Read the original text at 112.ua.
Practice has shown that violation of law, which remains not punished on time, leads to an even more serious violation.
September 3, Maidan-related graffiti disappeared from the facade of the Emporium store on Hrushevsky Street, Kyiv. Young people (members of far-right organizations such as C14, National Corps – Ed.) came to restore “justice” with the help of stones and tires; they have set fire at the store's facade and smashed it.
What should be done in such situation?
First: the pogrom makers should be detained under articles "hooliganism" and "property damage."
Second: the prosecution check on the destruction of the historical monument should take place. There must be a list of Maidan-related monuments. If graffiti on the "Emporium" building is on the list, criminal proceedings will be initiated – Article 298 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine "Deliberate destruction or damage to monuments of history or culture." If the graffiti is not on the list, then there is no reasons for punishment.
On the day of the pogrom, Attorney General Yuriy Lutsenko immediately announced the verdict: he opened criminal proceedings against the owner of the "Emporium" under Article 298 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, ignoring the violation of the law, I mean the destruction of the store.
And then a week later, September 10, another emergency happened: the breakthrough of the state border. And there were not Russian tanks. It has been committed by citizens of Ukraine, and one of them was previously deprived of Ukrainian citizenship - Mikheil Saakashvili, Poroshenko’s opponent.
The positions of social media users, who hastened to show their attitude to what had happened, were divided. Part of them has pointed out that such actions are illegal. Another part, who called themselves patriots, pointed out that the government in the person of the president was simply afraid of his opponent Mikheil Saakashvili, able to lead the country to prosperity.
The most interesting thing is that each of the parties are right: from a legal point of view, a crime – illegal border crossing – was actually committed. From the political point of view, it was something like circus, the root cause of which was Peter Poroshenko's desire not to let a political opponent, previously deprived of Ukrainian citizenship, enter the country.
And what is most terrible: each side defends its point of view, which is beneficial to it.
In February 2014, near the building of Security Service in Khmelnytsky, law enforcers opened fire against activists who were planning to storm the building. As a result, two people were killed. If you omit emotions, the shooter was just performing his duty, according to his oath, but the military prosecutor's office opened a criminal case.
Participation of volunteer units in anti-terrorist operation (ATO) is also controversial: from the legal point of view, they are just illegal armed formations, as they are not incorporated into the official structure of state power bodies - the Ministry of Internal Affairs or the Ministry of Defense. Gradually, all this resulted in scandals, when whole units were accused of crimes and disbanded, like Shakhtarsky or Tornado battalions.
Nevertheless, participation in ATO was considered as a kind of indulgence, the remission of sins. The most indicative in this respect is the story of ATO participant, who raped a 15-year-old teenage girl in Kyiv region. For this mitigating circumstance he has got a suspended sentence.
One day someone will come to the office of the president of Ukraine, will sit in his armchair and declare himself the head of the state and the guarantor of the Constitution. And, someone would consider this to be legal and correct, because the current president, Petro Poroshenko, is a "bad president" and is dragging the country down. But who will guarantee that:
1) the one who takes president's chair will be better than the previous incumbent;
2) the very next day, another person, wishing to become head of the state, would throw away the previous president and proclaim herself a new head of state?
Little thieves are hanged but great ones escape. And the whole struggle is just a quarrel, who is a “little thief” and who is a “great one.”