SBU and Bihus: how much is opium for the people?

Lessons in rapid re-shoeing in the air, or How Bigus has turned into 'Bogus'. Photo: UOJ

A few days ago, "journalists" from Bihus.info released an "investigation" about the "illegal" activities of the "media pool" of the UOC. In this "investigation", the UOJ, Kozak 1 and Myriany were called "enemies of Ukraine" and accused of "working for the aggressor state". To what extent do these accusations correspond to reality and Bihus’s "investigation" to journalistic standards?

The Bihus team were famous for their reports about corruption in the Ukrainian government. Their reports often implicated very influential politicians and sometimes were even interesting.

On November 5, 2013, the first programme of Bihus was aired – with Dmytro Bihus as the host. Further – the appearance of this project on ZIK, Channel 24 and Pershyi. The most striking and memorable feature of their activity: scandalousness and harshness. They do not shy away from expressions, operate with interesting factual material in the form of records that "fell into the hands of our journalists" (this was the Medvedchuk case), and the focus of their investigations is the Ministry of Defence, the State Property Fund, the National Guard and, in general, everything related to large sums of money and corruption schemes.

It is not surprising that the authorities have been paying very close attention to Bihus. And when "a little trouble" happened to the journalists at the beginning of this year, the only thing that caused surprise was how quickly this "trouble" ended.

In mid-January, a video was leaked online showing Bihus employees taking drugs during a New Year's corporate party. Initially, Dmytro Bihus did not deny this fact and promised personnel purges. However, later the deputy editor-in-chief Opanasenko made a statement that the employees of Bihus had been bugged by the SBU for about a year and the video was a compilation of different conversations recorded during that time.

Subsequently, Bihus said that they had approached law enforcement agencies regarding illegal surveillance and pressure on journalists. According to Bihus, the blame for this pressure undoubtedly lay with the SBU employees.

Dmytro Bihus expressed indignation on media platforms about the methods and ways in which representatives of the SBU treated his employees. He called for justice and spoke about the difficult relationship between journalists and the authorities in Ukraine, that such pressure is "Kremlin methods", that children and family should not be involved in the situation with the corporate party. After all, the complex where the corporate event took place was literally filled with surveillance cameras – wardrobes, rooms, corridors.

Bihus gave several interviews to Western media, loudly declaring pressure on him and the company due to their journalistic activities. Against this backdrop, Volodymyr Zelensky urged to "immediately find answers to all this and react accordingly", Because, according to the President, "we so desperately need media support in Europe and the world".

The SBU dismisses the head of the department responsible for the surveillance, and everyone is satisfied.

So, despite the undeniable evidence, despite the presence of proof indicating drug use by Bihus employees, the case against them is closed. Because the evidence was gathered "illegally", the SBU's work was "too rough" and most importantly – there was an outcry that "journalists are being persecuted" in Ukraine.

The case was decided to be "hushed up". We can assume that it was not without certain conditions. What are they? Read on.

Just three months after the "trouble" with drugs and the SBU, Bihus hastily releases a "hit piece" about the UOC and the Church's "media pool". The most interesting part is that this "hit piece" about the UOC is done in collaboration with the same SBU that provides Bihus with materials from pre-trial investigations, which is already a crime. The entire SBU-Bihus "material" is based on "facts" provided by law enforcers. These same law enforcers, who not long ago were accused by Bihus journalists of employing Kremlin methods and persecuting freedom of speech. This inconsistency is so obvious that it catches the eye even of UOC opponents.

Here's a characteristic comment under the video featuring Bihus’s coverage of the UOJ: "I have a small question. Why, when the SBU conducted its ‘special operation against Bihus.info, did you release three videos to expose their illegal activities, showing us how they planted cameras ILLEGALLY, showed all the defendants, conducted the entire investigation to show us that the SBU isn't always on the side of good. YOU said that the SBU is trying to discredit your company by all LEGAL and ILLEGAL means. And now, when the same persecuting SBU is going after the Church, everything is OK here, we trust them, IT'S THE SBU. Don't you have even a little impartiality, why do you trust them only when it's CONVENIENT FOR YOU!!!? (ps. I'm not whitewashing the UOC, but you shouldn't believe all the "findings and exposures" in the UOC by SBU agents)."

Agree the question is indeed correct and logical: why did Bihus suddenly start collaborating so closely with the SBU? The answer seems to be on the surface.

Let's move on to the "investigation" itself.

In the story, phrases like the "Moscow Patriarchate", "FSB agents", "Kremlin methods" are constantly used. And yet, the court has not yet delivered its verdict, the defendants of the "investigation" are in pre-trial detention, and investigations are ongoing against them. So why do the Bihus team insistently repeat all these phrases? To hammer into the viewer's head that all Orthodox journalists are already guilty. Because can the SBU pressure innocent people? Bigus knows it can't. Or can it?

The story begins with a rather dubious cutting: Deputy Artem Dmytruk talks about another act of lawlessness and the seizure of a church with the beating of a priest and parishioners, Bishop Theodosiy appeals to the UN Human Rights Committee, the lawyer Fr Nikita Chekman speaks about human rights violations against believers... And the hostess, against the backdrop of the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra, concludes that the UOC is practically the centre of "pro-Moscow priests, pro-Moscow parishioners and pro-Russian propaganda."

But what does the statistics say? What is being talked about? By mid-2023, 12 cases of collaboration were proven among the clergy, out of 12,000 priests serving in 9,000 parishes. That is, about 0.1% of the total number of priests, within the margin of minimal mathematical error. It is even less among the parishioners of our churches.

However, the number of Orthodox believers who are currently defending Ukraine amounts to hundreds of thousands. Are they also "pro-Moscow collaborators"?

On the other hand, in just 2022, the SBU investigated over 2,600 criminal cases related to collaboration, with 300 of them sent to court. Among the defendants are high and mid-level officials, law enforcement officers, educators and ordinary employees. So, among these 2,600 cases, only 12 representatives of the UOC were involved – and this is the official statistics from the SBU! But for some reason, this is not mentioned by Bihus.

And the icing on the cake: in early February 2024, the SBU announced the exposure and arrest of a network of FSB agents consisting of former and current employees of Ukrainian intelligence agencies. Moreover, the evidence base is very serious: it concerns specific individuals and specific information transmitted, regarding strategic objects of civil infrastructure, energy and defence of Ukraine.

Do you get it now? There are dozens of SBU employees who are actively working for the enemy, leaking information about strategic objects, and there are 12 UOC priests who reposted on social media or expressed pro-Russian narratives during personal conversations or correspondence! Do you see the difference?

If so, then the question arises: why does no one demand that the SBU be recognized as a "criminal organization" working for the enemy? Probably, because our law lacks the concept of "collective guilt", doesn’t it?

But none of this stops the journalist from Bihus to confidently claim to have exposed a whole network of FSB "agents", allegedly operating under the guise of the "Moscow Patriarchate”. This network allegedly involves members of parliament and even an American human rights activist and UOC lawyer, Robert Amsterdam. According to Bihus, it is this "network" that contributes to blocking international aid to Ukraine.

And once again, there's a reference to the Lubianka – implying that they're applauding there. So, the terrible corruption scandals in the army, theft of humanitarian aid, bribes taken by TCK employees, embezzlement of funds for the Armed Forces, the notorious expensive eggs bought for the army, and much more – none of this gets applause at the Lubianka (probably because the country is being looted by true "patriots"), but they do applaud when Orthodox journalists talk about seizures of UOC temples.

We wonder if the Bihus team themselves understand all this or not? They should understand – after all, they've been involved in corruption scandals for several years.

The journalist then complains that the law on the UOC ban did not pass beyond the first reading in parliament and that our deputies are so bad that they do not want to ban the UOC. Then she directly hints that special services will deal with all these deputies if they do not vote accordingly.

Meanwhile, Bihus attributes the leading role in blocking this law to an "agent network" consisting of journalists from UOJ, Kozak 1 and some clergy members associated with the Orthodox media sphere.

They all receive biased and evaluative characteristics, and the Bihus hostess unequivocally declares that they work according to "Kremlin instructions", creating thousands and thousands of texts and shaping the necessary picture for the Kremlin. So, the image for the Kremlin is not created by those who seize UOC temples, beat UOC believers and priests and break locks with bulldozers and grinders but by those who report on it! Well, you’ve got the idea.

However, just three months ago, Dmytro Bihus spoke of the lawlessness of the SBU towards his employees and used practically the same expressions, but not in relation to the UOC but... to the SBU itself!

So, what exactly is the UOJ’s fault? You won't believe it, but according to Bihus, it's because in 2018 our platform criticized Poroshenko! As evidence, Bihus even provided a screenshot from some news article dating back six years. So, one can conclude that anyone who criticises Poroshenko today (or criticised him before) is a "Kremlin agent" who uses "Moscow instructions".

Did we understand Bihus correctly? If so, then today, everyone in the party of President Zelensky and the vast majority of Ukrainian deputies, politicians and journalists fall under the category of "Kremlin agents".

The UOJ is also accused of quoting Patriarch Kirill – they say, how could they. But if journalists are accused of quoting Patriarch Kirill or, for example, Vladimir Putin, then everyone will have to be judged, including Bihus because exclusively "patriotic" platforms constantly quote Patriarch Kirill, from the "Spiritual Front" to "RBC-Ukraine".

But that's not all. The hostess is most outraged by the fact that an Orthodox media platform actively covers the problems existing in the country's religious sphere: the actions of Filaret (Denysenko), constant seizures and pressure from the authorities and nationalists against UOC communities, harassment of believers and violations of their civil rights and freedom of religion.

Bihus presents it as if it doesn't exist at all, and what is discussed in the Orthodox media sphere is not just untrue but lies and a real provocation against Ukraine.

Bihus with all its demeanor shows that "everything is fine" here, and only "FSB agents" lie.

But the problem is that the lawlessness towards the UOC is known not only in Russia but also in the West, where increasingly uncomfortable questions are being raised about human rights violations in the religious field by the Zelensky government. One can recall not only statements by Tucker Carlson and American politicians but also UN reports on human rights violations in the religious sphere of Ukraine. Hiding the facts of persecution against the UPTC is impossible. On the other hand, authorities should not hide them but stop them. The difference is obvious.

On the other hand, since the arrest of the UOJ journalists on March 12, we have all witnessed not only a gross violation of human rights but also the trampling of the fundamental basis of democracy – freedom of speech.

So, for almost 15 minutes, the girl from Bihus quotes excerpts from the internal correspondence of UOJ journalists, cites correspondence with various people from the work chat and talks about meetings with members of the Ukrainian Parliament. All of this is presented as illegal activity.

But the thing is that agreeing or disagreeing with the law, as well as seeking legitimate ways to slow down its adoption, is a parliamentarian’s job.

Our MPs are not robots to just press the "for" button; they are people who are obligated to think, analyse, compare and make decisions that serve the interests of the Ukrainian people rather than following orders and wishes of the authorities. Especially when it comes to a law against the Church.

Furthermore, the hostess is very outraged by that famous interview given by Robert Amsterdam to Tucker Carlson. Referring to Amsterdam, Bihus exclusively labels him as a "Moscow lobbyist", and based on the overall narrative and framing of the question, it turns out that Robert Amsterdam is also directly involved and one of the "FSB agents".

However, we remind that Amsterdam is a persona non grata in Russia, a person who defended Russian opposition figures and could be called an enemy of the Putin regime. Why on earth would he suddenly start working for the Kremlin? Just because he reminded our authorities of the Constitution of Ukraine? Strange logic. And the accusations against Amsterdam that he receives money for his work look absolutely absurd.

Yes, he does receive money. Because people who aren't kept on a short leash by the intelligence agencies due to compromising materials usually work for compensation. On the other hand, presenting to the public the amounts that Amsterdam's organisation (which is not just one person) charges for its work (around $1400 per hour) against the backdrop of the sums allocated by our government to fight against the UOC in the American parliament and media (around $3.5 million) is just ridiculous.

The Bihus team (or rather their orderers) are particularly outraged by Amsterdam's warning to Ukrainian MPs regarding criminal liability for voting and adopting law 8371: everyone who votes for it may face sanctions from the U.S. Overall, the message suggests that Amsterdam's activities are causing a rift in Ukrainian society.

One question: did Amsterdam initiate the seizures of churches, the arrests of journalists and bishops, and legal proceedings against them?

Three months ago, when Bihus was under pressure from the SBU, they weren't just talking about freedom of speech and the ability to truthfully report information, they were shouting about it on every possible platform available to them and desperately trying to reach Western media platforms. And suddenly, they changed their tune abruptly. Isn't that strange?

In the end, no serious evidence pointing to unlawful activities of Orthodox journalists was provided. All the "facts" that ended up in the hands of Bihus came from the SBU, with which the story was made up. Its dirty nature is so obvious to Bihus themselves that they didn't dare to upload it to their YouTube channel for foreign users.

For example, if your account is registered in the USA or Austria, you won't be able to watch the "investigation" about UOC journalists on the Bihus.info channel. Why, one might ask? Because this story is not about an "investigation" but about persecution – of freedom of speech, journalists and the violation of human rights in Ukraine. Persecution, which was initiated by the Security Service of Ukraine and carried out by Bihus.info.

We hope that Dmytro and his team are ashamed of this. And we understand that their interest in the Church is simply because "religion is opium for the people".

To sum it up, throughout the entire program, Bihus operates on just a few narratives: "Moscow Church", "FSB priests", "pro-Russian priests", "FSB agents", "Kremlin instructions”, etc.

The main goal of the "investigation" is to discredit the UOC as much as possible and achieve a positive vote for the law against the UOC.

The second goal is to once again convey to the common man that the main enemy of Ukraine is priests and the Church.

The third is to justify the illegal actions of the authorities against Orthodox journalists, priests, hierarchs and UOC believers in general.

Have these goals been achieved? Judging by the reaction of the blogosphere and comments – partially yes. But in reality, not only these goals have been achieved. The story itself really divides society, instills confusion and hatred among some Ukrainian citizens towards others.

And that's exactly where we can talk about the "interest of the Kremlin"...

Read also