he Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union on 27 April received a response from the President’s Administration to its open letter regarding the lack of response from the Minister of Internal Affairs to criticism from the President [in English here: http://www.helsinki.org.ua/en/index.php?id=1270127290 ]

The letter explains that “On 29 March the President’s website published a report by the Press Service on the President’s meeting with the Minister of Internal Affairs during which the President described as “ill-considered” the decision to reduce the part of the MIA office dealing with human rights. The President stressed that measures on defending human rights needed to be extended, not reduced “

The Minister did not respond, and therefore an open letter was sent to the President, Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister with, of course, a copy to the Minister of the MIA, Anatoly Mohylev.

The response from the President’s Administration is frankly staggering. UHHRU was informed that the letter had been considered, but since a letter with analogous content had been sent to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, it was the MIA which should inform on the results of the review.

This is not the only baffling communication breakdown of a very strange variety. See http://www.helsinki.org.ua/en/index.php?id=1271876732 for information about another meeting between the Minister of the MIA and the President. This ignored the fact that the opposed measures (closing the Department for the Monitoring of Human Rights in the Work of the Police and dismissal of human rights regional advisors) had taken place. It suggested however that the President’s instruction had been carried out through the creation of already created and functional Public Councils, with the added nuance that those in charge of these would be imposed from above.