federation-occupied Crimea and its part of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov.

We emphasize that Ukraine has been guaranteed unhindered access to the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, as well the Kerch Strait under international law, particularly the Charter of the United Nations, the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the 2003 Agreement between Ukraine and the Russian Federation on Cooperation in the Use of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait. The Russian Federation is not entitled to arbitrarily block such access, as it has previously done in the Baltic Sea Vistula Lagoon against the Baltic states and Poland.

We consider these actions a worrying sign of escalation in the ongoing military aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine. They demonstrate that the deteriorating security situation in the Sea of Azov had reached a dangerous conflict level within Europe.

We urge members of the UN Security Council to demand at its emergency meeting on November 26, 2018 that the Russian Federation immediately stop military aggression against Ukraine, release captured servicemen of the Naval Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, recognize their status as the prisoners of war according to international humanitarian law and close all criminal proceedings against them as those contradicting international law.

Also we call on the UN Security Council members to demand that the Russian Federation give detailed information regarding physical condition of captured servicemen of the Naval Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, medical assistance provided to the injured, grant access to them for official representatives of Ukraine and international non-governmental organizations, as well as restore Ukraine’s control over the captured vessels and compensate for the losses.

List of the Civil Society Organizations

Conference Getting to 2030: Forced displacement and sustainable development 18 October 2018, Domaine de Penthes, Geneva

Review of
Hannah Roberts (International Foundation for Electoral Systems / IFES)
Tetyana Durnyeva (Civil Holding GROUP OF INFLUENCE)

This presentation will cover the position of the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) on IDPs and electoral participation. Since 1987 IFES has worked in more than 145 countries promoting electoral integrity and supporting citizens’ participation in elections, including the under-represented such as IDPs. In September 2016, IFES issued a white paper on IDP electoral participation to promote more attention to this under-addressed issue. I will talk from this and then be followed by Tetyana who will give the case study of Ukraine.

IFES argues that IDPs’ electoral participation is crucial for reconciliation and preventing marginalization. The political voice of IDPs is needed for making governments more responsive and accountable, including in regards to provisions, services and solutions for IDPs. Securing IDPs’ electoral rights in their area of origin or current location is a key component of a durable solution for IDP settlement. However realizing such rights in practice is complex and politically-sensitive.

While there is a lack of available data, what is evident is that IDPs under-participate. In some cases this may be due to a lack of full legal rights and in other cases there may be practical obstacles.

International treaty obligations relevant to elections refer to citizens having the right and opportunity to vote and to stand as candidates, without unreasonable restrictions and discrimination. Therefore it may be argued that there is an onus on states to take special measures to enable electoral participation by IDPs in principle and in practice. And of course SDG 16 refers to “peaceful and inclusive societies” and “effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels”. This can be made real by including IDPs in the electoral process, as voters and as candidates for office.

IDP electoral participation can be extremely politically sensitive, especially given that it can change constituency electorates and alter election outcomes. IDPs are often perceived as predominantly representing the interest of one party, thereby creating an incentive for other parties not to address enfranchisement issues. Uncertainty over return to constituencies of origin is highly sensitive. IFES argues that IDPs should individually be given the choice of whether to vote for constituencies of origin or current constituencies, without any consequence for IDP status or access to humanitarian assistance.

Operational complexities are multiple. Residency requirements can create legal and practical barriers to IDP participation. Documentation requirements can also result in exclusions. Furthermore, IDPs may have difficulties in accessing information through regular methods, including for reasons of language or iliteracy. IDPs are disproportionally affected by the existing barriers to electoral participation of marginalized groups since women, the elderly and persons with disabilities are frequently overrepresented in IDP populations. This calls for special measures during registration, candidate nomination and polling to promote IDP franchise. Such special measures, including arrangements for voting for constituencies of origin, need to be carefully worked out on a case-by-case basis so as not to compromise the overall integrity in the electoral process.

The process of how IDPs electoral rights are provided for is therefore crucial. Consensus-based decisions increase the chances of acceptance of provisions for IDPs, the process overall and ultimately the electoral outcome. Development of policies and laws should be undertaken well in advance of an election, to allow time for research, consultations, consideration of different implementation options, consensus-building, and the implementation of changes. IFES argues that groups representing IDPs, civil society and the election management body should all be involved. The more IDP electoral rights are secured in law, the less risk there is of non-fulfillment.

Public data on IDP numbers and electoral participation is needed so problems can be identified and addressed. Civil society needs to keep IDP participation on the agenda and advocate for reform. Without such pressure, state authorities can often neglect the sensitive and complex issue of realizing IDPs’ rights to vote and to be elected.

IFES’s White Paper includes 17 recommendations. These seek to support the realization of Guiding Principle 22(1) which states that IDPs “shall not be discriminated against as a result of their displacement in the enjoyment of… the right to vote and to participate in governmental and public affairs, including the right to have access to the means necessary to exercise this right.” Furthermore principle 29(1) states that IDPs “who have returned to their homes or places of habitual residence or who have resettled in another part of the country shall not be discriminated against as a result of their having been displaced. They shall have the right to participate fully and equally in public affairs at all levels and have equal access to public services.”

Twenty years on, we see that there is still a long way to go in realizing IDPs’ full political rights in practice. Issues are avoided and practicalities struggled with, risking deepening marginalization and divisions. One such example is Ukraine…

My name is Tetyana Durnyeva, I‘m from Donetsk and had to leave my home due to the Russian aggression. Now I’m a head of Ukrainian NGO “Group of Influence” and we protect the rights of conflict-affected people.

Military aggression of the Russian Federation and occupation has led to a large-scale internal displacement of persons in my country.

As for September 3, 2018 according to the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine 1 519 132 IDPs has their voting rights restricted, which is about 4% of the Ukrainian electorate.

IDPs in Ukraine can vote for President of Ukraine, elect Members of Parliament by Party-list proportional representation system and stand as candidates for President, Parliament, Local elections, but are not able to elect Members of Parliament in single-member districts, mayors and local representatives.

In the parliamentary elections in October 2014, all IDPs (about 500 000 people as of October 2014), had no right to elect a deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in majority district at the new place of residence. In October 2015 in local elections, 1,3 million IDPs did not participate in the election and were not able to elect local councils’ deputies.

Aiming to resolve the outlined problem, in 2016 a group of independent experts developed a draft law №6240 on Ensuring Access to the Right to Vote of Internally Displaced Persons and Other Internal Migrants . The Draft Law was prepared by the NGO “Group of Influence” together with Civil Network OPORA and International Foundation for Electoral Systems in consultation with Central Election Commission, representatives from the Verkhovna Rada, Ministry of temporarily occupied territories and IDPs in Ukraine, IDPs and other key stakeholders.

On March 27, 2017, Draft Law No 6240 was registered at the Verkhovna Rada. The Draft Law, if adopted, would amend the Law on State Register of Voters, along with other relevant legislation, to guarantee full voting rights for Ukraine’s internally displaced persons (IDPs). The Draft Law would also enable all Ukrainian citizens to vote in their actual places of residence by simplifying voter registration procedures and decoupling them from one’s registered place of residence.

The Constitution of Ukraine and international standards clearly define the equality of rights of all citizens, particularly in matters of electoral law. International principles also oblige Ukraine to ensure these rights.

Thus, Group of Influence in partnership with IFES will continue an advocacy campaign to grant IDPs the right to vote on all kind of elections.

Video (English subtitles)

***
Conference Overview
Photos from here and here

Key aspects of the draft law: All voters would be able to change their voter address to their current/actual place of residence by submitting a written application to the Voter Register Maintenance Body…

Read and watch more:

Page 1  …  Page 2

“The first stage in advocacy work is when we raise the issue, pluck it from obscurity or silence,” says Tetiana Durnyeva, GRUPA VPLYVU, civil society organization (CSO). “Our task is not just to bring the attention of decision-makers to the issue but also of those directly affected by infringement.”

The voting rights of the displaced population from the Eastern Conflict Area have been increasingly on the radar of this civil society organisation for several years now. Tetiana explains that internally displaced persons (IDPs), who make up 4% of voters, won’t be able to vote in local elections and single-mandate constituencies during the forthcoming parliamentary elections.

“So, the first secret of an advocacy campaign is this: you need to be personally interested in changing something,” emphasises the CSO leader, who has been involved with advocacy work for 12 years. Forced to leave her native Donetsk, Tetiana decided to channel the organisation’s efforts into resolving the legal contradictions faced by displaced persons and those living in the temporarily occupied territories.

“If we are talking about protection of the citizens’ rights and interests, then what is needed is a systemic change. If we want to change the system, it’s important that we act systematically,” adds Tetiana.

The only way to resolve the issue of IDP voting rights is through legislative changes: by updating the definition of what constitutes an electoral address. Such changes were proposed in bill No. 6240 of March 27^th 2017, drafted by GRUPA VPLYVU jointly with OPORA Civic Network, the International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES), and some other human rights organisations. This is already the second, improved draft of the bill, containing safeguards against possible manipulations, such as frequent changes of electoral address. In addition, for the first time ever, it includes the category of “other mobile citizens within the country”.

“When we’ve started digging into the issue, we came across the category of people who were completely out of the picture before – that is, Ukrainian citizens living in a place other than the place of their registration. In reality, their number far exceeds the number of IDPs. This category includes migrant workers and people who, for instance, got married and went to live in another region, but are not registered at the new place of residence, because the apartment belongs to their partner’s parents or some other reason, as well as many other circumstances.”

The very fact that the bill was registered, and that MPs and international partners are now aware of the issue, so that IDPs are not left to deal with it alone, is a real success, says Tetiana.

Advocating for IDP rights, the CSO relies on international standards and practices, in particular, the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and the Council of Europe’s recommendations.

“Although there are no direct restrictions in the national legislation regarding IDP voting rights, de facto an indirect discrimination is there,” Tetiana explains. Along with the right to vote, the IDP right to participate in local self-government decision-making in their host communities is also infringed. Not only this, it contradicts the principles and concepts of decentralisation and the participatory approach.

Every day, IDPs contribute to their host communities, for instance, by paying taxes. “Then why don’t we have right to elect the local authorities?” ask the protagonists of the social ad shoot by GRUPA VPLYVU. This video is a part of an information campaign to lobby for the political rights of IDPs and other mobile groups within Ukraine.

We need to be crystal clear about whose interests are implicated by a particular change

To better understand the obstacles to changing an electoral address, Tetiana and her team conducted research among IDPs in 10 regions of Ukraine. In addition to the fact that people often do not have means to buy an apartment and get registered in a new place, they also face some additional issues unknown to other populations.

First, there is an increased risk for them when crossing the contact line (entry-exit checkpoints) and the administrative border with the Crimea. Second, there is a risk of losing property; if a resident leaves a flat, for example, in Donetsk, their property could be illegally seized, and they would hardly be able to protect their ownership rights if they have no supporting documents. Finally, participants of the focus groups regularly mentioned that an electoral registration sustains a psychological connection to their abandoned place of residence.

“Since it’s really challenging for the IDPs to change their place of registration, we came up with a solution that allows them to change their electoral address without changing the registration. This would allow people to vote at the place of their actual residence.”

“We have our say in shaping national policies”

The organisation has been dealing with several headline-grabbing cases, where they were able to intervene in a timely manner when rights of IDPs and other groups of citizens were infringed. For instance, Tetiana and her team discovered that the verification, both in physical and telephonic forms, of beneficiaries of social benefits, upon the authorities’ request had been performed with violations. It turned out that a private  data collection company received access to the personal data of citizens, including displaced persons and ex-combatants. The organization managed to flag the issue to journalists and the Office of the Ombudsperson for Human Rights, who filed a complaint and got the positive court ruling.

Another example of discrimination mentioned by Tetiana is a case related to the introduction of changes to the Tax Code. Entrepreneurs registered in the temporarily occupied territories of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts should pay an extra tax of 18 per cent– unlike other entrepreneurs who pay 5 per cent under a simplified system.

Tetiana has compiled the best examples of her advocacy campaigns in the book Little Secrets of Big Advocacy Campaigns. Amongst her most well-known initiatives is a campaign to protect pedestrians’ rights and create bicycle lanes in Donetsk, as well as a campaign to facilitate the implementation of a smoking ban law.

“Our task is to raise the issue, as well as to prove to people that there is a way to find a solution. Most people just keep silent about their issues. If they were discussed, there might be a solution. By the way, it applies not just to citizen-state relations, but to personal life as well.”

The civil society organisation GRUPA VPLYVU is a part of the network of SCO hubs, created with UNDP support under the project “Civil Society for Enhanced Democracy and Human Rights in Ukraine” funded by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark.

Text: Tanya Kononenko. Photos courtesy of SCO GRUPA VPLYVU

UNDP Ukraine

Human Dimension Implementation Meeting 2018 (HDIM)
10 September – 21 September 2018
Sofitel Victoria Warsaw Królewska St. 11 00-065 Warsaw, Poland
Organized by OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR)

Tetyana Durnyeva, Executive Director of NGO GROUP of INFLUENCE

Dear ladies and gentlemen,

First of all, I would like to express my greatest respect to you for your contribution to strengthening democracy and protection of human rights.

My name is Tetyana Durnyeva, I ‘m from Donetsk and had to move to Kyiv after the beginning of the Russian aggression. Now I’m a head of Ukrainian NGO “Group of Influence” and we protect the rights of conflict-affected people.

I would like to use this opportunity to describe the problem of political rights of IDPs.

As of July 30, 2018, according to the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine 1,516,246 internally displaced persons from the occupied territories of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea were registered.

About 4% of the Ukrainian electorate, who are IDPs, are deprived of the full exercise of their political rights.  In Ukraine, people can participate in local democracy only in places of their residence registration which are often different from the actual ones.

In the first year of the war, IDPs did not think about voting. They thought about where they could live and what they have. Then the questions arose, in which school will the child study and so on. Over time, people began to realizethat their relocation is not temporary. In the fourth year of the war, more and more IDPs perceive themselves as members of new communities. To feel equal in their host communities IDPs need the ability to exercise their constitutional right to vote and elect authorities. By now, 4% of voters still silent, and for these people, the value of their voice is increasingly sensitive.

There are cities in Ukraine where the number of IDPs is higher than the number of local people. This situation is acute in the regions near the conflict line. However, it must be said that the IDPs changed their new communities not only in quantitybut also in quality.

We have many examples of IDPs becoming social leaders – when displaced doctors or teachers or businesspeople have a significant impact on their new community through their daily affairs and paying taxes. At the same time, these people, who are actively influencing the community with their own hands, heads and hearts, cannot affect the choice of local self-government bodies.

Some of provisions Ukraine’s electoral lawexclude IDPs from electing Members of Parliament in single-member districts, mayors and members of the village, settlement and city councils.

In the parliamentary elections in October 2014, all IDPs (about 500 000 people as of October 2014), had no right to elect a deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in majority district at the new place of residence. In October 2015 in local elections, 1,3 million IDPs did not participate in the electionand were not able to elect local councils deputies.

This is a clear violation of the principle of non-discrimination in ensuring equal rights, freedoms, and opportunities and slows the process of integration of IDPs to the local communities.

The Constitution of Ukraine and international standardsclearly definethe equality of rights of all citizens, particularly in matters of electoral law.  International principles also oblige Ukraine to ensure these rights.

More attention must be paid to allowing access to voting in national and local elections for IDPs

Our NGO, the GROUP OF INFLUENCE, together with our partners, conducts a broad informational and educational campaign, and we promote the principles of the Constitution about the equal rights of all citizens, regardless of their origin, place of residence or other differences. I wear this bracelet on my arm, not as an accessory. I wear it because it’s written here that every vote is important.

IDPs are not the only group that faces challenges to their enfranchisement in Ukraine. Other mobile communities whose actual place of residence differs from their registered one and voter addressalso face obstacles to exercise their electoral rights.

Aiming to resolve the problem, in 2016 a group of independent experts developed draft law №6240 on Ensuring Access to the Right to Vote of Internally Displaced Persons and Other Internal Migrants. The Draft Law was prepared by the NGO “Group of Influence” and Civil Network OPORA, in consultations with the IFES, Central Election Commission, representatives from the Verkhovna Rada, IDPs and other key stakeholders. Amendments provide that voters will be able to apply to vote in their place of actual residence, regardless of their place of formal residence registration. In case the amendments are adopted, IDPs’ voting rights will be protected. Ability to change voting address at the place of actual residence will be available also to other internal migrants. It will help to reduce conflict in the society and raising the level of public participation in elections.

On March 27, 2017 24 MPs from different fractions signed the draft law No6240 which enables all Ukrainian citizens to vote in their actual place of residence by simplifying voter registration procedures and separating them from their formal registered places of residence.

The local governments support such system changes and consider IDPs as the members of their communities. Within advocacy campaign “EVERY VOTE HAS IMPACT” local authorities of different cities of Ukraine adopted appeals to the VerkhovnaRada of Ukraine with a request to vote for Draft Law No.6240 and protect politicalrights of IDPs at local level.

However, this draft law is currently of little interest to MPs and requires information and lobbying support.

NGO “Civic holding “GROUP OF INFLUENCE” would be grateful if ODIHR could send the following recommendations to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine: 

1. To the Committee on Legal Policy and Justice: Accelerate consideration of Draft Law No. 6240 and recommend it for adoption on first reading by the Verkhovna Rada; and,
2. To the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine: Adopt Draft Law No. 6240 and provide mechanisms for ensuring the voting rights of IDPs in all elections, including at local level

Video

In 2017, the Office of the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights (Ombudsperson) and partner organizations developed a Methodology to monitor observance of the rights of internally displaced persons. The work was commissioned by the Ombudsperson with the support of UNDP’s “Strengthening the Capacities of the Office of the Ombudsperson” project and the Council of Europe’s “Strengthening the Human Rights Protection of Internally Displaced Persons in Ukraine” project. It was co-ordinated by the “Group of Influence” NGO.

The Methodology includes toolsets for various target groups, which, based on the specificities of the mandate of the Human Rights Ombudsperson, enable systemic problems concerning the rights of internally displaced persons to be identified and individual violations of the rights of IDPs that require prompt response to be recorded.

This report is based on data from comprehensive research based on a series of surveys of different target groups and focused analysis of the findings at each stage.