A Russian academic investigating the fate of ethnic Germans deported by Stalin during World War II has had his research seized by security services.
History professor Mikhail Suprun was briefly arrested in the far north of Russia last month, but the incident has only now come to light.
Prof Suprun told the BBC he has been ordered not to comment on the case.
Thousands of ethnic Germans were sent to remote areas far from the war front after Hitler attacked the USSR in 1941.
Although they had lived in southern Russia for generations - mostly along the River Volga - Soviet leader Joseph Stalin did not trust them.
Prof Suprun had managed to track down the files of 5,000 deportees and had interviewed hundreds of their descendents.
But now the documents he had collected over 10 years, his computer and all his hard drives have been seized by the FSB - the powerful successor to the KGB.
Although he has been ordered not to comment on the case, a few days ago he described the seizure as absurd.
He said it was part of a Russian government attempt to control how the history of World War II is told.
Sunday, 18 October 2009
Thursday, 15 October 2009
Critics say Tymoshenko bent on trampling free speech
Yulia Tymoshenko’s failed attempt to ban negative ads of herself sparkle speculations about her authoritarian tendencies.
Bowing to pressure from free-speech advocates and political rivals, Yulia Tymoshenko’s political party dropped a controversial lawsuit banning “unfair” advertising against the prime minister, who is a leading candidate in the Jan. 17 presidential election.
But the damage may have already been done to Tymoshenko’s tattered reputation as a democrat. A Kyiv judge in the Pechersk district court, Serhiy Vovk, ruled on Sept. 22 that a video produced by one of Tymoshenko’s rivals – the Party of Regions – used colors and slogans from Tymoshenko’s own advertising campaign in a way that damaged her reputation.
The court ruling immediately fanned fears that Tymoshenko as president will have a governing style more like a dictator than a democrat, using whatever power she has to squelch dissent.
Her Batkivshyna Party announced on Oct. 5 that it decided to withdraw a lawsuit, a step that led the judge to cancel his ad ban two days later. The Regions Party video in question mocked Tymoshenko’s slogan “She’s working.” It included images of sad, destitute people and dispensed advice that the prime minister should stop “filling people with promises” and to “take a rest” instead.
While the Regions Party ad indeed mocked Tymoshenko, it would never have come close to being banned in truly democratic nations. Vovk, the judge who issued the pro-Tymoshenko ruling, didn’t stop with this ad. The court also banned “any individual or legal entities” from “posting” any “unfair advertisements against the head of Ukraine’s government” on billboards, via the Internet, radio and television.
To the shock of free-speech advocates, the ruling concluded that the ads against Tymoshenko were “anti-social in nature” in “discrediting Tymoshenko,” and by “increasing social tensions” could cause “other negative consequences.”
An avalanche of criticism followed. A broad range of political parties and non-governmental organizations complained that the ruling violated freedom of speech. Such anti-democratic sentiments are classic Tymoshenko, her critics say, and evidence of her dangerous and anti-democratic principles.
“It is unconstitutional to establish censorship all over Ukraine. It is illegal to limit the constitutional freedom of speech, repress the mass media,” said Serhiy Kivalov, a lawmaker from the Party of Regions who chairs parliament’s justice committee. “Instead of protecting citizens’ rights, a judge canceled them. And it was a political force that is running for power in a democratic country that had asked [the court] to do it.”
Kivalov is one of the unlikeliest persons in Ukraine to be advocating for citizens’ rights and free speech. He headed the Central Election Committee during the 2004 presidential election that was famously rigged, prompting the democratic Orange Revolution that led to a new vote.
The Party of Regions in general has poor democratic credentials. But in this argument, at least, the party led by ex-Prime Minister Victor Yanukovych – the current front-runner in the Jan. 17 presidential election – stood side-by-side with past critics, including human rights organizations, lawyers and mass media.
Ukraine’s Helsinki Union for Human Rights, a non-governmental organization representing lawyers and human rights activists and Olena Lukash, a parliamentarian from the Regions Party, sent petitions to the Kyiv court of appeals to cancel the Pechersk court‘s decision. Lukash also asked the Council of Judges and High Council of Justice to dismiss the judge.
Lukash said European courts usually uphold the citizens’ rights to criticize politicians, even if such attacks are “considered provocative or offensive.” She quoted an abstract from one such ruling: “Under the democratic system, the government’s activities should not only be controlled by the legislative and the judicial powers but also by the mass media and public opinion.”
Whether it was a slip of the tongue or not, Tymoshenko on the Savik Shuster TV political talk show on Sept. 25 revealed what many believe to be her attitude towards the people. “Who told you people don’t want dictatorship?” But she quickly recovered on the program, saying: “I would never allow censorship.” But then she also retreated again, saying: “I think criticism is fine, but dirty advertisement is banned by the law. And if it cannot be challenged in court, this is dictatorship and not a democracy.”
Valeriy Pysarenko, a lawmaker and Tymoshenko ally, said the court ban was related to a particular video produced by the Regions Party and has no relevance to criticism of Tymoshenko in the media. “The prime minister doesn’t control TV channels,” Pysarenko said. “They are controlled by tycoons. Government is roughly criticized by media all the time.”
And ads against Tymoshenko continue to appear. On Sept. 28 billboards mocking Tymoshenko’s “She's working” campaign were posted in Mariupol, a steel-town city on Ukraine’s Azov Sea coast. Kyiv streets are plastered with them also, all done in the white-and-red style of Tymoshenko’s own ads.
Volodymyr Fesenko, a political analyst, said problems with unfair advertising cannot be solved through the courts. “It creates a very dangerous precedent,” he said. But Fesenko said “unfair advertisement” should be defined by law.
However, even the notion that “unfair” free speech can be defined or should be regulated – let alone banned – is antithetical to democratic values.
“Everyone has his own opinion on what discredits a politician and such opinions are often contradictory,” said Tetyana Montian, a Kyiv-based lawyer who has been outspoken on human rights issues.
Bowing to pressure from free-speech advocates and political rivals, Yulia Tymoshenko’s political party dropped a controversial lawsuit banning “unfair” advertising against the prime minister, who is a leading candidate in the Jan. 17 presidential election.
But the damage may have already been done to Tymoshenko’s tattered reputation as a democrat. A Kyiv judge in the Pechersk district court, Serhiy Vovk, ruled on Sept. 22 that a video produced by one of Tymoshenko’s rivals – the Party of Regions – used colors and slogans from Tymoshenko’s own advertising campaign in a way that damaged her reputation.
The court ruling immediately fanned fears that Tymoshenko as president will have a governing style more like a dictator than a democrat, using whatever power she has to squelch dissent.
Her Batkivshyna Party announced on Oct. 5 that it decided to withdraw a lawsuit, a step that led the judge to cancel his ad ban two days later. The Regions Party video in question mocked Tymoshenko’s slogan “She’s working.” It included images of sad, destitute people and dispensed advice that the prime minister should stop “filling people with promises” and to “take a rest” instead.
While the Regions Party ad indeed mocked Tymoshenko, it would never have come close to being banned in truly democratic nations. Vovk, the judge who issued the pro-Tymoshenko ruling, didn’t stop with this ad. The court also banned “any individual or legal entities” from “posting” any “unfair advertisements against the head of Ukraine’s government” on billboards, via the Internet, radio and television.
To the shock of free-speech advocates, the ruling concluded that the ads against Tymoshenko were “anti-social in nature” in “discrediting Tymoshenko,” and by “increasing social tensions” could cause “other negative consequences.”
An avalanche of criticism followed. A broad range of political parties and non-governmental organizations complained that the ruling violated freedom of speech. Such anti-democratic sentiments are classic Tymoshenko, her critics say, and evidence of her dangerous and anti-democratic principles.
“It is unconstitutional to establish censorship all over Ukraine. It is illegal to limit the constitutional freedom of speech, repress the mass media,” said Serhiy Kivalov, a lawmaker from the Party of Regions who chairs parliament’s justice committee. “Instead of protecting citizens’ rights, a judge canceled them. And it was a political force that is running for power in a democratic country that had asked [the court] to do it.”
Kivalov is one of the unlikeliest persons in Ukraine to be advocating for citizens’ rights and free speech. He headed the Central Election Committee during the 2004 presidential election that was famously rigged, prompting the democratic Orange Revolution that led to a new vote.
The Party of Regions in general has poor democratic credentials. But in this argument, at least, the party led by ex-Prime Minister Victor Yanukovych – the current front-runner in the Jan. 17 presidential election – stood side-by-side with past critics, including human rights organizations, lawyers and mass media.
Ukraine’s Helsinki Union for Human Rights, a non-governmental organization representing lawyers and human rights activists and Olena Lukash, a parliamentarian from the Regions Party, sent petitions to the Kyiv court of appeals to cancel the Pechersk court‘s decision. Lukash also asked the Council of Judges and High Council of Justice to dismiss the judge.
Lukash said European courts usually uphold the citizens’ rights to criticize politicians, even if such attacks are “considered provocative or offensive.” She quoted an abstract from one such ruling: “Under the democratic system, the government’s activities should not only be controlled by the legislative and the judicial powers but also by the mass media and public opinion.”
Whether it was a slip of the tongue or not, Tymoshenko on the Savik Shuster TV political talk show on Sept. 25 revealed what many believe to be her attitude towards the people. “Who told you people don’t want dictatorship?” But she quickly recovered on the program, saying: “I would never allow censorship.” But then she also retreated again, saying: “I think criticism is fine, but dirty advertisement is banned by the law. And if it cannot be challenged in court, this is dictatorship and not a democracy.”
Valeriy Pysarenko, a lawmaker and Tymoshenko ally, said the court ban was related to a particular video produced by the Regions Party and has no relevance to criticism of Tymoshenko in the media. “The prime minister doesn’t control TV channels,” Pysarenko said. “They are controlled by tycoons. Government is roughly criticized by media all the time.”
And ads against Tymoshenko continue to appear. On Sept. 28 billboards mocking Tymoshenko’s “She's working” campaign were posted in Mariupol, a steel-town city on Ukraine’s Azov Sea coast. Kyiv streets are plastered with them also, all done in the white-and-red style of Tymoshenko’s own ads.
Volodymyr Fesenko, a political analyst, said problems with unfair advertising cannot be solved through the courts. “It creates a very dangerous precedent,” he said. But Fesenko said “unfair advertisement” should be defined by law.
However, even the notion that “unfair” free speech can be defined or should be regulated – let alone banned – is antithetical to democratic values.
“Everyone has his own opinion on what discredits a politician and such opinions are often contradictory,” said Tetyana Montian, a Kyiv-based lawyer who has been outspoken on human rights issues.
Russian gangster said to have ordered murder of 4 Room shopping center director
The director of the Kyiv-based 4 Room shopping center, Shabab Aloyan, was threatened by Mirab S., a relative, before being killed, while a gangster known by the nickname of Mirab ordered the murder, Inferior Minister Yuriy Lutsenko said at a press conference in Kyiv on Wednesday.
The minister said that a second suspect detained by the police is wanted by the United States and Armenia.
"As our Russian colleagues testify, he is in the elite of killers," Lutsenko said.
According to him, the trial of the alleged killer should be conducted in Ukraine, as he is a suspect in three murders, including a murder of a policeman, in the country.
"According to our data, there are two Mirabs, one of them is a gangster and another is Mirab S. We think that the direct threats came from Mirab S., while the gangster ordered the murder…," the minister said.
When asked whether they had been detained, Lutsenko said: "They have been identified. Currently we're resolving questions: what their citizenship is, under which conditions they live in Russia and whether Ukraine has enough evidence to bring them to account."
As reported, the director of 4 Room shopping center died of gunshot wounds in hospital, while two security guards, employees of the Titan special unit detachment, died at the scene of the shooting at the 4 Room shopping center on October 2.
One of the two attackers died in hospital on Saturday of gunshot wounds and injuries received during a traffic accident.
The minister said that a second suspect detained by the police is wanted by the United States and Armenia.
"As our Russian colleagues testify, he is in the elite of killers," Lutsenko said.
According to him, the trial of the alleged killer should be conducted in Ukraine, as he is a suspect in three murders, including a murder of a policeman, in the country.
"According to our data, there are two Mirabs, one of them is a gangster and another is Mirab S. We think that the direct threats came from Mirab S., while the gangster ordered the murder…," the minister said.
When asked whether they had been detained, Lutsenko said: "They have been identified. Currently we're resolving questions: what their citizenship is, under which conditions they live in Russia and whether Ukraine has enough evidence to bring them to account."
As reported, the director of 4 Room shopping center died of gunshot wounds in hospital, while two security guards, employees of the Titan special unit detachment, died at the scene of the shooting at the 4 Room shopping center on October 2.
One of the two attackers died in hospital on Saturday of gunshot wounds and injuries received during a traffic accident.
Ukraine to hand Georgia 12 T-84 tanks in October
Ukraine will hand 12 T-84 Oplot tanks, developed by the Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau, to Georgia in October, Verkhovna Rada deputy Valerii Konovaliuk of the Party of Regions faction has announced to the press.
In his words, the state company for export and import of military and special-purpose products and services Ukrspetseksport will deliver the banks to the Georgian side.
The Georgian side has already transferred UAH 45 million of payment for the armour.
The Oplot main battle tank is outfit with a 125mm smoothbore KBA3 gun, a total of 40 rounds of separate loading ammunition (projectile and charge), of which 28 rounds are placed in the automatic loader. It is also equipped wit a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun with ammunition of 450 rounds and a 12.7mm anti-aircraft machine gun with ammunition of 1,250 rounds.
As Ukrainian News earlier reported, President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev in August criticised Ukraine for supplying arms to Georgia.
In October 2008, Russia assured that Ukraine had been holding lead in supplies of arms to Georgia in 2004-2007.
In his words, the state company for export and import of military and special-purpose products and services Ukrspetseksport will deliver the banks to the Georgian side.
The Georgian side has already transferred UAH 45 million of payment for the armour.
The Oplot main battle tank is outfit with a 125mm smoothbore KBA3 gun, a total of 40 rounds of separate loading ammunition (projectile and charge), of which 28 rounds are placed in the automatic loader. It is also equipped wit a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun with ammunition of 450 rounds and a 12.7mm anti-aircraft machine gun with ammunition of 1,250 rounds.
As Ukrainian News earlier reported, President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev in August criticised Ukraine for supplying arms to Georgia.
In October 2008, Russia assured that Ukraine had been holding lead in supplies of arms to Georgia in 2004-2007.
World Bank keeps Ukrainian GDP decline forecast for 2009 at 15 percent
The World Bank has kept the forecast of the decline in Ukraine's gross domestic product (GDP) in 2009 at 15%, however, it revised upwards the GDP growth forecast in 2010 from 1% to 2.5%, World Bank senior economist Ruslan Piontkivsky said at a press conference on Thursday.
In his words, inflation in Ukraine in 2009 is projected at up to 14% and in 2010 at up to 11%.
As the World Bank said in a press release, Consumer Price Index (CPI) growth in 2009 is expected at 13.8% and in 2010 at 10.6%. Ukraine's nominal GDP in 2009 is forecast to shrink to UAH 912.3 billion from UAH 949.9 billion in 2008, while in 2010 it is expected to expand to UAH 1.032 trillion.
As was reported earlier, the World Bank in July 2009 downgraded its forecast for the expected fall in Ukraine's GDP in 2009 from 9% to 15%, but improved its inflation forecast from 16.4% to 13.4%.
It predicted that real GDP was to grow 1% in 2010, with the consumers prices growing 10.5%.
In its recent economic update, the World Bank says that Ukraine's state and guaranteed debt in 2009 is to increase to 36.7% of GDP and in 2010 to 41.7%.
The bank's experts say that in 2009 there will be a deficit of Ukraine's current account balance worth 0.6% of GDP, whereas in 2010 Ukraine will see a surplus worth 0.1% of GDP.
"Ukraine's real sector bottomed out in the first half of 2009, but fiscal and financial pressures give no ground for complacency," reads the World Bank's economic update on Ukraine dated October 15, 2009.
The World Bank says that while reflecting the global outlook it improved its growth forecast for 2010 but domestic demand is likely to remain subdued.
In his words, inflation in Ukraine in 2009 is projected at up to 14% and in 2010 at up to 11%.
As the World Bank said in a press release, Consumer Price Index (CPI) growth in 2009 is expected at 13.8% and in 2010 at 10.6%. Ukraine's nominal GDP in 2009 is forecast to shrink to UAH 912.3 billion from UAH 949.9 billion in 2008, while in 2010 it is expected to expand to UAH 1.032 trillion.
As was reported earlier, the World Bank in July 2009 downgraded its forecast for the expected fall in Ukraine's GDP in 2009 from 9% to 15%, but improved its inflation forecast from 16.4% to 13.4%.
It predicted that real GDP was to grow 1% in 2010, with the consumers prices growing 10.5%.
In its recent economic update, the World Bank says that Ukraine's state and guaranteed debt in 2009 is to increase to 36.7% of GDP and in 2010 to 41.7%.
The bank's experts say that in 2009 there will be a deficit of Ukraine's current account balance worth 0.6% of GDP, whereas in 2010 Ukraine will see a surplus worth 0.1% of GDP.
"Ukraine's real sector bottomed out in the first half of 2009, but fiscal and financial pressures give no ground for complacency," reads the World Bank's economic update on Ukraine dated October 15, 2009.
The World Bank says that while reflecting the global outlook it improved its growth forecast for 2010 but domestic demand is likely to remain subdued.
Protests in Moscow at 'rigged' polls
Opposition activists in Russia are up in arms as tens of millions of Russians prepare to go to the polls across the country in local elections this weekend.
Opposition groups have been particularly angry in the capital Moscow, openly accusing authorities of rigging the election for the city assembly to ensure the ruling party maintains its tight grip on power.
The vote is the first test of the government's popularity since the economic crisis hit the country hard a year ago.
In the run-up to the elections, a small group of protesters took to the streets of Moscow, calling for Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and Yuri Luzhkov, the Mayor of Moscow, to be removed from office.
They were venting their frustration after the election commission blocked all serious opponents of the government from running as independent candidates in Sunday's crucial vote for the Moscow assembly.
The commission said their application forms had mistakes or the signatures needed to support the applications had been faked.
One opposition candidate - former minister Vladimir Milov - dismissed this as nonsense, accusing the authorities of fixing the election before people even had a chance to vote.
"There were multiple violations during the process of verifying my signatures and these were severe violations of the Moscow city electoral laws," said Mr Milov.
"Obviously due to a political order from the top Russian and Moscow authorities, all of the independent candidates were banned from the elections including myself.
"It looks like the Moscow city government chose to ban 100% of the independent candidates to secure the desired outcome of the election results."
Opposition politician Boris Nemtsov described Sunday's polls as "fraud, farce, 100%", suggesting Muscovites might boycott the election.
"No parties which have criticised the views of the Mayor of Moscow Yuri Luzhkov are taking part in the elections, and Vladimir Putin's party of corrupted bureaucracy is the biggest organisation trying to control power for future corruption," he said.
"That is why this is not an election and it's why an idea of a boycott is quite interesting and I believe that millions of Muscovites don't want to go at all (to vote)."
The move has left just the so-called official opposition parties such as the communists in the race. Critics say they are only tolerated because they do not pose any real threat to the government.
But Nikolai Gubenko, a communist member of the Moscow assembly, said even his party was facing unprecedented pressure from the authorities in this election.
"Never before have the authorities gone this far in trying to make campaigning difficult for the opposition - any opposition, regardless of party affiliations," he said.
"We are having enormous difficulties meeting people, holding campaign events, even putting up paid advertising posters."
Certainly, on the streets of the capital, all I have seen has been posters and activists for the ruling party, United Russia, and for a couple of other Kremlin-friendly parties.
A recent opinion poll showed that almost 40% of Muscovites believe Sunday's election will be rigged.
One Muscovite I spoke to said the election had already been decided.
"This is a show, not an election," he said. "My vote will not count anyway."
Another voter said she was pessimistic about the poll.
It doesn't matter how I vote, or how other people vote - the authorities will effectively appoint the people who they think are right," she said.
The election commission strenuously denied the allegations.
"If you look up the laws, you'll see that it is now a crime to rig an election," said Gennady Raykov, who is co-ordinating the Moscow city election.
"We already have cases where people have been prosecuted. I can look you in the eye and promise you that people will be free to vote for any of the registered candidates."
Critics say that may well be true, as the genuine opposition has already been eliminated.
Election observers say what is happening in the capital is particularly worrying because methods used for elections in Moscow - if successful - are then copied across the country.
It all flies in the face of President Dmitry Medvedev's recent promise to renew the country's political system and develop Russia in a democratic way.
Opposition groups have been particularly angry in the capital Moscow, openly accusing authorities of rigging the election for the city assembly to ensure the ruling party maintains its tight grip on power.
The vote is the first test of the government's popularity since the economic crisis hit the country hard a year ago.
In the run-up to the elections, a small group of protesters took to the streets of Moscow, calling for Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and Yuri Luzhkov, the Mayor of Moscow, to be removed from office.
They were venting their frustration after the election commission blocked all serious opponents of the government from running as independent candidates in Sunday's crucial vote for the Moscow assembly.
The commission said their application forms had mistakes or the signatures needed to support the applications had been faked.
One opposition candidate - former minister Vladimir Milov - dismissed this as nonsense, accusing the authorities of fixing the election before people even had a chance to vote.
"There were multiple violations during the process of verifying my signatures and these were severe violations of the Moscow city electoral laws," said Mr Milov.
"Obviously due to a political order from the top Russian and Moscow authorities, all of the independent candidates were banned from the elections including myself.
"It looks like the Moscow city government chose to ban 100% of the independent candidates to secure the desired outcome of the election results."
Opposition politician Boris Nemtsov described Sunday's polls as "fraud, farce, 100%", suggesting Muscovites might boycott the election.
"No parties which have criticised the views of the Mayor of Moscow Yuri Luzhkov are taking part in the elections, and Vladimir Putin's party of corrupted bureaucracy is the biggest organisation trying to control power for future corruption," he said.
"That is why this is not an election and it's why an idea of a boycott is quite interesting and I believe that millions of Muscovites don't want to go at all (to vote)."
The move has left just the so-called official opposition parties such as the communists in the race. Critics say they are only tolerated because they do not pose any real threat to the government.
But Nikolai Gubenko, a communist member of the Moscow assembly, said even his party was facing unprecedented pressure from the authorities in this election.
"Never before have the authorities gone this far in trying to make campaigning difficult for the opposition - any opposition, regardless of party affiliations," he said.
"We are having enormous difficulties meeting people, holding campaign events, even putting up paid advertising posters."
Certainly, on the streets of the capital, all I have seen has been posters and activists for the ruling party, United Russia, and for a couple of other Kremlin-friendly parties.
A recent opinion poll showed that almost 40% of Muscovites believe Sunday's election will be rigged.
One Muscovite I spoke to said the election had already been decided.
"This is a show, not an election," he said. "My vote will not count anyway."
Another voter said she was pessimistic about the poll.
It doesn't matter how I vote, or how other people vote - the authorities will effectively appoint the people who they think are right," she said.
The election commission strenuously denied the allegations.
"If you look up the laws, you'll see that it is now a crime to rig an election," said Gennady Raykov, who is co-ordinating the Moscow city election.
"We already have cases where people have been prosecuted. I can look you in the eye and promise you that people will be free to vote for any of the registered candidates."
Critics say that may well be true, as the genuine opposition has already been eliminated.
Election observers say what is happening in the capital is particularly worrying because methods used for elections in Moscow - if successful - are then copied across the country.
It all flies in the face of President Dmitry Medvedev's recent promise to renew the country's political system and develop Russia in a democratic way.
Tuesday, 13 October 2009
Michigan man denies committing World War II crimes in Ukraine
An 88-year-old retired auto engineer told a judge through his attorney Tuesday that he never shot Jews while serving in a Nazi-controlled police force in Ukraine during World War II, as the government began laying out its case as to why he should be deported.
John Kalymon, of suburban Detroit, denied the U.S. Department of Justice's assertion that he claimed to have fired his gun at least eight times and killed a Jew in August 1942, when Jews were being rounded up and removed from what is now Lviv, Ukraine.
During Tuesday's initial hearing, Judge Elizabeth Hacker told the Justice Department to file a brief detailing its case by early 2010. Xenos would have until Feb. 26 to respond to the brief. A trial date has not been set.
Kalymon was stripped of his U.S. citizenship in 2007, and the government is seeking to deport him. It hasn't been determined where he would go.
"My heart is pounding a little bit harder. I'm too old and sick," Kalymon told The Associated Press after the brief hearing.
There is no dispute that Kalymon, in his early 20s, served in the Nazi-sponsored Ukrainian Auxiliary Police in Lviv, which was part of Poland until the Soviet Union invaded in 1939.
His lawyer, Elias Xenos, described the police unit as a group with little authority, comparable to a reserve force guarding streets and rooms in police stations.
But the government says Kalymon should be deported because his service resulted in the persecution of civilians. He also failed to disclose the police job when he applied to enter the United States in 1949.
The Justice Department became aware of Kalymon after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 when World War II-era archives became accessible. Xenos insists the government is relying on forged handwriting that doesn't belong to his client.
In 2007, however, a federal judge stripped him of his citizenship, a decision that was upheld by an appeals court.
"It's turned our life upside down," Kalymon's son, Alex Kalymon, said of the case. "I'm very
disturbed. My father's not done anything wrong."
John Kalymon, of suburban Detroit, denied the U.S. Department of Justice's assertion that he claimed to have fired his gun at least eight times and killed a Jew in August 1942, when Jews were being rounded up and removed from what is now Lviv, Ukraine.
During Tuesday's initial hearing, Judge Elizabeth Hacker told the Justice Department to file a brief detailing its case by early 2010. Xenos would have until Feb. 26 to respond to the brief. A trial date has not been set.
Kalymon was stripped of his U.S. citizenship in 2007, and the government is seeking to deport him. It hasn't been determined where he would go.
"My heart is pounding a little bit harder. I'm too old and sick," Kalymon told The Associated Press after the brief hearing.
There is no dispute that Kalymon, in his early 20s, served in the Nazi-sponsored Ukrainian Auxiliary Police in Lviv, which was part of Poland until the Soviet Union invaded in 1939.
His lawyer, Elias Xenos, described the police unit as a group with little authority, comparable to a reserve force guarding streets and rooms in police stations.
But the government says Kalymon should be deported because his service resulted in the persecution of civilians. He also failed to disclose the police job when he applied to enter the United States in 1949.
The Justice Department became aware of Kalymon after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 when World War II-era archives became accessible. Xenos insists the government is relying on forged handwriting that doesn't belong to his client.
In 2007, however, a federal judge stripped him of his citizenship, a decision that was upheld by an appeals court.
"It's turned our life upside down," Kalymon's son, Alex Kalymon, said of the case. "I'm very
disturbed. My father's not done anything wrong."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)