Stupnitsky: According to SBU's manual, I cannot be accused of treason
The UOJ journalist explained that there are no legal grounds to accuse him of state treason.
The UOJ journalist Valeriy Stupnitsky stated that he categorically disagrees with the accusations brought against him, particularly of state treason. Explaining his position regarding the recusal of the group of prosecutors due to their biased attitude, Valeriy Stupnitsky personally presented evidence in court to prove his innocence.
Speaking about the accusation of state treason, Valeriy used the definitions of this term by the head of the SBU, Vasyl Maliuk. In the practical guide on criminal-legal assessment and demarcation titled "Criminal Collaboration in Conditions of Armed Aggression", the head of the SBU emphasizes that a mandatory condition for such qualification of accusation should be the fact of committing certain activities in favor of a hostile state together with its representatives. Such representatives exclusively include official individuals of a foreign state, diplomats, intelligence officers, etc.
"I deny that my journalistic activities and those of my colleagues defending the UOC can be considered hostile. And I strongly state that I have never had any acquaintances, contacts, let alone conspiracy with representatives of the aggressor country. I voluntarily provided law enforcement with passwords to all contacts and correspondence in messengers, as well as from my computer," he emphasized.
The UOJ employee added that in the mentioned manual, Maliuk asserts that if there is no foreign recipient in the case, it cannot be considered state treason.
"So, according to the law, there are no grounds to accuse me of state treason," Stupnitsky concluded.
As written by the UOJ, the journalist emphasized in court that the OCU is not a state attribute, and criticizing it is not a crime.
