|
 In April, prosecutors arrested three suspects, members of an elite
unit within the “Berkut” riot police. Senior among them was Dmytro
Sadovnyk, 38, a decorated commander, who was accused of ordering his
men to fire on the crowds on the morning of Feb. 20. The three stand
accused of massacring 39 unarmed protesters.
On Sept. 19, the case took a turn when a judge released Sadovnyk
into house arrest – and, two weeks later, he went missing.
Maidan activists were outraged, convinced that a corrupt system had
let a killer escape. The judge was placed under investigation. The
prosecutor said in a statement: "D. Sadovnyk, suspected of
committing an extremely grievous crime, aiming to avoid punishment,
disappeared from his place of permanent residence."
But in a country where justice often isn’t blind, there’s another
possibility: Sadovnyk was being framed, and saw flight as his best
option. In court last month, he called the case against him “a
political lynching.” In the days before he vanished, his wife and
his lawyer say, Sadovnyk and his family received death threats.
A Reuters examination of Ukraine's probes into the Maidan shootings
- based on interviews with prosecutors, defence attorneys,
protesters, police officers and legal experts – has uncovered
serious flaws in the case against Sadovnyk and the other two Berkut
officers.
 Among the evidence presented against Sadovnyk was a photograph.
Prosecutors say it shows him near Kiev’s Independence Square on Feb.
20, wearing a mask and holding a rifle with two hands, his fingers
clearly visible.
The problem: Sadovnyk doesn’t have two hands. His right hand, his
wife told Reuters, was blown off by a grenade in a training accident
six years ago. As prosecutors introduced the image at a hearing in
April, said Yuliya Sadovnyk, her husband removed a glove and
displayed his stump to the courtroom.
“He can’t really shoot,” said Serhiy Vilkov, Sadovnyk’s lawyer. “To
blame him for the crime is a political game.”
The probes into the killings have been hindered by missing evidence.
Many guns allegedly used to shoot protesters have vanished; many of
the bullets fired were taken home as souvenirs. Barricades,
bullet-pierced trees and other items of forensic evidence were
removed, lawyers say.
A former Berkut commander told Reuters that Berkut officers
destroyed documentary evidence that potentially could identify
fellow officers. They did so, he said, because they feared the
Berkut’s headquarters would be attacked by a mob of revenge-seeking
protesters after Yanukovich fled to Russia.
The former president isn’t the only key figure missing. In an
interview before Sadovnyk vanished, Ukraine’s general prosecutor,
Vitaly Yarema, said investigators had identified 17 Berkut officers
as alleged participants in the protester shootings, based on
surveillance camera videos and mobile-phone location data. Of the
17, he said, 14 had fled to Russia or Crimea, including the Berkut’s
top commander in Kiev. Sadovnyk and his two co-defendants were the
only identified suspects who had remained behind.
MILESTONE
Independence Square was the rallying point in Kiev where the
anti-Yanukovich revolution largely unfolded between November and
February. (The word Maidan means “square” in Ukrainian.) The
killings there quickly were recognised as a milestone in modern
Ukrainian history, part of a chain of events that set off a
separatist conflict and Russian incursions that have shaken the
country to its core.
Videos and photographs appear to show how Berkut officers shot at
protesters and beat them with sticks. In one video, the Berkut are
seen making a man stand naked in the snow.
The public is demanding answers and justice. But the investigations
are testing Ukraine’s ability to rise above the kinds of failings
that have hobbled the country ever since its independence from the
Soviet Union in 1991.
In contrast to, say, Poland, Ukraine has never gelled into a robust
state. Kiev has had two revolutions since independence. A host of
endemic problems - political corruption, racketeering, a divide
between speakers of Ukrainian and Russian - have left it feeble and
fractious. Another of the state’s chief failings, outside observers
say, is a broken justice system.
Under Yanukovich and his rivals before him, courts and cops were
political instruments. Yulia Tymoshenko, runner-up to Yanukovich in
the 2010 presidential election, later was jailed in a case widely
criticised as political.
In its 2013 report on human rights, the U.S. State Department cited
the Tymoshenko conviction in observing that Ukraine’s courts
“remained vulnerable to political pressure and corruption, were
inefficient, and lacked public confidence. In certain cases the
outcome of trials appeared to be predetermined.”
The post-Yanukovich government acknowledged as much this July, in a
report it prepared with the International Monetary Fund. “The tax
administration, the police, the Prosecutor General’s Office, the
State Enforcement Service, and the judiciary were noted as having
traditionally been viewed as among the most corrupt public
institutions,” the report found.
The past shows signs of repeating itself.
The two prosecutors and a government minister who have led the
Maidan shooting probes all played roles in supporting the uprising.
One of these officials told Reuters that the investigators gathering
the evidence are completely independent.
Another gap in the prosecution: To date, no one has been apprehended
in the shooting of policemen. According to Ukraine’s Ministry of
Interior Affairs, between Feb. 18 and 20, 189 police officers
suffered gunshot wounds. Thirteen died.
In addition, the former acting general prosecutor who oversaw the
arrests of the three Berkut officers declared on television that
they “have already been shown to be guilty.” That statement, said
legal experts, could prejudice the cases. Ukraine is a party to the
European Convention on Human Rights, which states that criminal
defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
“A public statement by a prosecutor that directly challenges that
presumption is a denial of due process,” said Richard Harvey, a
British barrister who specialises in international criminal law.
Even some of the bereaved families question the fairness of the
proceedings. Serhiy Bondarchuk, a physics teacher, died of a gunshot
wound to the back on the morning of Feb. 20. His son, Volodymyr
Bondarchuk, said the killing is one of the 39 in which Sadovnyk and
his two colleagues are suspected. Volodymyr said that based on his
own inquiries, he doubts the three were responsible for his father’s
death.
“They are trying to close the case because their bosses and the
community just want to have someone to punish,” he said. “The
investigation does not have enough evidence to prove the guilt of
these three people.”
Volodymyr Bondarchuk recently helped organise an association of
about 70 families of dead protesters. “The main aim for us,” he
said, “is an objective and accurate investigation.”
GOLDEN EAGLES
February 20 was the bloodiest day of the Maidan uprising. Scores of
protesters and police officers were shot and killed. A day later,
opposition leaders signed a European Union-mediated peace pact.
Public pressure mounted to prosecute the perpetrators. Within a
week, Yanukovich, by then a fugitive, was indicted for the mass
murder of protesters. An interim government disbanded the Berkut, a
force of several thousand whose name means “golden eagle.”
On April 3, Ukrainian authorities announced the arrests of several
members of an elite special unit within the Berkut. One was
Sadovnyk, the unit’s commander. A father of three, he first joined
the Berkut in 1996 after serving in the Ukrainian army. He later won
numerous commendations for his police service.
Also detained were two younger officers: Serhiy Zinchenko, 23, and
Pavel Abroskin, 24.
An internal prosecution document, reviewed by Reuters, sketches out
investigators’ version of events. It is a “Notice of Suspicion” for
Zinchenko, dated April 3.
The document alleges that on Feb. 18, the Berkut’s top commander,
Serhiy Kusiuk, gave an oral order to Sadovnyk to deliver automatic
rifles to his unit. Kusiuk is among the Berkut officers who fled to
Russia, prosecutors say. He couldn’t be reached for comment.
On the morning of Feb. 20, several members of Sadovnyk’s unit were
shot. At around 9 a.m., the document alleges, Sadovnyk ordered his
men to fire in the direction of unarmed protesters walking up
Instytutska Street in downtown Kiev. The shooting lasted nearly two
hours, and more than nine protesters were killed, the document
states.
[to top of second column] |
Sadovnyk’s order to shoot was an abuse of power, “given that there
was no immediate threat to the lives of the police officers,” the
document alleges.
Vilkov, Sadovnyk’s lawyer, disputes that account. Although the
document indicates Sadovnyk was at the scene, Vilkov said his client
was not on Instytutska Street when the protesters were killed the
morning of Feb. 20. Vilkov declined to discuss Sadovnyk’s
whereabouts.
In a telephone interview on Sept. 30, Sadovnyk told Reuters he was
at a meeting on the morning of Feb. 20 at Kiev police headquarters.
It began sometime between 8 a.m. and 8:30 a.m., he said. The
purpose, he said, was to deal with reports that many armed
protesters would be arriving in Kiev after a call by protest leaders
to mobilise.
Sadovnyk said about seven police officials and officers were
present, and he named three of them. Reuters was unable to locate
the three for comment. At the meeting, Sadovnyk said, the
attendees heard gunshots and screams over police radios. The radios
carried reports of the death of a Berkut officer and of other police
wounded on Instytutska Street.
Sadovnyk said at that point, he left and drove to the scene, taking
about 15 minutes to get there. He said he does not remember what
time he arrived, but that investigators could figure it out by
tracking his mobile phone. He said he brought a gun and protective
equipment.
When he arrived, he said, he found a nearly empty scene, with police
officers running and the sound of ricocheting bullets. He said he
neither received nor gave any order for his unit’s members to shoot
at protesters, nor did he fire at anyone himself.
“I deny killing,” he said.
Vadim Ostanin, an attorney for the Berkut’s Kiev branch, gave a
similar account to Reuters. He said there is a video showing that
Sadovnyk attended the meeting at police headquarters. Ostanin said
that when Sadovnyk arrived at the scene of the shooting, his unit’s
men already were retreating.
 “GUILTY”
The general prosecutor’s office declined to discuss the defence’s
account. In a statement, the office said it has plenty of evidence
against Sadovnyk. This includes videos of a protester being shot by
a gunman. The office believes the gunman is Sadovnyk, based on the
“special way” the shooter is holding the weapon. In a previous
statement, the office said: “The question of guilt or, conversely,
innocence of mentioned persons will be resolved by the court.”
Oleh Makhnitsky was Ukraine’s acting general prosecutor until June.
In an interview, Reuters asked him about the purported photograph of
a two-handed Sadovnyk, which was cited at a hearing in April.
The purpose of that hearing, Makhnitsky said, was not to judge the
reliability of the evidence but to determine whether Sadovnyk was a
flight risk. He said the evidence against Sadovnyk would be
presented at a future trial.
Makhnitsky, now an adviser to President Petro Poroshenko, said he
was a leader of a lawyers’ group that provided legal assistance to
anti-Yanukovich protesters during the Maidan demonstrations. He said
politics played no role in the prosecution of the three Berkut
officers.
“The investigators are in a separate unit that can’t even be
influenced by the prosecutor,” he said.
On May 30, Makhnitsky gave an interview on local television about
the arrests of the three officers. The suspects, he said, “have
already been shown to be guilty.”
Asked about those comments by Reuters, Makhnitsky said he meant that
“enough evidence was gathered to prove they are guilty.” A court
ultimately will decide, he said.
The extent of the prosecution’s evidence against the three officers
remains unclear. Court filings in the cases are not public.
Attorneys for officers Zinchenko and Abroskin said that as far as
they knew, much of the evidence against their clients consists of
videos that prosecutors allege show the officers holding guns. The
attorneys say the men in the videos - wearing masks and helmets -
are not their clients.
In one video, “only the eyes and nose are seen, and that guy isn’t
shooting; he’s just turning around with a gun and looking around,”
said Stefan Reshko, an attorney for Abroskin. Reuters did not view
the video.
Oleksandr Poznyak, who represents Zinchenko, said the evidence
against his client includes a video of a masked man holding a gun.
The attorney showed the video to Reuters. The masked gunman, he
said, is taller and has bigger hands than Zinchenko, and is holding
the gun in his left hand. While Zinchenko writes with his left hand,
the lawyer said he has photographs showing that his client shoots
with his right hand. Reuters didn't view those pictures.
Defence attorneys also plan to argue that the Berkut officers were
entitled to fire in self-defence: They were in danger, as
demonstrated by the fact that their colleagues were shot.
Prosecutors argue that the 39 protesters the three are accused of
killing on Feb. 20 were all unarmed.
The prosecutors “represent the whole picture as a peaceful protest,”
Sadovnyk told a judge at a hearing on Sept. 5. But, he added, “On
the 20th, early in the morning, as a result of the peaceful protest,
nearly 17 representatives of law enforcement were killed.”
GRAPPLING HOOK & STEEL CLAW
To bolster Sadovnyk’s point, several ex-Berkut officers who still
serve on Kiev’s police force agreed to meet a reporter and
photographer. In a small room at their old headquarters, they
produced a selection of what they said were weapons seized from
demonstrators.
The items included a grappling hook attached to a steel bar, wooden
clubs affixed to chains, and a steel claw made of four welded nails.
The ex-officers showed a burnt police shield with two bullet holes
that they said had been struck by a Molotov cocktail.
Alongside the weaponry were framed photos of two Berkut officers who
they said were killed at the demonstrations.
“If these officials were fair, they would catch not only policemen,
but also the activists from the other side,” said one ex-Berkut
member.
On Sept. 5, a tense crowd watched as a judge heard arguments over
whether Sadovnyk should be released into house arrest. The defendant
observed from inside a metal cage.
The prosecutor, Oleksii Donskyi, called Sadovnyk’s claim that he was
absent during the shootings “a complete lie.” When the judge retired
to deliberate in chambers, an exasperated-looking Yuliya Sadovnyk
marched up to where the prosecutor sat and told him: “I’m waiting
for your case to collapse.” Donskyi declined to comment.
The judge ordered that Sadovnyk be kept behind bars. Two weeks
later, a different judge gave him house arrest. The prosecution
appealed. Last Friday, Sadovnyk was called to a hearing to determine
whether he should be sent back to jail.
That’s when he vanished. Yuliya Sadovnyk said he left their
apartment at 7 a.m. last Friday, saying he felt ill. She hasn’t
heard from him since, she said.
In the days before the hearing, attorney Vilkov says, the Sadovnyks,
their three children and the lawyer himself received death threats.
Yuliya Sadovnyk read to Reuters a sample of texts she received.
“Hey you, Berkut slut,” reads one. “Horrible death is waiting for
you and your spawn. Glory to Ukraine!"
Abroskin and Zinchenko remain in jail. No trial date has been set.
All three men face life imprisonment.
(Additional reporting by Elizabeth Piper in Moscow. Edited by
Michael Williams and Sara Ledwith.)
[© 2014 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2014 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
