When Valeriya Lutkovska was appointed Ukraine's ombudsman on April 22, 2012, she promised to be apolitical as the nation's chief steward of human rights.
Nearly two year
later, she received grade A marks for job performance at the end of 2014 from
the U.N. International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the
Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, a body responsible for examining
ombudsmen worldwide.
Now after three years
on the job, Lutkovska has witnessed political prosecutions under the disgraced
presidency of Viktor Yanukovych, the EuroMaidan Revolution that ousted him, and
the breaking out of a war instigated by Russia.
Nevertheless, some
are still not happy with her track record. A group of lawmakers from Oleh
Lyashko’s Radical Party registered a resolution on May 18 to cancel Lutkovska’s
appointment.
One of the nation’s
most prominent human rights groups, Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, has
come to her defense.
“The office of
Ukraine’s ombudsman must not be subject to political bargaining… it must be
immune from any outside influences. This is why the ombudsman is appointed for
five years,” the group said in a May 28 statement.
Lutkovska, 43, was puzzled
by parliament’s move.
“I do not understand
why certain members of parliament are seeking to cancel the results of the 2012
vote instead of creating a special temporary commission to investigate alleged
non-eligibility,” she told the Kyiv Post in an interview.
Faced with war in Donbas and Russia’s
annexation of
Crimea, Lutkovska said that her hands are almost tied.
She said there was no alternative but to cooperate with Russia’s ombudsman
to protect the rights of Ukrainians on the peninsula. However, cooperation is
not always effective.
“This is a matter of political will and political pressure on Crimean
Tatars and although it might sound strange, a minority of Ukrainians decided to
stay in Crimea,” Lutkovska said.
In the war zone, Lutkovska’s office closely cooperates with volunteers
and various groups that provide care to people that are unable to leave Donbas,
such as orphans and incarcerated prisoners.
One of her recent achievements is the amended procedure for crossing the
demarcation line in the east.
“The previous procedure exposed people’s lives to danger… The State
Security Service listened to us… While [the new procedure] is not perfect, and
we continue to improve upon it, it’s better than the previous one,” Lutkovska
said.
While the government has received
praise for simplifying the procedure for refugees registering as internally
displaced people, Lutkovska believes more could be done in terms of strategy.
“The government lacks a clear vision for
the migrants’ future… We talked to our Georgian colleagues, who, based on their
experience, categorically rejected the building of separate settlements for
internally displaced people,” she said. “Eventually they realized they’d
created a ghetto… and now they’re trying to integrate migrants into local
communities.”
Although Lutkovska’s powers end at
giving recommendations and in mediation, she believes now is not the best time
to reform the institute she heads.
“Indeed, in many cases, the competence
of the ombudsman is limited to recommendations and mediation… However, this is
quite enough if you have good cooperation with the mass media and
non-governmental organizations (NGOs),” she said.
There is still a room to extend her recommendatory
powers.
The ombudsman’s office received a new
function on Jan. 1б, 2014 – to monitor
the protection of personal data. Similar to eliminating discrimination, preventing
torture and securing access to public data, this function helps implement the
Association Agreement that Ukraine signed with the European Union and gives
impetus for visa-free travel with the EU, Lutkovska said.
However, there are still limitations. Whereas
the ombudsman can intervene between private and government persons, in private
matters this is allowed only to the extent that it is connected with processing
personal data and eliminating discrimination.
Lutkovska believes it would be
possible to extend her powers to deal with consumer relationships.
“Sometimes I receive complaints from consumers, but I cannot help because I would exceed my
authority,” she said.
“This is probably the only area where
an ombudsman’s powers are worth extending.”
Lutkovska added that it was unrealistic
to expect that an ombudsman could prevent large-scale human rights violations.
Pointing to the EuroMaidan Revolution,
when police beat, tortured and killed activists, Lutkovska said: “To prevent something,
you have to see it coming. There is no ombudsman in the world who has the power
to order law enforcement to refrain from actions that violate human rights.”
But if respect for the rule of law was higher in Ukraine then “even a
recommendation from the ombudsman would
prevent government
officials from wrongdoing,” she said.
Kyiv Post’s legal
affairs reporter Mariana Antonovych can be reached at [email protected].
