Conflict around the Veterans Council in Kharkiv Region: why the selection of candidates caused protests from veterans’ organizations
Discussions around the formation of representative bodies for war veterans increasingly go beyond purely procedural issues and turn into serious conflicts between the public sector and government bodies. The situation in the Kharkiv region has become a vivid example of how an attempt to create a consultative body to represent the interests of veterans can provoke a heated debate about the transparency of the rules and real access to participation in such structures. Representatives of veterans’ organizations are convinced that the method of selecting candidates for the Council of Veterans of the War of Independence of Ukraine under the Ministry of Veterans’ Affairs does not ensure the openness of the process, and some decisions of officials raise doubts about their validity.
The dispute arose at the stage of forming a regional representative office, which is supposed to delegate candidates to the nationwide consultative body. At this level, where the initial selection and registration of candidates takes place, some veteran organizations have stated problems with the procedure and possible violations of the principles of equal access to participation in elections.
The impetus for the public discussion was the statement of the public organization “Union of Veterans of the Ukrainian Secondary Educational Service”, which stated serious problems with the procedure for forming the composition of the representation to the Council of Veterans in the Kharkiv region. The document published by the organization noted that the current election procedure contains a number of provisions that make it difficult to conduct an open and transparent candidate selection process.
The organization’s head, Yuriy Korsunov explains the veteran community’s position by saying that the rules approved by the Ministry of Veterans Affairs, in his opinion, create a situation in which it is extremely difficult to hold transparent and fair elections. According to veterans, certain provisions of the procedure allow administrative structures to influence the selection process, which is causing concern among organizations representing the interests of the military and veterans.
The greatest indignation of veterans was caused by cases of individual candidates being denied registration, which became the central element of the conflict.
One of the candidates who was denied registration was Kostyantyn Rudenko, nominated by veterans’ public organizations. According to him, he received a notification of his disqualification from participating in the elections by phone from representatives of the Department for Veterans Affairs of the Kharkiv Regional Military Administration.
“The person who heads the Department for Veterans Affairs of the Kharkiv Regional Administration should help veterans and promote their activities. Instead, we simply faced a wall of unwillingness to hear us,” says Kostyantyn Rudenko.
The reason for the refusal was doubts about the authenticity of the signatures in the letter of support attached to the candidate’s package of documents. However, Rudenko categorically disagrees with this explanation and considers the decision absurd and groundless. According to him, the veterans were informed that the signatures were declared invalid by a collective decision, although no specialized verification or expert analysis of the handwriting was carried out.
The situation looked even more contradictory during a meeting at the department, where one of the people whose signature was declared invalid was present. This person personally confirmed that he had signed it himself, but even after such confirmation, the decision to refuse to register the candidate was not reviewed.
Konstantin Rudenko said that the veterans’ community offered a simple way to check the authenticity of the signatures by contacting the people who signed them, since they all left contact details. According to him, such a step could quickly clarify the situation, but the verification in the proposed format was not carried out.
A similar situation arose with another candidate for participation in the elections – Dmytro Oliynyk, who was also nominated by veteran organizations in Kharkiv and the region. His documents were also not accepted for participation in the selection, which increased concerns among veteran associations.
Oliynyk explains his participation in the elections by the desire to represent the interests of people who went through the war and have practical experience in solving veterans’ problems. In his opinion, an effective veteran policy should be formed on the basis of real experience of working with veterans, and not solely at the level of administrative procedures.
Lawyers from the public organization “Chuguiv Human Rights Group” joined the discussion of the conflict, who analyzed the situation from a legal point of view. According to them, the actions of officials may show signs of exceeding administrative powers.
Human rights activists draw attention to the fact that, according to the regulation on the Council of Veterans of the War for Independence of Ukraine, regional administrations must perform mainly technical functions related to the verification of submitted documents of candidates. At the same time, in the case of refusal, the applicants were not explained in detail by what criteria the signatures were evaluated, and there is no information about the commission that made the relevant decision.
According to lawyers, if the candidate meets the requirements of the regulation, and the refusal does not contain clear legal grounds, such actions can be considered a violation of the principle of equal access to participation in public representation.
Human rights activists pay special attention to the mechanism for forming a counting commission, which includes representatives of the administration. This model, in their opinion, creates a risk of administrative influence on the candidate selection process.
Despite the conflict surrounding the selection procedure, both candidates — Kostyantyn Rudenko and Dmytro Oliynyk — declare that they do not intend to refuse to participate in the elections. After the postponement of the voting procedure and the announcement of an additional deadline for submitting documents, they plan to resubmit applications for participation.
The candidates explain their position by saying that participation in the formation of the Veterans Council is primarily related to the desire to influence the development of veterans’ policy at the state level.
The Veterans Council under the Ministry of Veterans’ Affairs is being created as a consultative and advisory body that should represent the interests of war veterans and participate in the formation of state policy in this area. That is why the issue of trust in the procedure for forming such a body is of particular importance for the veteran community.
The situation in the Kharkiv region shows that even at the initial stage of candidate selection, conflicts may arise between veteran organizations and government bodies. Veterans emphasize that without clear and open rules for forming a representation, any consultative body risks losing the trust of the people whose interests it is called upon to represent.
For many participants in the veteran movement, participation in such elections is perceived not as a struggle for positions, but as an opportunity to influence the formation of a veteran support system based on the experience of those who went through the war and know its consequences not from official documents, but from their own lives.
