Lawyer explains why UOJ journalists cannot be charged with treason
The human rights defender cited a number of publications on the UOJ website, which refute the charges brought against his client.
On July 19 in Kyiv, during a court session addressing the pre-trial detention of UOJ journalist Andriy Ovcharenko, the lawyer explained the baselessness of the prosecution's suspicion of state treason against the Orthodox website's employee.
The human rights lawyer, citing the suspicion text, noted that Ovcharenko is accused of belonging to a certain criminal group founded by Viktor Vishnevetsky to harm Ukraine's informational security and help the Russian Federation conduct subversive activities against Ukraine through information-psychological special operations aimed at inciting inter-religious tensions, forming viewpoints in society to support the aggressor state, anti-Ukrainian propaganda, and discrediting Ukraine, undermining trust in Ukrainian patriotic society, and bringing Ukraine back into the religious, cultural, and political influence zone.
The pre-trial investigation body claims that to allegedly achieve their goal, the criminal group, which included UOJ journalists, published various articles on the website (39 in total).
"The pre-trial investigation body and prosecutors only reviewed a small part of the publications posted on the UOJ website. However, they paid no attention to the overall position of the UOJ editorial board, which was highlighted in many publications," he emphasized, adding, "I would like to briefly present the contents of publications that I believe are very important, as they fundamentally refute the goal of the alleged criminal organization mentioned by the prosecutor and investigator."
The lawyer explained that on May 15, 2022, a publication titled "Brief Results of the UOC Military Synod" stated that the UOC clearly indicated that the current war is aggression by the Russian Federation, which daily claims the lives of Ukraine's sons and daughters, including UOC believers. More than a quarter of parishes have been affected by the hostilities.
On September 29, 2022, the UOJ published an article titled "Unexpected Theology of Patriarch Kirill," stating that on February 24, it was not Ukrainian troops that invaded Russian territory, nor Ukrainian missiles that destroyed peaceful Russian cities. If that were the case, Russian soldiers would indeed be defenders of their homeland, faith, and families. However, the truth is that neither Russia nor its residents are threatened. It is Kyiv's suburbs, not Moscow's, that are in ruins. Homes are being destroyed in Ukraine, burying innocent people under their rubble. It is Ukrainian parents mourning their dead children.
On October 31, 2022, the UOJ published an article titled "ROC, the State, and the War: What Metropolitan Kirill Would Say to Patriarch Kirill," quoting the patriarch's words from 20 years ago. At that time, he said that if the state commits actions inconsistent with Christian morality, the Church must promptly and directly condemn those actions. The article essentially criticizes Patriarch Kirill for his current position and inconsistency.
On October 31, 2022, another UOJ article titled "Russia Bombs Ukraine Because Ukraine Is No Longer Orthodox?" stated: "Another Monday in Ukraine begins with massive shelling by Russian missiles. Explosions are heard in Kyiv, Kharkiv, Lviv, Dnipro, Zaporizhzhia, Vinnytsia, Kryvyi Rih, etc. Previously destroyed energy facilities are being targeted again, and new ones are being destroyed. People are left without light, heat, and water. These are not Nazis or military personnel, but ordinary civilians with children. Meanwhile, Russian Telegram channels are passionately discussing U.S. Congressman Jamie Raskin's words that Russia, as an Orthodox country with traditional social values, must be destroyed. Orthodox channels especially actively discuss this, seeing Raskin's words as confirmation of Russia's righteousness in its war with Ukraine... Throughout history, one of the main tasks of the aggressor has been to convince their supporters that they face opponents who are significantly more immoral, foolish, and ungodly. In other words, those who are not so pitiful. Thus, it is quite permissible to bomb them a little for their own good. But where is the Orthodoxy in such 'education'? How is it expressed?" the article states.
Addressing the court, the lawyer questioned how such rhetoric could be used to turn anyone towards the influence of Russia, or motivate positive attitudes towards the actions of its authorities and the ROC.
"It seems to me that this is complete absurdity. We see the clear and consistent position of the Union of Orthodox Journalists. Russia is the aggressor. It bombs Ukraine. Every day, civilians and UOC believers suffer from Russian aggression. The Russian Patriarch supports all this, and the Russian Orthodox Church also supports it. It seems to me that the prosecutor and the investigator deliberately ignored all the publications on the UOJ website," he noted.
According to him, all conclusions were made based on dubious expertise, but no attempts were made to communicate with the journalists or understand their position.
"All these publications were not reviewed by the investigator and prosecutor, although we submitted the relevant petition. It is not advantageous for them, as it would completely undermine the prosecution's position. But these publications, in my opinion, refute the goal of the alleged criminal organization. If there is no goal of the criminal organization to undermine Ukraine from within in the religious sphere, then there is no Article 111, and no objective suspicion of state treason. Therefore, we believe that these circumstances are key to changing the preventive measure to a milder one. We ask that these circumstances be considered in reviewing this application," the lawyer concluded.
🙏You can help support Orthodox journalists' defense through the following details:
Card: 5375 4112 1710 9227, send.monobank.ua
As reported by the UOJ, during the court hearing, the journalist inquired why he is on trial instead of the MPs mentioned by the UOJ.
