sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bilovodsk, Bilytske, Huliaipole, Kamianske, Kostiantynivka, Kryvyi Rih

EASTERN CHECKPOINT MONITORING REPORT

January – March 2019 vpl.com.ua 1

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 2

METHODOLOGY 2

HIGHLIGHTS 3

1 DEMOGRAPHICS OF RESPONDENTS 4

2 RESIDENCE, DISPLACEMENT, AND RETURNS 5

FREQUENCY AND DURATION 3 6 OF CROSSING

4 REASONS FOR CROSSING 7

5 DESTINATION OF THE TRIP 8

CONCERNS WHILE CROSSING THE LINE OF 6 10 CONTACT

This publication has been produced with the assistance of the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR). The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of «Right to Protection» and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of UNHCR. Advocacy, Protection, and Legal Assistance to IDPs 2

INTRODUCTION

This report provides the results of the survey conducted by the Charitable Foundation «The Right to Protection» (R2P) with the support of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) at the five entry-exit checkpoints (EECPs) to the non-government-controlled area (NGCA) in the first quarter of 2019. The data were collected during regular visits to each of the five EECPs (120 visits in three months). More statistical data are available on the Checkpoint Monitoring Online Dashboard – https://goo.gl/Ab1qXs.

Stanytsia Luhanska EECP

METHODOLOGY

The survey has been administered on It should be noted that the survey results a person refused to participate, monitors a regular basis since June 2017. The should not be directly extrapolated onto proceeded to survey the next fourth survey is part of the monitoring of the entire population traveling through person in line. People traveling both to violations of rights of the conflict-affected the checkpoints, but it helps identify and from the GCA took part in the survey. population within the framework of the needs, gaps, and trends and provides an At no time did the monitors cross the zero project «Advocacy, Protection and Legal evidentiary basis for advocacy efforts. checkpoints into the NGCA. As monitors Assistance to the Internally Displaced The data collection methodology was the interview people during the process of Population of Ukraine» implemented same at all EECPs. R2P monitors surveyed crossing the line of contact, it would be by R2P with the support of the United civilians queuing at the EECPs. The survey premature to ask them about the duration Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. was conducted anonymously and on a of that particular crossing. As a solution, The objective of the survey is to explore voluntary basis. All persons interviewed the question about the previous crossing the motivations and concerns of those for the survey were informed about its experience was added to the survey. traveling between the NGCA and the objective. The survey was conducted government-controlled area (GCA), as in the form of personal interviews with well as the conditions and risks associated people aged 18 and above. The monitors with crossing the line of contact through approached every fourth person in line EECPs. with a request to complete the survey. If vpl.com.ua 3

HIGHLIGHTS

• On March 1 all EECPs switched to the to the Joint Center for Control and months prior to the time of their spring operation schedule (07:00 – Coordination, one more man died in survey. The vast majority (313) of 18:30). the buffer zone beyond the Ukrainian these cases were caused by the lack of zero checkpoint at Maiorske. permits in the SBGS database. • By the end of February, SBGS staff converted to the new database – • Respondents from the NGCA were often • Another attempt to launch E-inspector – that includes information concerned about rumors related to EECP was made from the GCA side. on debts, stolen cars, etc. The presidential elections such as all EECPs As no preparation works, including system of obtaining permits was also being closed for a week up to March demining, were conducted in the upgraded on March 28. New permits 31 and social payment suspensions for NGCA, and security guarantees were will be termless. Old permits will those who will not vote. These rumors not provided, the EECP was launched become termless after re-applying for considerably affected the crossing only unilaterally on March 24. prolongation. process. Reconstruction of the bridge • The water supply issue at Marinka at EECP planned • Reconstruction is still in progress at EECP was solved in mid-March when for March 25 by Hnutove, Novotroitske and Maiorske “Donetskheolohia” completed the Military Civil Administration also did EECPs. work on the new water well. not happen as security guarantees • R2P monitors reported 14 fatalities in were not provided by the NGCA de- • It is common for the flow of people the first quarter of 2019. Six of them facto authorities. crossing the line of contact to be much took place at Stanytsia Luhanska EECP. lower on days where governmental • 349 individuals (5% of all respondents) Six people died in a road accident entities and banks are closed mentioned cases of not being able near Marinka EECP. One man died (weekends, holidays, etc.). to cross the line of contact in the six at Novotroitske EECP. According

Stanytsia Luhanska EECP Advocacy, Protection, and Legal Assistance to IDPs 4

1 DEMOGRAPHICS OF RESPONDENTS

In the first quarter of 2019, R2P monitors  GENDER AND AGE OF RESPONDENTS surveyed 6,372 individuals. The majority Men (60+) Women (18-34) (68%) of respondents were women. 68% of all respondents were over 60 years old. Women over 60 years old constituted Men (35-59) Women (35-59) almost half of all respondents (3,088 individuals, 48%). 6% of all respondents 5% 20% were traveling with children. The 15% gender ratio was relatively consistent each month. The age disaggregation also remains approximately the same with the elderly representing the predominant majority of interviewees. The low number of younger respondents 9% demonstrates that they have fewer reasons to cross the line of contact. The share of respondents traveling in 4% both directions was almost even: 53% of interviews were conducted with people heading to the NGCA, 47% of respondents 48% were going to the GCA. According to Women (60+) the monitoring observations, NGCA Men (18-34) residents tend to make short trips (1 or a few days) to solve their issues and return.

 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS BY EECP1

Number of crossings Number of respondents Hnutove 123000 291000 11% Stanytsia 25% Luhanska 1096 1269 17% 20% 1382 272000 Maiorske 22% 24% 1345 210000 21% 18% 1280 20% Novotroitske 250000 Marinka 22%

1 General statistics on crossings are available at the UNHCR dashboard visualizing data from the State Border Guard Service – https://goo.gl/TZbU8c vpl.com.ua 5

2 RESIDENCE, DISPLACEMENT, AND RETURNS

The majority of all respondents (94%)  DISPLACEMENT resided in the NGCA at the time of the survey. 49% of NGCA residents stated Never displaced that they live more than 20 kilometers from the line of contact, 15% – within 76% 20 km. 36% (2,124 individuals) did not (4858) Displaced several times specify the distance. It is important to but did not return note that the GCA residents have fewer reasons to visit the NGCA, while people 1% (42) who reside in the NGCA often need services that are unavailable or limited in Displaced but then the NGCA. According to the observations returned of monitors, the flow of people crossing the line of contact is much lower on days 20% (1252) where governmental entities and banks are closed (weekends, holidays, etc.). Displaced once and are 76% of interviewees indicated that they still residing there have never moved due to the conflict, 3% (220) so the number of actual or former IDPs is low among respondents. Although the majority of respondents who were displaced at least once already returned to their previous place of residence, such share should not be extrapolated to all internally displaced persons or NGCA residents who do not travel across the line of contact at all or who do not do so through official EECPs. The stabilized situation was cited among the reasons for return by the majority of returnees (862 individuals – 14% of all respondents), which correlates to the share of the NGCA residents who live more than 20 kilometers away from the line of contact. 58% of returnees stated that their decision to return was made voluntarily. 18% were compelled to return due to personal circumstances. Maiorske EECP Advocacy, Protection, and Legal Assistance to IDPs 6

3 FREQUENCY AND DURATION OF CROSSING

As pensioners are mostly traveling to fit  FREQUENCY OF CROSSING THE LINE OF CONTACT in the 60-day limit of being away from the  Daily  Weekly  Monthly GCA, the vast majority of respondents    over 60 years old (92%) cross the line of Once in 2 months Quarterly Twice a year contact once every two months. Younger  Once in a year  First time  Not specified respondents who do not have to meet such conditions plan their trips based on 18-34 16% 40% 9% 19% 10% 4% their own schedules and are not tied to any particular frequency. 35-59 4% 24% 40% 17% 9% 3%

60+ 6% 92%

As people are surveyed while they  DURATION OF CROSSING BY EECP are in a process of crossing the line of contact, the questions related to  less than 1 hour  1-2 hours  2-3 hours duration refer to the previous crossing.  3-4 hours  4-5 hours  5+ hours 66% of all respondents stated that  they had previously crossed the line of Not specified contact in January, February or March 2019. The largest share of respondents stated it took 2 to 3 hours to cross the Hnutove 31% 57% 7% line of contact. 33% said it took 3 to 4. It is noteworthy that the crossing Maiorske 20% 26% 30% 20% process considerably accelerated: the share of such respondents who spent over 4 hours on crossing decreased Marinka 24% 21% 40% 13% from 34% in January to 14% in March. It is also noteworthy that 55% of such respondents stated it took longer to pass Novotroitske 12% 47% 32% 7% checkpoints in the NGCA. 12% said they spent more time on the GCA checkpoints. Stanytsia 6% 55% 34% 5% 33% stated it was approximately the Luhanska same. vpl.com.ua 7

4 REASONS FOR CROSSING2

No considerable changes in the reasons  REASONS FOR CROSSING (BY PLACE OF RESIDENCE) for crossing were observed during the GCA residents   NGCA residents first quarter of 2019. As in earlier reports, Issues with pension/social they differ substantially for GCA and 6,9% 74,6% payments NGCA residents. Solving issues with pensions or social 2,2% Withdrawing cash 27,1% payments is the most common reason for NGCA residents. It is also a lot more 72,3% Visiting relatives 15,5% common among elderly people: 90% of respondents over 60 years old mentioned 1,5% Shopping 12,9% it among their reasons. These issues include avoiding payment suspension 1,7% Issues with documents 8,4% due to 60-day limit of not being in the Applying to GCA (61% of all respondents); passing 1,2% 5,0% physical identification (51%); obtaining or Coordination Group reinstating of payments (9%), etc. 0,5% Postal services 2,0% Out of all people who had issues with documents, 64% were related to 2,5% Education 1,0% passport (5% of all respondents – 329 individuals). Among other documents 3,7% 1,6% respondents mentioned obtaining death Work (72 individuals) and birth (34) certificates, 30,1% digitalized pension cards (47) and IDP Checking on property 0,7% certificates (26). 0,2% 0,6% 12% of all respondents indicated shopping Medical treatment as one of their reasons for crossing. 99% 4,9% Funeral/visiting a grave 0,4% of them were NGCA residents. The most common purchases included food (10% 0,7% Vacation 0,1% of all respondents – 645 individuals) and medicines (6%). Among others were hygiene items (2%), clothes (1%), 0,1% Care for a relative 0,2% household appliances (1%), etc. 0% Permanent relocation 0,1%

0,2% Other 0,1%

2 General statistics on crossings are available at the UNHCR dashboard visualizing data from the State Border Guard Service – https://goo.gl/TZbU8c Advocacy, Protection, and Legal Assistance to IDPs 8

5 DESTINATION OF THE TRIP

As the NGCA residents often travel The most common destination point to (34% – 184 individuals) to solve issues related to state, legal for respondents surveyed at Hnutove and Pokrovsk (30%). (9%) and or bank services it is important to EECP who answered this question Marinka (9%) were also quite frequently understand the demand on the was (75% – 393 individuals). mentioned. infrastructure of the localities in Among other – Berdiansk (Zaporizhzhya The of Novotroitske itself was the the GCA. 77% of all NGCA residents Oblast, 7%), ( Oblast, most common destination point among agreed to answer the question about 6.5%), Mangush (, 5%) those surveyed at Novotroitske EECP their destination point. The majority and Sartana (Donetsk Oblast, 2.5%). (61%). They also mentioned Mariupol of such respondents (94%) were Respondents at Maiorske EECP were (17%) and (14%). visiting localities in Donetsk and mostly traveling to (48% – The number of respondents who agreed , giving preference 190 individuals). 10% were heading to to answer this question at Stanytsia to the bigger ones located closer to Kostyantynivka, 7% to Slovyansk and 7% Luhanska was the lowest (60 individuals). the EECP. 4% (76 individuals) were to . They were mostly traveling to Stanytsia heading to Oblast, 2% (34 Respondents surveyed at Marinka EECP Luhanska (36), (10) and individuals) – to Oblast. were almost equally often traveling Bilovodsk (9).

Maiorske EECP vpl.com.ua 9

 MAIN SETTLEMENTS OF DESTINATION OF THE NGCA RESIDENTS CROSSING THE LINE OF CONTACT

KHARKIV OBLAST

Starobilsk

Bilovodsk Krymky LUHANSK OBLAST Kamianka Terny Pokrov Drobysheve Tsvitkove Lyman Chervonyi Sadok Adamivka Sievierodonetsk

Shesternia Mykolaivka Novoslobidka Bylbasivka Dibrova

Krasna Zoloti Prudy Kramatorsk Hora Komyshuvakha Bakhmutske Zolote Stanytsia DONETSK OBLAST Bakhmut Luhanska Dnipro Stanytsia Illinivka Luhanska Maiorske Zaitseve Chervona Poliana Novoekonomichne

Myrnohrad Novooleksandrivka Pokrovsk LUHANSK OBLAST Keramik

Mezhova Ocheretyne Selydove

Hirnyk Zhelanne Druhe Kostiantynopil Maksymilianivka Komar Entry-exit checkpoint Marinka Dachne Hnutove Kurakhove DONETSK OBLAST Velyka Marinka Novosilka Novotroitske

Vuhledar Novotroitske Marinka Kamianka Novotroitske Maiorske Olhynka Krasna Stanytsia Luhanska Poliana Volnovakha Rivnopil Starohnativka 1-25 Zaporizhzhia

Nikopol 26-120 RUSSIAN Pyshchevyk FEDERATION 121-230 Zapasne

Sviatopetrivka Hnutove Hnutove 231-600 Novovasylkivka Sartana Nikolske Huliaipole Talakivka

Melitopol Manhush Mariupol Non-operational checkpoint Radyvonivka 30km Pokrovske Sea of Azov Operational checkpoint Ialta Feedback: [email protected] Shovkove Urzuf Source: Right to Protection, UNHCR, SSPE "Kartographia" The line of contact The designations employed and the presentation of material on this map do not imply International boundary the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations (and UNDP) Berdiansk concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries Region boundary Advocacy, Protection, and Legal Assistance to IDPs 10

6 CONCERNS WHILE CROSSING THE LINE OF CONTACT3

Long lines remain a major concern at all  CONCERNS (BY EECP) EECPs.  Hnutove  Maiorske  Marinka The number of respondents who did not   raise any concerns slightly increased from Novotroitske Stanytsia Luhanska 18.7% in January to 23.3% in March. This 21,6% 73,4% includes a 13.6% decrease in a number 88,7% Long lines of concerns regarding the condition of 73,7% 36,6% the road (due to seasonal changes and 34,1% reconstruction improvements), but at 4,6% Poor condition of 7,5% the same time there was a discernible the road 40,1% (11.3%) increase in complaints about 71,7% waiting times. 17,2% 5,9% Respondents did not report any cases Long distance to 1,9% travel on foot 13,0% of sex- and gender-based violence to 50,3% monitors. 5 respondents mentioned 1,2% abuse of power among their concerns: 5,6% Transport 8,4% 3 of them took place in the NGCA and 2 1,6% 0,2% in the GCA. People often feel intimidated 1,3% about articulating such complaints, so 27,8% the level of such concern is most likely Shooting/shelling 1,4% 2,2% understated. 0,1% 1,9% Confiscations/ 2,9% restrictions on 2,1% 0,3% carried goods 0,3%

0% Explosive remnants 2,5% 0,1% of war 0% 0%

0% 0,1% Abuse of power 0,2% 0% 0%

0% Sex/gender-based 0% 0% violence 0% 0% 2,2% 7,4% Possible issues with 1,5% 0,1% a permit 2,8%

0% 0,1% Other 0% 0,1% 0% 48,5% 29,7% No concerns 12,9% 14,2% 11,5%

3 Respondents could indicate several concerns vpl.com.ua 11

WAITING CONDITIONS4

Among the five EECPs, the conditions  WAITING CONDITIONS at Hnutove were the least concerning  GCA  “0” checkpoint  NGCA to the respondents. The flow of people traveling through Hnutove EECP is the lowest, which also affects the level 20,3% Poor condition or 19,3% of concerns among respondents. In lack of sheds 21,8% contrast, the highest share of concerned 0,3% Lack of medical respondents was at Stanytsia Luhanska 2,9% units 1,2% EECP, which is the most crowded one. 7,7% Concerns about sheds, seats, and toilets Poor condition or 6,4% were very common at Novotroitske and lack of seats 5,9% Hnutove and were caused by temporary Lack of air 0,1% 0,0% reconstruction inconveniences. Many circulation 0,0% respondents at Stanytsia Luhanska were 5,6% Poor condition or 8,3% also concerned about sheds that are too lack of toilets 11,4% small to shelter all the people in lines. By 0,4% the end of March, it was decided to build Lack of water 0,9% additional sheds at Stanytsia Luhanska 0,2% Insufficient garbage 0,3% to improve the waiting conditions. Up 1,2% to mid-March issues with water supply removal 0,2% were hindering the maintenance of 39,1% No concerns with 35,7% toilets at Marinka EECP. The issue waiting conditions 24,7% was solved when «Donetskheolohia» completed works on the new water well.

Marinka EECP

4 Respondents could indicate several issues Advocacy, Protection, and Legal Assistance to IDPs 12

AWARENESS OF RESPONDENTS5

63.3% of all respondents do not feel they  LACK OF INFORMATION lack any information. However, it should Information is be noted that 16.7% mentioned the lack 63% or poor visibility of contacts of entities to sufficient address their complaints regarding the Direction signs 12% situation at the EECP (the share implicitly indicates that they might have such Services available 13% complaints). Lack of the information at the EECP about services available at the EECP (medical aid, water supply, toilets etc. – schedule 7% 13.2%) and direction signs (12.3%) were Contacts for raising 17% also frequently mentioned. complaints

Legal aid contacts 2%

Social aid contacts 4%

Novotroitske EECP

5 Respondents could indicate several issues

For more information please contact: [email protected]