The Shevchenko Court of Kyiv sentenced a resident of Kherson, who worked in the occupation “Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Kherson Region.”
The woman not only admitted guilt, but also actively helped the investigation in exposing other collaborators. Despite this, she will have to serve 5 years behind bars. But this punishment is significantly less than provided by law. The Criminal Code refers to a term of 12 to 15 years for holding a position in an illegal law enforcement agency in occupied territory.
The mitigation of punishment for collaboration, according to Article 69 of the Criminal Code, has recently been applied by Ukrainian courts, albeit at the request of the prosecutor. Now the sentence in this case is perhaps the least severe for such a crime.
The woman was tried in a closed court session. Security measures have been taken for the accused. She is also a witness in a number of similar criminal proceedings. We took advantage of this by attending an open hearing where she testified as a witness.
“FSB knocked down doors”
Anna (name changed for security reasons - ed.) is about 30, has no children, lived in a civil marriage. Before the occupation, she worked as a senior detective at the information and analytical center of the criminal investigation department of the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in the Kherson region.
At the court hearing, Anna says that on February 24, 2022, the SBU, police, national guard, prosecutor’s office and military left Kherson. Some military units remained and tried to recapture the Antonovsky Bridge to prevent the Russians from entering the city.
From the testimony of the accused, on February 24, she arrived at her duty station in connection with the announcement of a combat alert and carried out an order from management to destroy official documentation. After this, the female personnel were sent home and told to wait for further instructions. Later that same day, a message was received that an evacuation had been announced in the Kherson region. She learned from management that evacuation is voluntary and independent, so she refused and decided to stay in Kherson, since her family does not have their own car, her father is disabled group III and was being treated at that time, and her mother has heart disease.
In early March, Kherson was occupied. The Russian military seized all law enforcement agencies and, having learned the data of the employees, began to look for them, believing that they would resist the new government.
On May 18, 2022, the military administration introduced General Vladimir Lipandin as the head of the occupation Ministry of Internal Affairs in the Kherson region. This is the former head of the police of the Cherkasy region, who during the Revolution of Dignity in 2014 organized titushki and led the detention of local activists. After the change of power, he fled to annexed Crimea, where he was engaged in the security business.
When asked about forced employment with the occupiers, Anna answers in the affirmative. The occupiers came home to Ukrainian police officers with offers, and then forced them to cooperate with threats. The accused said that she knew that some law enforcement officers who refused to work with the occupiers were taken to dungeons and were subjected to physical and psychological pressure.
Finding herself trapped, Anna allegedly repeatedly wrote reports to management, asking for assistance in her leaving for the controlled territory of Ukraine, but they remained unheeded. Twice the woman tried to leave the occupied city on her own, but was not allowed through at the checkpoints. Representatives of the occupation authorities came to her and her common-law husband several times and put psychological pressure on her, but she refused to cooperate. However, when they began to threaten her parents with physical harm, she was forced to agree.
— Employees of the criminal investigation department of the GUNP in the Kherson region, who remained in the city of Kherson, were forced to cooperate with the Russian Federation. The FSB came to them and, in particular, to me, knocked down doors... Yes, it was forced. These are about those I know (...) I went to work because there were threats to my parents. In addition, there was no financial opportunity to live. Russian food products and medicines were imported. My parents are disabled. Sorry, how a decent daughter went to break the law... She took up her duties, earned money. I was able to get my father out, whom I treated, who is now outside our state, and left... And I put aside some money so that I could wait for the city of Kherson to be deoccupied.
“There was no legislation as such”
In the period from June 23 to June 30, 2022, Anna held the position of “temporary inspector of the human resources group of the forensic center” at the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Kherson Region; from June 30 to July 19, 2022 - “temporary head staffing group of the forensic center." On July 19, 2022, according to the woman, she was transferred against her will and without her knowledge to the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Kherson region under the occupation authorities to the position of “temporary deputy head of the department for work with personnel.”
In her last position, she checked orders for the appointment, dismissal and transfer of occupation police officers, handled statistical reporting and reported to management on staffing levels.
For those who had not previously worked in the authorities, recruitment was announced and people came to the regional departments and wrote applications for employment. Whether they all did this voluntarily, Anna does not know.
“I didn’t see anyone come.” I cannot say that this or another person was brought by force and forced to write this statement. This was not my area of expertise. I didn't do this. I can say that in the forensic center there were people who voluntarily came and applied for employment... When I came to the main department, more than 500 people were appointed, and when I left, there were about 1200 who were working, and 80-90 had already been fired at your own request.
On August 29, 2022, General Lipandin signed an order approving the staffing structure of the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in the Kherson region and an order on the creation of regional departments - the total number was to be 6,500 people. However, in reality at that time, as the witness says, about a thousand were working. Anna could not answer what the ratio of professional police officers to ordinary civilians was.
According to the woman, it was possible to resign only with the consent of the manager; if the latter did not sign the resignation letter, then no one would consider it.
The woman confirmed that sometimes appointment orders were issued in relation to persons who did not know about their employment and did not go to work. During questioning in court, she recalled two such incidents.
Orders were provided to the accounting department for designated persons. Personnel officers handed over work attendance tables. Discrepancies were identified between personnel tables and appointment orders. There are people according to the order, but there are no personnel officers in the table. Several facts were established when an employee was appointed, but did not go to work because he allegedly did not know about his appointment. Then the person was simply fired for a disciplinary offense. Anna cites a case where a married couple skipped work. Also, in the departmental kindergarten of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the janitor knew about the employment, but did not show up for work.
Finally, the legislation of the Russian Federation should have come into force after the referendum. By that time, chaos reigned in the occupied city.
— There was no legislation as such. The representatives sent from the Russian Federation wanted us to work according to Russian laws. Investigative departments worked according to Russian laws, due to the fact that they opened cases under articles that are prescribed in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. We, as a personnel department, did not use the federal law on personnel provision, because there was a contradiction... There will be a referendum, then please force us to work according to Russian laws. Until then, we will not (...) As they later told me, “we are working now to restore order in the city due to the fact that there is no police, then we will work according to Russian laws.”
On September 12, 2022, Anna resigned from the “police,” as she claims, of her own free will, because she had a conflict with representatives of the Russian Federation.
— I did not agree with the current legislation and the fact that they wanted to hold a referendum in Kherson. I did not support that government and the fact that Kherson was occupied. In this regard, the decision was to quit (...) Upon dismissal, I dumped onto my flash drive all the official information that related to the personnel department: all orders, tables, staff... I saved all the information and transferred it to the Security Service of Ukraine.
The woman came to the police on her own. And they did not refuse help, but offered to confiscate these documents during a search of her home. During the search that same day in the evening, the woman voluntarily gave up her work laptop, flash drive and mobile phone. On November 30, 2022, she was officially detained.
On the flash drive were documents on the appointment of police officers, tables with lists of employees. Now, in the trials of collaborators, Anna explains the origin of these documents. A few weeks before the verdict, she testified in court about one such occupation police officer, whose appointment order was on a flash drive. Anna did not know the accused himself and they met after the arrest, when they were both escorted to extend the pre-trial investigation.
Anna asked to take into account that, risking her own life and health, she collected and transferred to the Ukrainian special services all possible official information about more than 1,000 people who collaborated with the occupation authorities.
The court took into account the woman’s appearance with a confession, her sincere repentance, active assistance in the investigation of the crime, her commission of the crime due to a combination of difficult personal circumstances, and her negative and critical attitude towards the crime. Therefore, the court agreed to impose a sentence below the lower limit established by the law.
The woman was sentenced to 5 years in prison with a 10-year ban on holding positions in law enforcement agencies, without confiscation of property. Now the accused has already served more than six months of her prison sentence in pre-trial detention.
