Comments by "Vladimir Bogorad" (@vlbogorad) on "CNN"
channel.
-
82
-
72
-
8
-
7
-
5
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Vladimir Bogorad, California attorney; Ph.D. in Law, Russia
Today, a special session of the UN General Assembly on the situation in Ukraine resumed its work at the headquarters in New York.
It is noted that the main purpose of the special session is to consider a resolution condemning the referendums held in the Donetsk and Lugansk people's republics, as well as in the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions on the issue of joining Russia. Before the vote on the document, which is scheduled to be held before the end of this week, a debate will have to take place for several days.
Please take my opinion into account.
The treaties on the covered territories with Russia cannot be legal, because one of the parties is completely deprived of legal personality:
1. Article 73 of the Constitution of Ukraine states that the issues of changing the territory of the country shall be decided exclusively by an all-Ukrainian referendum. In the Constitution of any country, not only Ukraine and Russia, it is a hornbook provision that only the people of the whole country should decide whether to tear off part of the land. Without such a rule, no state could resist.
2. The reference to the right of nations to self-determination is ridiculous. There is no "Zaporozhye" nation, no "Kherson" nation, no "Donetsk" nation. If this is accepted, tomorrow every village, every alley around the corner would declare the right to self-determination. States would crumble like a house of cards. Russia would be the first victim.
3. Russia signed these treaties in flagrant violation of its international obligation. Under the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, Russia pledged to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine in exchange for the renunciation of nuclear weapons. Contrary to a Russian excuse, this instrument is valid without ratification. Article 15 of the Federal Statute of the Russian Federation "On International Treaties" of July 15, 1995 states that ratification is required if it is provided for in the treaty itself. However, the Budapest Memorandum, according to its text, does not require ratification. On the contrary, it is clearly stated at the end of the document that it enters into force immediately upon signing the document.
4. Decisions in these referenda shall are taken in the absence of free expression of will. A war is raging in Ukraine. Referendums were held under the auspices of the invader - the one who was going to annex the "liberated" lands. Thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of voters have fled their homes. For whatever reason, they did not vote. Bullets whistled over the heads of those who remained, shells exploded, they buried the dead, death threats were heard from both sides, fear hung over people everywhere, they were afraid to open their mouths. A man with a machine gun came for the voice. Is it a free vote?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Four reasons ас то why these Russian referendums in Ukraine are a fascist mockery of the laws of Ukraine and Russia, the traditions of civilized humanity. Read it:
1. Article 73 of the Constitution of Ukraine states that the issues of changing the territory of the country shall be decided exclusively by an all-Ukrainian referendum. In the Constitution of any country in the world, not only Ukraine and Russia, it is written that only the people of the whole country should decide whether to dig up a piece of land from themselves. Without such a rule, no state could resist. Ask Putin, if tomorrow people on Sakhalin island vote to surrender to Japan, will he let them go? Like he "let go" Chechnya.
2. They say that the UN documents record the right of nations to self-determination. Yes, NATIONS. But no one has ever heard of the "Zaporozhye" nation. About the "Kherson" nation. About the "Donetsk" nation. If this is accepted, tomorrow every village, every alley around the corner would declare the right to self-determination. All states would crumble like a house of cards. Russia would be the first victim.
3. A war is raging in Ukraine. Referendums are held under the auspices of the invader - the one who is going to annex the "liberated" lands. Thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of voters have fled their homes. For whatever reason, they do not vote. Bullets whistle over the heads of those who remain, shells explode, the dead are buried, death threats are heard on both sides, widespread fear, people are afraid to open their mouths. A man with a gun comes for your voice. What kind of free voting is Putin talking about?
4. Finally, there is the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, which Russia signed and under which it pledged to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine in exchange for abandoning nuclear weapons. In Russia, the idlers on all channels repeat that Russia should not comply with this document, because it has not been ratified by Russia. Lies. The lack of ratification does not absolve Russia from fulfilling its obligation. Article 15 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On International Treaties" of 15 July 1995 states that ratification is required if it is provided for in the international treaty itself. However, the Budapest Memorandum, according to its text, does not require ratification. On the contrary, it is clearly stated at the end of the document that it enters into force immediately upon signature. So Russia brazenly refuses to do what it has signed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There were the referendums one year ago on the Ukranian lands captured by Russia. It was a fascist mockery of the laws of Ukraine and Russia, the traditions of civilized humanity. Read it:
1. Article 73 of the Constitution of Ukraine states that the issues of changing the territory of the country shall be decided exclusively by an all-Ukrainian referendum. In the Constitution of any country in the world, not only Ukraine and Russia, it is written that only the people of the whole country should decide whether to dig up a piece of land from themselves. Without such a rule, no state could resist. Ask Putin, if tomorrow people on Sakhalin island vote to surrender to Japan, will he let them go? Like he "let go" Chechnya.
2. They say that the UN documents record the right of nations to self-determination. Yes, NATIONS. But no one has ever heard of the "Zaporozhye" nation. About the "Kherson" nation. About the "Donetsk" nation. If this is accepted, tomorrow every village, every alley around the corner would declare the right to self-determination. All states would crumble like a house of cards. Russia would be the first victim.
3. A war is raging in Ukraine. Referendums are held under the auspices of the invader - the one who is going to annex the "liberated" lands. Thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of voters have fled their homes. For whatever reason, they do not vote. Bullets whistle over the heads of those who remain, shells explode, the dead are buried, death threats are heard on both sides, widespread fear, people are afraid to open their mouths. A man with a gun comes for your voice. What kind of free voting is Putin talking about?
4. Finally, there is the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, which Russia signed and under which it pledged to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine in exchange for abandoning nuclear weapons. In Russia, the idlers on all channels repeat that Russia should not comply with this document, because it has not been ratified by Russia. Lies. The lack of ratification does not absolve Russia from fulfilling its obligation. Article 15 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On International Treaties" of 15 July 1995 states that ratification is required if it is provided for in the international treaty itself. However, the Budapest Memorandum, according to its text, does not require ratification. On the contrary, it is clearly stated at the end of the document that it enters into force immediately upon signature. So Russia brazenly refuses to do what it has signed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Four reasons аs то why these Russian referendums in Ukraine are a fascist mockery of the laws of Ukraine and Russia, the traditions of civilized humanity. Read it:
1. Article 73 of the Constitution of Ukraine states that the issues of changing the territory of the country shall be decided exclusively by an all-Ukrainian referendum. In the Constitution of any country in the world, not only Ukraine and Russia, it is written that only the people of the whole country should decide whether to dig up a piece of land from themselves. Without such a rule, no state could resist. Ask Putin, if tomorrow people on Sakhalin island vote to surrender to Japan, will he let them go? Like he "let go" Chechnya.
2. They say that the UN documents record the right of nations to self-determination. Yes, NATIONS. But no one has ever heard of the "Zaporozhye" nation. About the "Kherson" nation. About the "Donetsk" nation. If this is accepted, tomorrow every village, every alley around the corner would declare the right to self-determination. All states would crumble like a house of cards. Russia would be the first victim.
3. A war is raging in Ukraine. Referendums are held under the auspices of the invader - the one who is going to annex the "liberated" lands. Thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of voters have fled their homes. For whatever reason, they do not vote. Bullets whistle over the heads of those who remain, shells explode, the dead are buried, death threats are heard on both sides, widespread fear, people are afraid to open their mouths. A man with a gun comes for your voice. What kind of free voting is Putin talking about?
4. Finally, there is the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, which Russia signed and under which it pledged to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine in exchange for abandoning nuclear weapons. In Russia, the idlers on all channels repeat that Russia should not comply with this document, because it has not been ratified by Russia. Lies. The lack of ratification does not absolve Russia from fulfilling its obligation. Article 15 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On International Treaties" of 15 July 1995 states that ratification is required if it is provided for in the international treaty itself. However, the Budapest Memorandum, according to its text, does not require ratification. On the contrary, it is clearly stated at the end of the document that it enters into force immediately upon signature. So Russia brazenly refuses to do what it has signed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There is a way out of the impasse in Crimea, if bias is discarded. Crimea should belong to both countries. Crimea has never been part of an independent Russian state as it exists today. Crimea belonged to the people inhabiting Russia and Ukraine, when these territories were part of the USSR, and when they were part of the Russian Empire. The current state border between Ukraine and Crimea is the same injustice as if such a border were between Russia and Crimea. In international law, there is the concept of condominium (condominium) - an entity over which two states exercise sovereignty and possession. For example, Pheasant Island, owned by France and Spain, under the Treaty of the Pyrenees in 1659, after the Thirty Years' War. Russia cannot afford to be in international isolation for thirty years. It must move towards a compromise. The whole world sees that Crimea was not rightfully annexed, and this curse cannot hang over Russia forever.
Crimea was annexed on the basis of an illegal referendum in one region. In the Constitution of every country, including Russia and Ukraine, it is written that the separation of any territory is possible only by popular vote. The whole country. Otherwise, if each region could choose the country to which it would like to join, not a single state would have survived. Ask Putin, if tomorrow they vote on Sakhalin to surrender to Japan, will they let him go? The way he let go of Chechnya.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Возмущаются, что над Навальным в колонии издеваются. А где были протесты, когда его незаконно арестовали? Выдающиеся адвокаты молчали в тряпочку, когда Навальному заменили условный срок на реальный, когда заменять уже было нечего, и потом, когда произвол стал очевиден, нагромождали новые несуразные обвинения и осуждения. Срок условного лишения свободы Алексея Навального истёк 30 декабря 2020 года. Как говорится, на свободу с чистой совестью. После 30 декабря ни ФСИН, ни суд не имели к нему никакого отношения. В том, что его тогда задержали, был вопиющий произвол и грубое нарушение закона. По закону, любое воздействие на условно осуждённого допускается только в течение испытательного срока. Согласно ст. 73 ч. 7 УК РФ, только суд и только в течение испытательного срока может "дополнить ранее установленные для условно осужденного обязанности." Соглано ст. 74 УК РФ, суд может "продлить испытательный срок," но если испытательный срок истёк, то нечего продлевать. Всё это касается и замены условного срока на реальный. Согласно ст. 74 ч. 2.1 УК РФ, только "в течение продленного испытательного срока" условный срок может быть заменен на реальный. После 30 декабря Навальный не является "условно осуждённым," "отбывающим наказание в виде лишения свободы", и ни ФСИН, ни суд не имеют над ним никакой ЮРИСДИКЦИИ. С таким же успехом можно было схватить и арестовать любого другого человека. В данном случае, ФСИН и суд, какие бы претензии они не имели к осуждённому, могли реагировать только до 30 декабря 2020г. Дальше их поезд ушёл.Но с этим они смириться не хотели. Лихорадочно искали правовое основание, по которому суд сохранял бы юрисдикцию над отбывшим условный срок лишения свободы, чтобы заменить то, чего уже нет: срок отбытый в прошлом на реальный в настоящем. Другими словами, искали право суда рассмотреть замену условного срока на реальный после того как срок истёк. Такое основание нашли в Постановлении Пленума Верховного Суда Российской Федерации от 20 декабря 2011 г. "О практике применения судами законодательства об исполнении приговора," где в п. 10 сказано: "Решение об отмене условного осуждения и исполнении наказания, назначенного по приговору суда, в отношении условно осужденного, скрывшегося от контроля в течение испытательного срока, может быть принято судом и в случае, когда рассмотрение данного вопроса осуществляется по истечении установленного ему испытательного срока."Во-первых, Навальный не "скрывался." Всем известно, как он оказался в Германии. Он не скрывался и до того, ФСИН было прекрасно известно его местонахождение. Когда находился в России, был в открытом доступе для воздействия. ФСИН, если имел к нему претензии, мог инициировать замену условно грока реальным в любой момент. Если они проворонили свои возможности, то это не проблема Навального. Итак, не было "скрывался." Даже по постановлению Пленума, арестовывать его уже было нельзя.Во-вторых, решение Пленума не основано на законе. В УК ясно сказано, что меры воздействия на условно осуждённого применяются только в течение испытательного срока. То, что Пленум решил, нигде в законе не предусмотрено. Если законодатель не решил, что суд уполномочен заменять срок после срока, то сами судьи, какого ранга бы они не были, не могут сами принимать законы. Пленум определённо вышел за пределы своей компетенции.Так что судья Морозова арестовала Навального без закона. По шучьему велению. А щука до сих пор в пруду.
1
-
1
-
1
-
The Jews are first in everything in the world, and that’s why they are hated. Out of envy. At first, Christians transcribed the Torah from the Jews and called it the Bible, and after half a century, Muslims, on the same basis, transcribed their Koran. Despite the fact that Jews make up only 0.25% of the world's population, they account for 27% of all Nobel Prizes. “If humanity does not yet have a cure for cancer, if it has not yet mastered Mars, if it is still unable to overcome hunger and find new sources of energy, then this is only because those Jewish geniuses who were supposed to make all these discoveries burned in the ovens of Auschwitz." Elie Wiesel, Nobel laureate.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1