UDC 821.161.2 M61 Translator Julia Lugovska

Graphic Designer Olena Huhalova-Mieshkova

The “Folio” Publishing House would like to express its thanks to the movie producer of the movie company 435 FILMS Anna Palenchuk for the help she provided us within the course of preparation of this book.

Printed on order Ministry of Information Policy of Ukraine FOR FREE DISTRIBUTION If you purchased this book, please contact us at: [email protected]

Mymruk O. M61 Oleg Sentsov / Oleksandr Mymruk; Trans. J. Lugovska; Graphic Designer O. Huhalova-Mieshkova. — Kharkiv: “Folio”, 2018. — 396 p.: photos. ISBN 978-966-03-8393-7. There is probably no person nowadays who wouldn’t have heard the name of Oleg Sentsov, as his court trial was really a cause célèbre and his verdict was quite exceptional and unbelievably harsh: twenty years behind the bars. Movie director, screenwriter, and writer, he was accused of an apparent participation in the terrorist activities. And despite all the public protests and multiple addresses to the government of the country that accuses Sentsov, he still remains imprisoned. This book consists of the memoirs of people who knew Oleg very well, of the fragments of his books and film scenarios, and also of the extracts of the protocols of the testimonials of the witnesses in this totally fabricated case. This book also contains many photographs, both from the personal home archives of Sentsov and from the courtroom. However, as his friends and relatives claim, Sentsov never really liked talking about himself, but his work speaks for him, and first of all his autobiographical novels and essays. And right before he was arrested he wrote a book, and its name totally corresponds with its contents: “Buy this book, it’s a funny one”. This book was published by the “Folio” Publishing House both in Russian and in Ukrainian translation. A fight for the release of Oleg Sentsov continues. UDC 821.161.2 © O. Mymruk, 2017 © J. Lugovska, translation, 2018 ISBN 978-966-03-8393-7 © O. Huhalova-Mieshkova, graphic design, 2018 About Oleg Sentsov

[ ■ ]

One of the biggest challenges in writing Oleg’s bio­­­ graphy is that first of all he is actually a very inward person who keeps to himself. He is not that kind of a person who willingly shares with his friends and acquaintances the details of his past. That’s why the people whom I had the chance to interview about him don’t tell a lot about Sentsov’s “pre- movie” life. Many of them also became friends with Oleg after he stormed the Ukrainian film industry with his Gamer. Secondly, everything Oleg wanted to tell us about him­­ self is already written in various books and does not re­ quire another story, description or repetition whatsoever. He has written several autobiographical novels, and one of them is even called “Autobiography”. Everyone who in one way or other follows the tragic developments of the life of Crimean movie director definitely knows about his literary estate too. Literature is probably one of the simplest and the least expensive manners of self-expression. Unlike the cinema, which is very a very synthetic art requiring lots of resources, the art of writing doesn’t need any additional means and tools in order “to start”. One needs only a sheet of paper, a pen, and one’s own mind. At the end of the day, every movie also starts from the script, that’s why it’s not surprising that Oleg started his path to art direction from writing.

[ 3 ] But as one of the tasks of this book is to show the important stages of the life of Oleg Sentsov I cannot refrain from saying a couple of words about and giving an update on the period of Oleg’s growing up and personality development. Although the name of Oleg Sentsov is closely connected with the city of Simferopol, where he spent a significantly huge part of his life, he actually was born in another place. Oleg’s birthplace is the village Skaliste of Bakhchisaray district. That was the place, where the future movie director drew his first breath in the family of the driver Gennadiy Oleksiyovich Sentsov and the nursery governess Lyudmila Grygoriivna Sentsova. The village Skaliste is quite big. According to the latest all Ukrainian population census, nearly three thousand people reside in this village. There are the cities in Ukraine with the population that doesn’t exceed this number. It is obvious that the name “Skaliste”, “Rocky” in Ukrainian, comes from the village’s geo­graphical location. The village lays not far from the second ridge of the Crimean Mountains, not far from the medieval settlement, the cave city of Bakly. It is hard to say, whether the local residents trace the history of their town to this ancient settlement, but the village Skaliste is quite popular and very well known among the caves researchers and the fans of extreme sports.

From “Childhood”: “When I was a little boy, I thought that the world’s size was just as I used to see and imagine it, which means that my world was basically limited to the line of the horizon. We used to live in the foothill region, so that line wasn’t really that far away, and the terrain was actually almost always elevated. That’s why it seemed that the world built up a big chalice, confined with the neighboring mountains, hills, and fields. It was the full and rich world, like a full cup of a child’s happiness”.

[ 4 ] “I remember myself since I was very young. Sometim­ es it even seems to me that I can remember the people who leaned over me when I laid in that baby strol­ler. However, now I tend to think that it was ra­ther a memory of some fragment from some movie I’ve seen. I also felt my own personality when I was very young. I think I was about five years old. I remember I once ran a splinter into my hand, and I couldn’t get it out. One of my friends, and I really can’t remember now who that bastard was, just told me that that was actually the end, as the splinter in my finger would travel inside of my body, reach my heart, and then I will eventually die. My first bright and impressive child’s memory was the following: I was five years old; I went home from the kindergarten, wearing the sandals and shorts. I was walking up the hill, not far away from the village I am from. Somehow children tend to dislike the normal roads, they always make a beeline in the strangest places, and if the road goes straight, kids would definitely choose to just crawl in the bushes. So, I was walking, and it pretty high, and I could see the entire village in front of and under me, my kindergarten was left far behind me, a little farther to the left was the school, where I still haven’t been. And in my thoughts, I was silently telling goodbye to all of that, as I was preparing to die soon. The situation was mostly calm, a little bit tragic; the weather was a little windy. But I wasn’t crying. It had to happen just the way as it was supposed to be. I don’t know what happened next, I remember my early childhood years like in the flashbacks, but if I am still alive, it means that that splinter somehow missed my heart”. Crimea always existed at the crossroads of various cul­tu­ res. Its territory is a field of constant cooperation and inter­ acting (and sometimes fight) of different influences, different

[ 5 ] countries, and different perspectives. Starting from the first Ancient Greek settlements in this region and coming to the times of collapse of the two great empires (of the “white” one and the “red” one), Crimea constantly played a role of a “concentrator” of the ideas and senses. There is probably no other place in Ukraine, where the people of so many various nationalities could meet and coexist. Of course, we have Bessa­rabia, we have Bukovina, we have Galicia, and in the course of their long history, all these regions were the parts of many different countries, and each of those countries left its unique mark on the local people’s mentality. But anyway, due to its geographical position, Crimean Peninsula always used to stay a little bit on the sidelines, as a completely unique case. And it probably makes a perfect sense that such an artist as Oleg Sentsov emerged in such a culturally diverse region. This openness to different influences, the fact that this region isn’t actually culturally entrenched only help the personal development of an artist. A specific worldview of Oleg Sentsov has been forming from these odd and segmental puzzles. It is worth mentioning that “gathering of the puzzles” together is a theme tune and a keynote of the entire bio­ graphy of Oleg Sentsov. Each of the persons, who told some­­ thing about him during the interviews for this book, was able to present us only with a little particle of this “puzzle”. The general image of Oleg Sentsov as a real human being (as opposed to the image of the hero of the news headlines) developed at the intersection of these initially scattered and uncoordinated memoirs and testimonies.

Natalya Kaplan: A cousin of Oleg Sentsov “I was four years old when my parents took me to Crimea and I saw Oleg for the first time. But of course, I can hardly

[ 6 ] remember him at that age… I remember how his parents were worried about him when he walked too close to the sea during the storm. I also remember how he was trying to catch a cat for me so that I could try to use the thermometer under the cat’s paw and measure his temperature. I was very sick back then, so everybody tried to do their best to somehow entertain me. Later, when Oleg became older, he used to visit me. He enjoyed some board games and didn’t really demon­strate any interest for the ‘adult’ parties. We had a signi­ficant age difference, four years. You cannot feel this diffe­rence now, but when we were the kids it felt like a really serious age gap. These are actually almost all the memories I have from those old times. There are obviously not so much of them. We didn’t really communicate that much with him before he started making films. I used to live in Moscow, he lived in Crimea…”

Oleg calls his childhood a “warm and nice time” when one could be happy about the simplest things and all the things that surrounded a child. He recalls that he used to spend lots of his free time hanging out with his friends, riding a bicycle, reading the books and going to the sea, and the sea was just thirty-seven kilometers away from the village Skaliste. The childhood time in his memories is like a sunny and happy universe, where time flows quite slowly, but the energy gushes forth like a fountain. He wrote many novels describing this time of his life later on. Sentsov’s childhood memories attract with their intimacy and imminently cause a feeling of nostalgia. And it’s all not only about his writing skills or his style but rather about the universal nature of the life experience he is trying to tell his readers about. We all had a childhood. We all had our favourite pets; we all had our share of joys and disappointments that

[ 7 ] are somehow related to the first childhood experience. That is why these novels are definitely destined to be understood by everybody. These novels’ are written in a very repressed style, without that much of affectation and exaggerations. These novels differ significantly from his other literary works. It is almost a self-reflection and an attempt to engage in the dialogue with his own personality.

A fragment from “Childhood”: “Everybody calls childhood the happiest time of our life. I agree. But I would add something: it is also one of the brightest and warmest periods of our life. Mostly. It applies mostly to everybody. I am genuinely sorry for all the people, who weren’t that lucky and were deprived of childhood, or for those whose childhood finished prematurely or wasn’t clear and bright enough. I had everything, the childhood and a certain amount of light and warmth in it. And one cannot really measure this light and warmth with the kilograms of oranges one can get for the New Year party or with the number of cartoons one watched back then on the black-and-white TV. It cannot be measured by the number of presents one used to receive for one’s birthday too. When you are eight, the set of plastic Hungarian soldiers is all you could possibly dream about. A radio-controlled toy- car is a sweet dream you are ready to see all the day, even while you are awake. But whether you had those Hungarian soldiers back then or not and whether they bought that toy- car for you or not, it all doesn’t really matter later, after so many years. And now, when you are a grown-up person, all these things stored somewhere in the attic and covered with dust do not really matter that much anymore, but you

[ 8 ] still understand that when you were a little child, in your childhood, all these things mattered, but weren’t really the most important. The most important thing you had and the most impor­ tant thing everybody should have had in their childhood is your mother, your family, your friends, your beloved pets and all the living creatures that surrounded you, giving you that light and warmth. And this light will remain with you later, and it will shine no matter what would happen later in your life… After your childhood”.

The first fifteen years of his life Oleg spent in the Soviet Union. The USSR collapsed right at the time when Oleg was developing as an adult personality. One could even say that his childhood ended with the Soviet Union collapse. Of course, it left its mark on Oleg’s personality, mindset and worldview. After the Soviet order people found themselves right in the midst of the chaos of the wild capitalism of the 90s. The entire generation of people lost the system of their worldview attitudes and paradigm just in one moment, along with the feeling and security and confidence in the future. One had to learn to live in a new fashion, to live the way nobody lived before. It was quite traumatic, but, definitely, unique experience in life. It eliminates the weak and leaves only those who have enough power and willingness to transform and to adapt to these new, ever-changing environments. Oleg would graduate from the school also in Skaliste. As he himself pointed out, he was a good student who used to get good marks, almost excellent ones. After he graduated, he even received a title of “the best student of the year”, but when he was offered to also receive a gold medal, despite a couple of just “good”, but not “excellent” marks, he refused, as he decided that he had to receive what he really deserved.

[ 9 ] But things didn’t go so smooth with his adaptation within his school class. Oleg was very skinny and had to bear with the bullying of some of his classmates. It was a quite typical situation, and at some point, millions of schoolkids face it in one way or another all over the country, but not all of them succeed to change this situation to their advantage. The school years during the period of growing up, socialization and personality becoming work as a version of a “social” natural selection. Usually, a defeat in this battle leaves its mark on the entire following life. But thankfully Oleg has won in this battle. Everything would change in high school when he would become braver and more confident, when he would start doing sports and finally become friends with some local rowdies. At that time he would also learn to actively argue with his teachers, explaining it later that he never really liked the people who tried to act and demonstrate that they are way smarter than the others and that they know more than they in fact do.

A fragment from “School”: “I remember I liked going to school. Most of the kids didn’t really want to go to the school, and it was even cool to answer the adults’ question whether you like going to school with a confident ‘No’. It was considered to be quite normal; adults would never scold us for that, they would rather pat us on the shoulder and tried to tell us that we might enjoy it with time. But I would always answer such a question with: ‘Yes, I like going to the school’. And they didn’t pat me on the shoulder, and they also didn’t have anything to say to me. All my life I wanted to be like everybody, and all the time I failed at that. All my life I was on my own and kind of a little isolated.

[ 10 ] I liked going to the school, but it didn’t last for a long time. I really enjoyed studying, but apparently, I didn’t really like that much actually attending the classes. I felt I was being destroyed gradually with the Soviet education system, with this routine, with this cramping and all this boring mood of the classes. I liked sports lessons, I also liked arts and crafts and of course the breaks. I wouldn’t say that I liked maths that much. I think it cannot be really normal to actually like maths. It’s just if somebody would dream to work as a cashier since his or her childhood. But I was pretty good at it, and it was really easy for me to learn it so that I could resolve all the test tasks during half of a lesson. The Russian language was a very boring school subject. But as for the literature, I simply adored it, just like the history. It was really very interesting there, and it felt also a little bit more of freedom than it was during the rest of the school lessons. Russian language and literature teachers liked to read my essays aloud in front of the audience. Not so many people actually liked it, including me. When I was a member of the pioneer organization, I built a crazy and extremely successful career there for a couple of years. I started as a class monitor and then reached the level of the trumpeter. It was very obvious that I had absolutely no aspirations for the political and social life. In addition to that, nobody could bugle in our class, while I could do that way better than the others… And till the end of my pioneer career, I used to bugle one and the same simple musical theme during all the important ceremonies and celebrations, during trouping the colour and all other sorts of useless events. And again, I just stood somewhere sideways, together with the drummer”.

While Oleg studied in the school and at the university, he had to also work, sometimes at the local collective farm,

[ 11 ] sometimes at various food markets. The Sentsov family had a quite tough financial situation at that time, so young Oleg tried to support his family as much as he could. The 90s in Ukraine and all over the former Soviet Union republics were the times of poverty and anarchy. It couldn’t be different in the country that has survived such a massive geopolitical cataclysm like the USSR collapse. Everybody tried to get as much freedom as he could. The old party establishment that has turned into the new Ukrainian political elite at that time, tried to steal and embezzle the former state property, and it was doing it with an unbelievable level of enthusiasm. The newly hatched and the most skilled bandits and bagmen have been receiving unbelievable, abnormal profits during a very short time, turning into the new oligarchy. Massive money laundering and merging of the govern­ mental structures, flourishing illegal, shadow economy, cor­ rup­tion, hyperinflation, backdated wages, extinction of the entire economic branches that were related to the coope­ra­ tion with other former USSR republics, — all of these factors didn’t really contribute to the wellbeing of the Soviet fellow citizens. The situation will become worse and way more compli­ cated in 1996 when Oleg’s father died. Since that moment Oleg took care of his mother. He would take care of her until the very last moment, until he would be imprisoned, in Russian captivity, thousands of miles away from home.

A fragment from “Childhood”: “It’s my birthday in the evening. We’ve got lots of guests, many of them are my father’s friends. They would give me the presents, but mostly money — such beautiful and im­ por­tant little sheets, the blue ones and the red ones, with Lenin’s portrait printed on them. It seems that it’s supposed

[ 12 ] to be pleasant to get them as a gift, it felt as if you were an adult already. But later, in the morning, you give them to your mother. Nobody ever asks you to do that, you just give them away yourself. It was just what one must do, I suppose. Then they would you buy something for you, with this money, or maybe this money would be used for some family needs, for improving the family budget after some family celebrations, as one is supposed to host and feed the guests. And here you are, left with the feeling of emptiness and deceit. So that was when I stopped loving these little colourful sheets with Lenin’s portraits for my birthday presents <…> Money means absolutely nothing to a child. When I was in the first grade, I once found one and a half roubles in the school, on the sports playfield. I had no idea whatsoever what I would do with it! I felt as if I found a million dollars in one paper sheet with the special mark for the ultraviolet lamps ‘Marked by the Organised Crime Division’. It’s like lots of money, but you don’t know what to do with them and how to use them. That was the time, when my parents used to give me just ten cents a day, for my school dinner, and it was enough to buy only one biscuit. And there it was, I found one and a half roubles! I didn’t know what to do with them, so without even meeting my parents, I decided to simply hide them somewhere. I lost them later and somehow I even felt relieved. A suitcase without a handle, good riddance and so on, you know…”

Just like every real artist, Oleg would not change his at­ titude towards the money, even when it would finally come to him. He would channel all his available resources for the implementation of his artistic ideas. He was never ever inte­ res­­­ted in just “collecting” the money and getting richer, as rea­ lized by Oleg Sentsov, belonged to a completely different area.

[ 13 ] Later Oleg Sentsov would enroll at the Crimean faculty of Kyiv National Economic University, where he would study to receive his higher education in the field of “Marketing”. It was the reason for him to take the decision in 1993 to leave his native village Skaliste and to relocate to the capital of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the city of Simferopol. The capital of Crimea was always and remains till now a gate to the big and wide world for many people from Crimea. At different times many intellectuals and artists resided here, including the famous Ukrainian writers Ivan Karpenko- Karyj and Mykhailo Starytsky, a renowned Ukrainian actress Maria Zankovetska, a worldwide famous scientist and philosopher Volodymyr Vernadsky, a German zoologist and botanist Peter Simon Pallas and the great Russian writers Leo Tolstoy and Alexander Pushkin. The city of Simferopol is the main cultural centre of the entire Crimea, that’s why there’s no wonder that Oleg decided to move there to receive his higher education. The capital cities are always attractive for the talented passionaries and activists, contributing to their further development and self-realization.

A fragment from “Autobiography”: “After school, I arrived in the city S. to enroll at the univer­ sity. It was a prestigious university, and I wanted to enroll at the state-funded faculty. At the beginning, they didn’t even want to accept my enrollment forms and documents there. ‘Where are you from, boy?’ they asked me. ‘I’m from the village S.’, I replied. ‘Do you have a gold medal from your school?’ ‘No, I don’t’. ‘Well, what about the silver medal?’ ‘I don’t have it either’. ‘So what do you want then?’

[ 14 ] ‘I want to study here!’” One can notice even from this episode of Oleg’s life that even at that stage of his life he’s already had an independent, confident and persistent type of personality, what will help him to achieve the goals he set for himself in the future, despite all the odds and external circumstances. Young Sentsov has no fear to leave his comfort zone and to walk towards the unknown. Oleg’s personality was developing in the complicated circumstances of the 90s. All of us remember what kind of time it was. People, whose personalities have developed during those times, which were an entire “epoch” for our country, usually have quite strong and determined characters. And Oleg wasn’t an exception.

Yevgen Chernikov: Actor, a friend of Oleg Sentsov “In fact, Oleg is very soft and kind, but definitely not to everybody. Especially at the very beginning, when he just met a person and doesn’t know this person well enough, then he tends to behave with a certain amount of caution. He never really tried to introduce himself in some specific way while meeting the new people, and he also never tried to get his feet under the table in the new situation. That’s why sometimes he was quite harsh, maybe even too harsh. In addition to that, he always says the truth; he is very direct and honest in communication. Hypocrisy is definitely not one of his personality traits. Of course, some people can take it for an outstanding overconfidence and maybe even snobbery, but in fact, Oleg always looks at the people like from below, and there are so many people who inspire and amaze him. He is an introverted person, so this behaviour could be considered as a certain type of self-defense. But at the same

[ 15 ] time he is very respective of another person’s private space, he never meddles with other people’s business and never tries to give advice on how to live and what to do. His harshness is rather an external trait. But in fact, Oleg always listens carefully to the people, in every second of his life. He never stops in his development, he is always trying to accumulate more knowledge about the outside world. Oleg knows that there is no reason to fear something new”.

Anna Palenchuk: A movie producer at the 435 FILMS Company “Oleg and I once met during one of the film events in Moscow. It was a special film-market, where we gathered in­ ter­national distributors and demonstrated various movies for them. Oleg and I were the representatives of Ukraine during this event. He was in Moscow at that time, because he was working on ‘Rhino’ project back then. I remember we used to walk a lot with him and we constantly made jokes that we are so new in this industry, yet here we are, we came here to Moscow already! He was here with his debut film ‘Gamer’, and I brought my ‘Nostalgia’ to the festival. Then he told me that he was planning to travel from Mos­cow to Simferopol, and he was going to do the hitch- hiking. I told him that it was an insane idea and that he had to go there by train, as it was such a long distance that it made absolutely no sense to risk with the hitch-hiking. But he told me then that ‘an artist has to walk a lot so that he could com­­ municate with more and more people and listen to more and more stories’. After that, I realized that Oleg was a person, who really gave up everything in order to fulfill himself in the film industry. He often had no money, although he came to the film industry from entrepreneurship, and he made

[ 16 ] good money there. It was easy to understand because he be­ haved very confidently. Unlike his other colleagues, he never tried to find an additional income. He has chosen to pur­sue self-realization instead. And for that, I respect him a lot”.

At the university, in 1996, Oleg would meet his future wife Alla. A couple of months after they met they would start living together, constantly moving from one rented apartment to another one. In 2002 they would register a common-law partnership. Being “married to an artist” is always something un­ expected and full of surprises. People with creative mindset always have quite complicated and often controversial perso­ nalities, existing in their own world, in their own frame­ work and coordinate system. Sometimes such a system can disagree with the existing reality and also with the traditional understanding of the “family values” and “family life”, what could possibly cause some critical misunderstandings in spousal relationships. That’s why the majority of marriages, where at least one party is an artist or has anything to do with art, could be considered being “complicated relationships”. At the end of the day, it is always not easy to live and be with the “complicated persons”. This year would also give Oleg and Alla their first child, daughter Alina. Two years later their son Vladislav would be born. The doctors would diagnose him with autism straight away. When in May 2013 the married couple would separate and stop living together, children would stay together with their father and would remain with him till the moment of his arrest and detention. After the Russian occupation forces would take Oleg Sentsov out of Ukraine, the children would be forced to move in their mother’s house, where they still live till now, in the city of Simferopol. Material support and financial

[ 17 ] security of the family are currently taken care of by charity organizations and donations of some Good Samaritans. In 1998 Oleg Sentsov would be recognized as unfit for the military service due to the health reasons. The reasons for that were hidden in his quite delicate, unsound childhood time. When Oleg was only eleven years old, he was diag­ nosed with myocarditis, rheumatic disease, and polyarthritis. The latest from the above-mentioned diseases turned out to be the most treacherous one. In consequence of the disease com­plications, the legs of a young boy suddenly failed to function. It forced him to spend over half a year bedridden. It often happens that serious and hard diseases in the life of an artist later turn into a certain form of fixation, what, on one side, becomes a factor of some sort of an oppression, but on the other side, it can become a catalyst element for the new creative accomplishments. History has so many examples of this phenomenon, starting with Heinrich Heine, who suffered from disseminated multiple sclerosis, and from Ludwig van Beethoven, who was deaf. In Oleg’s case, it is difficult to say that his childhood di­ sease developed into some sort of a really serious fixation. One could rather talk about the overcoming process. Thanks to the regular sports exercises, a skinny and weak boy grew into a strong and physically well-built young man. He believes in himself and he is ready for the active work. Actually, the word “overcoming” is probably the best word that comes to one’s mind, when one looks at the difficult life path of Oleg Sentsov. In the same year Oleg also graduated from the univer­sity and received the diploma of a “marketing specialist”, yet he never ever really tried working in this field. Instead of it, he would start as a young entrepreneur. At the beginning of the 2000s, he would get the private trading place at the central market in Simferopol and would start selling ladies’ shoes.

[ 18 ] Later on, in the middle of 2000s, he would open the biggest computer club in the city. This is probably a quite typical situation for Ukrainian education, where the education system consists of so many universities and institutes, that soon it will be not enough people to fill them, most likely. There is an old and strong tradition that exists in the post-Soviet space and that basically obligate the citizens to go into higher education and graduate. As a consequence, there are so many people with the economic degrees in the country, that the Ukrainian economy is simply unable to employ all of these people. Due to such a devaluation of the education, its quality also remains not that high.

Danylo Vradiy: A close friend of Oleg Sentsov “I know him since probably 2001. It was the time when we used to actively play various games. Actually, that was how we met. Oleg created a team for Warcraft 3 and was testing it. He was also responsible for the organization of the championships. In other words, he was very actively engaged in the so-called cyber-sports. His team was quite successful both in Crimea and in Ukraine as well. Oleg’s trainees performed very well during the World Cyber Games and took there the places that were very close to the main prize. And all of it happened despite the fact that the computer club, where the training took place, was located somewhere on the outskirts of Simferopol, in a remote province. It was the real success. Oleg was among those people who actually developed the regional cyber-sports. Later, when the interest to all of it started to fade a little bit, Oleg opened his own club and was actively involved with it till the 2008 world economic crisis. He already knew, how this business works, that’s why it was quite understandable

[ 19 ] that he wanted to make something similar again, but this time he wanted to make it with his own powers and on the higher and more serious level. It was the biggest club in Simferopol. In had 112 personal computers and was located right in the city centre, in a spacious basement space”.

Vladislav Zhuk: The leading male actor in the Gamer film “Earlier Oleg was a cyber sportsman on the Crimean level. It was the time when he actively played Warcraft, and later he opened his own computer club. I used to play a lot in those times, and that was actually how we met. Our city is quite small, so everybody who played computer games and achieved something in this field, even on the regional level, in Crimea, all of us knew each other. Oleg his own achievements and his authority in this field as well. We can say that he was among the fathers of Crimean cybersports. He was responsible for various organizational issues, he wanted to create a team that could perform during the tournaments, at the beginning just on the regional level, but then on the Ukrainian level as well”.

It was the time, when not everybody had his or her own computer at home, especially computer with the internet access. That’s why the clubs like that became the real place of pilgrimage for everybody, who was interested in everything new and progressive. So, we could say that Ukrainian cyber-sport was deve­ loping in the places like that, built on enthusiasm only. Everything started from the pure love for the game. Thanks to the availability of the permanent local network, these clubs gave gamers a chance to constantly master their skills in sparring with the real people, and sooner or later that would

[ 20 ] definitely develop into the real competition, on the local level at the beginning and expanding later to the regional level. Despite the constant public skepticism, with which computer and video games and also cyber-sports are usually met and perceived, nowadays it is a big and well-developed business that attracts millions of sponsors’ money yearly and drives attention of huge numbers of people from all over the world. It is quite surprising that soccer or boxing cause much more enthusiasm in our patriarchal society than the cyber- sport does. But in terms of emotional intensity and level of skills and excellence could be second to none traditional, more conventional sports arts. Since high speed and the stable Internet came to nearly every home now, there is almost no need of maintaining big computer clubs. Today cyber-sportsmen can easily train at home, mastering their skills in comfortable conditions and in a familiar environment. But anyway, comparing to other European countries, in Ukraine, this business survived longer. Surely, it has to do with the constant lag in technology that the post-Soviet countries experienced for quite a long time. The massive wave of introducing the Internet to people reached these countries later, especially the provincial regions. But very soon Oleg would start being interested in filmmaking, and this new interest would definitely start replacing the interest for the computer business. Parallel with the administration of the computer club, Oleg would start making his first steps in the filmmaking industry and would materialize his ideas in his first films. He would create his first short motion pictures called A Perfect Day for Banana-Fish and A Bull’s Horn. Later on, he would work on the idea of his first feature-length filmGamer that would basically become his lucky ticket to the world of big cinematography, where he always wanted to be.

[ 21 ] [►A Perfect Day for Banana-Fish]

A fragment from “Autobiography”: “I’ve never really dreamt of becoming a filmmaker. But I always loved cinema, since my childhood, I think. And I used to really enjoy good movies. The older I became, the more I developed my artistic and cinema taste and appreciation of good quality arts, and I worked a lot on my self-education too. The more I worked to improve myself and stepped up my own game, the narrower became the circle of my friends and people I could talk about the cinema with. As of today, there would be probably just two or three persons I know”.

The more and deeper Oleg’s knowledge of cinemato­ graphy would be, the harder and more burdensome admi­ nistration of the computer club would become for him. When in 2012 he would shut down his computer business and close his computer club due to the economic crisis, and when he would start his “Kraj Cinema” film company, it wouldn’t be perceived as a huge loss for him. It would feel rather like a freedom from a heavy burden, finally.

Yevgen Chernikov: Actor, a friend of Oleg Sentsov “Oleg was well-known in the cyber-sports circles. In addition to that, he was an owner and administrator of the biggest computer clubs in Simferopol back then. He also was the one who created one of the biggest in terms of the Internet

[ 22 ] traffic Internet forum for Ukrainian cyber-sportsmen. Even now, when all of these crazy things started happening, we never expected that not only the film industry but the entire Ukrainian cyber-sports community would join the campaign demanding to release Oleg Sentsov. I’ve personally seen so many comments and responses from the people from these circles on the Internet, and people support Oleg. The club itself didn’t make Oleg happy that much any­ more, as he was really willing to spend all of his free time working in the filmmaking industry. Any business requires lots of time and effort. It is necessary to control and manage everything, to organize all the working processes and to cont­ rol people who work for you. All of it distracted him too much. He was really very happy when he finally sold that computer club and got rid of all those financial papers, reports etc.”.

Generally speaking, cyber-sports competitions are very much similar to the traditional sportive competitions. There are the same tournaments; there are the same teams, leagues, fans and prize funds. What differs fundamentally though are the disciplines involved. Basically, every single game that is being played during these competitions is a sepa ­rate discipline. Counter-Strike, DotA, FIFA, League of Legends, Quake, Starcraft, Warcraft, Unreal Tournament and others… All these games have their own specific traits in their inner mechanics (the same as in the “rules”) and they also have some genre differences as well. Some of them also have several different versions too, and each of these versions could be also considered being a separate discipline. Not every game could have stood the test of time and remain kind of a cyber-standard for decades to come. The majority of these games experience a significant rise in popularity, and then the interest to them starts fading gradually. This factor often

[ 23 ] contributes to the impermanence and quite a short duration of the career of a cyber-sportsman. If a discipline suddenly disappears from the cyber-sports tournaments, and gamer spent so much time and efforts training and mastering skills for this discipline, it ba­si­cally means that sportsman needs to urgently work on chan­ging qualification or even the entire occupation. The tran­si­tion from one discipline to another one usually goes hand in hand with some losses and lowering of the game level.

Oleg Sentsov

[ 24 ] Gennadiy Veselkov: A cyber-sportsman “First time I met Oleg was maybe about fifteen years ago. Back in those days, he was one of the best gamers who played the first Starcraft, and he has even won the championship of Ukraine in this particular discipline. It was the time when the entire movement was just establishing, and Oleg joined it and was really active in the field. Later on, he created his own team and with some time he opened a computer club in Simferopol. This club became one of the main cyber-sports centres in Crimea. The best and the strongest gamers from Simferopol played there in his club, those who played mostly Starcraft and Warcraft. It was not just a business for him though, he was also trying to develop the cybersport on the local level as well. He organized various competitions and tournaments, various cyber-sports related events, he kind of trained the youth, giving these guys a chance to move forward in their lives. He genuinely believed that this case has a bright future ahead. While Oleg was still playing, he was in the top-five or top-ten of the best players of the country, but later on, when he stopped playing that actively, he concentrated more on the training activity. His Warcraft team was also one of the best teams in the country. He accepted even the small kids in his team, the kids, who were so much into the game, so he started training them, and they used to achieve really great and impressive results. They found themselves among the winners of the national Ukrainian championships, and some of his trainees even mad it to the finale of the World Cyber Games. In those times the strongest and the most powerful cyber- sportive movements were concentrated in the big cities, for sure, like in Kyiv or in Odessa. But Oleg managed to include the city of Simferopol in this field too. There were always strong strategists in Simferopol.

[ 25 ] In addition to that, Oleg is a very talented writer as well. In olden times he wrote a lot about the cyber-sportive topics, mixing it with his own, very unique and specific sense of humour. His articles and posts always provoked loud and active discussions in the comments section. There was no social network in those times though, that’s why everything was usually posted on some thematic resources”.

Oleksandr “Deep.Orcrist” Barkar: A cyber-sportsman “His articles (and I think I could afford myself to make such a comparison now) kind of reminded me of Belinsky’s articles. The unique sense of humour, sarcasm, clear under­ standing of the game and the situation in the field of cyber- sports in general, exceptional language and passion, and, of course, his genuine devotion to his work of love — all of it made his articles really unique. In one of his blogs he wrote, almost literally quoting Vissarion Belinsky: ‘I wake up in the middle of the night, I get up silently, making sure I don’t wake my sleeping wife, and roam in the house, searching for a piece of paper and a pen, so that I can write down all the ideas and thoughts, until they are still here and not lost. It will be too late in the morning’. All these thoughts always hit the target. We used to read his articles and his blogs in our club, and when his new article was out there, we used to discuss it for at least two or three fol­ lowing days. I still have a special file with all the saved Grunt’s articles somewhere in the special folder in ‘My Documents’ on my personal computer, with the articles and posts of the best and the most talented person in the cyberspace. He was also one of the first serious gamers who played Starcraft-1. He won many tournaments in the times when the concept of the ‘Internet’ almost didn’t exist in Ukraine, and, all the more so, there was no opportunity to learn from the Korean gaming professionals by just watching how they

[ 26 ] played. Oleg was a really unique gamer. He was also a unique ideologist of the cyber-sportive movement. In Simferopol, he founded a cyber-sportive computer club called Fortress. He organized there qualifying compe­titions and tournaments for the main international gamer tournament, WCG, he also created a professional gamers team from Varik, and he promoted his cyber-ideology among the people. The real icons and cult heroes of those times cooperated closely with Grunt. And, actually, Oleg was the one who created the first Ukrainian Warcraft champion, C14. Maloy, who was among the eight best gamers during the WCG 2003, which was an extraordinary event of an unbelievable importance at that point in time. In other words, it was nearly impossible. The gamers with the nicknames containing the prefix ‘C’ were among the best gamers in Ukraine for quite a long period of time, and only Hot was able to interrupt their hegemony. But Hot was a real genius of the game, while the Crimean guys, who gathered around the Grunt’s talent, were just a very strong and well-organized club’s team… Grunt visited the tournaments, he made his comments and trained the guys, he also wrote some analytical pieces, and sometimes he also played himself, gaining some minimal income from his Fortress… According to his own articles, many times he wanted to simply quit it all, as he was almost desperate, so he was really thinking of stopping doing all this “cyber-non­ sense”, because irresponsibility, laziness, silliness and general in­ difference that were so common among the gamers ran high and were just off the charts. The Grunt’s team gradually deteriorated and degenerated. Later it ceased to exist at all. The gamers commu­ nity forgot about Simferopol and Crimea, the strategies started losing their popularity, some casual games came to replace them, and Grunt was probably way too adult for them. But, despite all of it, he somehow continued to participate in all these events, although he didn’t write any articles for a quite a long time, so he probably hardly followed the developments and news in this field”.

[ 27 ] Time runs very fast, and very soon the fast-speed Internet appeared, computers also got cheaper, so computer clubs star­ ted to be shut down by their owners due to their unprofitability. It was the time, when the news appeared that were quite inspiring for all the old-school gamers. C2 Grunt became a film director and created a movie! We found out that the real name of Grunt was actually Oleg Sentsov, and that the movie was called Gamer. This film told a story of a gamer that was the best in his town, a story of his path to the world gamer championship and about his defeat, and about rapid and intense disappointment in everything that used to be so dear to the guy. It was the first really honest and open film about our provincial cyber-sport. It was the first view of the gamers’ community and its problems and troubles, and it was actually the first sincere and open creative attempt to show our community”.

A fragment from the article by Oleg Sentsov “Cybersport without fanaticism”: “Cybersport as a sports discipline has its own negative sides, such as changing of the games, patches, maps etc. But at the same time, there is also a clear and distinct system of determination of the winner, coded within every single game. There is no place for a judge’s mistake in cyber-compe­titions and tournaments (except of the cases of dis­con­nections or usage of the forbidden commands, or pro­bably non-compliance of the ‘dead gamers’ with the rule of silence in the cyber-sport, but all these issues and problem could be easily resolved through the distinct and clear organization). So, there is basically no place for the judge’s mistake, as it happened, for instance, recently, during the latest Champions League, during one of the recent soccer games, when, after the game was already over, the judges started having doubts regarding his own decision to remove one of the players from the field. And it is better to not even mention the figure-skating in this regard!

[ 28 ] I don’t really want to engage in the long arguments con­ cer­ning the usefulness or damage of the computer games here. But the games help us develop, and that’s just a matter of fact. And it applies to the computer games as well. Sport also develops us, and that’s a matter of fact too. But the big sport, the golden medals sport, sport, where millions of dollars are involved, this sport really injures and cripples people, it drains their life energy, destroys their lives and damages their health, and it can be applied even to the greatest world champions, not to mention thousands of those who weren’t that successful in sport. The same fate awaits the cybersport too. It’s all about a deteriorated health condition and crippled lives of the gamers… A beautiful, modern virtual show on one side and dirty cybersport on another side. It will always remain this way, and nobody can really change that. There is a basis, there are conditions, there is also a mass involvement in the sport, and there are examples and also a well-organized system of promotion of this sport, which means that there are actually perspectives for the future development. As for those people, who are still full of skepticism and who view me as an idiot who sees the world through the pink glasses, I can just offer a little example with the usage of the initials elements of imagination. Imagine that there is no such sport as soccer. It just doesn’t exist. There is no Shevchenko, there is no Zidane, there are no million-worth contracts and there are no TV coverages and live streams of the games. The game itself exists, but there is no such sport. Almost all the kinds in every yard play this game, the same as their fathers. The kids have their own teams and their own competitions. So, you are a young man, who himself played soccer quite recently, and who was also really good in it, but now you have to leave this childish hobby, as you need to make money for the girls and for some beer. And one night you read the newspaper and suddenly you see there an article,

[ 29 ] where it’s stated that soccer, a game, where one should score a goal with a leather ball, is actually a very perspective sport, and millions of people all over the world play this game. And sooner or later soccer will definitely become one of the most popular and spectacular sports shows. The people who are involved in this sport are grown up and serious persons, so they will do it in good earnest and they would actually make big money off it. Would you believe it? I highly doubt it. Most likely, you wouldn’t believe it, same as you don’t really believe it when it comes to cyber-sports. But time will judge and show, who is right and who is wrong. Epilogue. Sadly, it was my last creative work, dedicated to the cyber-sport. Not that I am not interested in cyber- sports anymore. No, not at all. I’ve lost interest in writing about it. Although there are still some topics that are worth a couple of sleepless nights still, such as cyber-prostitution of the gamers and computer-addiction to the online games. But I don’t want to write about it anymore. I think I just grew out of that colourful shirt of a cyber-publicist clown. I will try to write about more general topics now, to move to the new levels, to work for a wider audience. I think, I will continue working on my new book. I started working on it after I became familiar with the books of Jerome Salinger. After that, I even thought of stopping my writer’s career forever, because I was so impressed with the work of this great master. But I was able to overcome this temporary weakness. I read Jerome Salinger now. And I felt useless and talentless again… And I continue struggling and fighting this… I would like to finish it with the quote from the ‘Million Dollar Baby’: ‘The miracles happen only when you sacrifice everything you have for the sake of your dream, even if no one else believes in this dream, but you’. The end”. About “Gamer”

[ ■ ]

A story of the film Gamer is a story of persistence and of express desire to achieve your own goals. This film was not only a debut film for Oleg Sentsov, it was really a turning point in his filmmaking career and basically his ticket to the world of cinematography. Making his first cinematography attempts and mastering his filmmaking skills creating short-feature movies, Oleg has traveled his own path of attempts and mistakes. Many people emphasize that this is a quite rare phenomenon when a person decides to totally change his career path and field of activity at such a serious age and starts making the first steps in filmmaking. Eventually, it is not that easy to become a part of this world and to begin in this field. Some people spend their entire lives for the things like that, trying to learn more and to master all the tricks of the profession, to build the necessary connections and networks in the filmmaking community and industry and to ensure support of the influential patrons. But Oleg is definitely among those people, who prefer to rather skip the shortcuts, then to take the more traveled roads. Even despite the lack of any professional and academic education in the field, despite the lack of financing and technical basis, he took a decision to leave all his doubts behind and to take that risk. And one should mention that this bravery and this determination were totally justified and paid off in spades.

[ 31 ] A fragment from the article called “Gamer by Oleg Sentsov. A review with the noose around the neck”: seance.ru, Maria Kuvshinova, 25 August 2015 “Three years ago, in one of his articles from the film festival ‘The Spirit of Fire’, where the movie Gamer by Oleg Sentsov received the prize of the film critics, Vasyl Stepanov compared this movie with the films of Aleksei Balabanov. At the beginning of the 2000s an equivalent of Danila Bagrov from Balabanov’s legendary films becomes a teenager, who wasn’t really affected by any war conflict, neither the past one nor the future one, and who wasn’t called to join the military after school, but who rather joined the gamers’ club instead. And it’s worth mentioning that Oleg Sentsov himself once owned one of such clubs too. However, this teenager is still surrounded by the same old empty reality with the eternal prefix ‘post’. His mother somehow manages to combine her study at the institute with her work at the shop, filled with the baked loaves of bread,

At the Gamer filming

[ 32 ] chips, and beer, and she still struggles to understand what kind of a career a computer club owner promises to her son, when he sends him first to the regional and later to the international gamers’ tournament. Same as Danila Bagrov in Balabanov’s film, Lyosha from Gamer is very focused, concentrated, quite isolated from the mankind, he is a little bit repressed and uneasy, when he has to come back to the real world of people, so the logic behind his actions isn’t always clear and understandable. The main character of this film, which kind of balances on the verge of a sports drama genre, is deprived of the thrill of the competition, as the game is not his primary goal. He is unprejudiced and dispassionate, both at the keyboard and when he meets a girl he studies with and the girl he actually likes. Life copies arts, or FSB (Russian security forces) follows Balabanov’s movies: while reading materials of the ‘Crimean case’, you can always feel that you are facing something very similar to the fragment from the Brother movie: a beaten female character Sveta there wasn’t a victim of a domestic violence, but rather a fan of sadism and masochism.

Gamer film crew

[ 33 ] This motive wasn’t actually included in the film, yet it relocated to the film called ‘Of Freaks and Men’, and later found itself also in the statement of the refusal to initiate criminal proceedings regarding tortures, when the bruises and marks, found on Sentsov’s body after his arrest, were explained as the consequences of his sexual practices.

Our team has recently interviewed Aleksandr Sokurov, who is one of those, who supports and defends Oleg these days openly and consistently. It was a different occasion, but he stressed out that computer games and generally sedentary lifestyles of the modern young men and women, when they spend too much time in front of the glimmering computer and laptop monitors, actually equalize them in their apathy, dullness and static character of their lives. But while a woman can afford herself being a little static, a man in our society needs the energy of movement and changes. That was how Sokurov described in his own words the new type of a contemporary character, the appearance of whom Dmytro Mamulia was talking in a quite more complimentary way during the last year discussion regarding the works of the Moscow school of the new cinema. This is a young man, who is quite easy to recognize, who exists literally everywhere and who is so easy to be described with the means of the special film language. It is easier to call such a young man a hipster. However, Lyosha from Gamer is far from being a real hipster. This person, this character and his prototype in the real world, is like always in some sort of prostration. One of the best scenes in Sentsov’s film is the one, where the main character travels by train and looks at his own hands, as if he saw them for the first time in his life or as they were not his hands, and his hands feel so awkward, like moving somewhere above the abyss, far from his comfortable computer keyboard. This young man is quite melancholic, he

[ 34 ] isn’t active, he looks just like table jelly, but this impression is wrong: if only he will not want to move from his place, nobody would be able to move him. His static character turns out to be his own kind of power. Probably, an appearance of this new type that has entered the post-Soviet cinematography from the reality and was noticed and described by Oleg Sentsov back in 2011, was a consequence and a product of a certain social and political breakup, which was also seriously affected with the global breakup that had to do with the advancement of the new digital technologies. The generation gap, which is quite a usual and normal thing for any epoch, is nowadays as deep and enormous as it was never before. These young people live in the world that was created before them and not for them. This is a world where getting a job at the shop or at the market feels easy and quite understandable, even desirable in a way, while a perspective of a stunning career in cyber-sport provokes lots of questions of the elder generation. Melancholy in general can be considered being a symptom of a restarting and reloading, of a necessary sleep, of unwillingness to waste the energy and to act among the old and ineffective decorations that would fall apart in the next moment. Maybe, that is the way the main character of the filmThe Messenger Boy behaves, somehow fearing the failure and disruption of the old world.

Danylo Vradiy: A close friend of Oleg Sentsov “Oleg always loved cinematography. In addition to our passion for computer games and to some other things as well, we used to watch lots of various movies. We had different tastes for the movies, but our tastes sometimes could fit. And while he was already training his cyber-sportive team, he just got that idea suddenly, at some point in time that he wanted to try his hands in the filmmaking.

[ 35 ] Vladislav Zhuk during the Gamer filming

As far as I understand, he first attempted to enroll at some movie directing courses in Moscow, but something went wrong, and this didn’t work out. That is why he took a decision to invest in self-education, and that there was nothing so scary or strange in that. The decision to start the filmmaking and directing career when you are in your thirties could seem to be quite strange and maybe even insane to many. Usually, creative people start their paths significantly earlier than this. But nevertheless, Oleg decided to make this step, and we, his friends, totally supported his initiative. It was very difficult to make a film directing career in Simferopol. It is not Kyiv, it is not Kharkiv and it is not even Odessa, where it is way easier to find the people and connections one would need in this field. All the professionals, who achieve something and reach a certain professional level in the field, relocate to the bigger cities, where there are more opportunities for the realization of their creative potential and

[ 36 ] abilities. They never stay in the provincial cities for too long. It is a huge problem to find a good cameraman in the province, it is a problem to find a good sound designer and sound producer too. There are even certain difficulties with the actors as well. Movie directing is actually a form of management. If you are a film director, you should constantly resolve some problems and issues, and they can arise one by one, in sequence. But Oleg didn’t feel scared to accept these challenges”.

Vladislav Zhuk: An actor, who performed the main male character in “Gamer” “He used to say that it was his dream. He said that he always loved cinematography. He used to write regularly for one cyber-sportive website, he had his own column there, and he used to publish in that column various interesting and exciting stories from his life. He also wrote sketches, essays, short novels, he used to fantasize a lot about the cyber- sportive and related topics. And later it developed into his passion for filmmaking. As he said: “I was lucky to jump on the last wagon of a departing train”.

Natalya Kaplan: A cousin of Oleg Sentsov “The way Oleg himself tried to explain it was that he used to watch lots of ‘pop’ culture and mass-market movies, some kind of action or horror movies etc. And then someone, I can’t really remember now, who exactly that was, but someone later suggested that he better watched some more serious films, the films that weren’t created for the viewers’ entertainment, but rather for the intellectual viewers’ thought. He watched all the classics of the world cinematography, he always tried to deepen and expand his knowledge in this field, and at some point of time, he suddenly came to the realization of the fact that he himself has something to say.

[ 37 ] He gathered lots of thoughts and ideas, and he needed to find a form to embody them somehow, so he decided to make it through cinematography”.

Yevhen Chernikov: An actor, a friend of Oleg Sentsov “I know Oleg since 2008. I used to work at Simferopol Theatre back then, and some of our mutual friends gave him my phone number. Oleg called me and offered me to participate in the filming of his new short-feature movie based on the novel of Jerome Salinger ‘The Perfect Day for Banana-Fish’. That was how we met. That was the time when he still owned and administered his computer club in Simferopol. Our first real-life encounter happened there, in that club. Oleg told me a lot about his ideas, about his views on life and his creative plans. I could feel back then that there was an entire big and incredible world inside of this person, and he really needed to share this world with the outside world. Maybe Oleg couldn’t really formulate his thoughts and ideas about it clearly at that time, but I could definitely feel his crazy and overwhelming energy right from the first minutes of our encounter. Later, when I saw the texts he wrote, I found out that he has an amazing language and that he can express his thoughts in such an exquisite way. I understood that it was a person, who was looking for various means of self-expression and stating of his life position”.

The Perfect Day For Banana-Fish was kind of a student experiment. And although Oleg never was a student of any theatre or cinematography course, one could call this short-feature film his “student” work within the framework of that self-educational “university” he created for himself. It is a creative attempt to answer the following question: am I actually able to direct films? Certainly, Oleg made his

[ 38 ] conclusions from this work, because, as we all know, he never stopped after his “Banana-Fish”, but on the contrary, he continued his path toward the big cinematography. The result we would receive in his first long-feature filmGamer would be the testimony to the fact that those first filmmaking attempts were not for nothing. All those creative ideas that Oleg’s head was literally filled with, found their expression not only in cinematography but in the fine literature as well. Generally speaking, cinemato­ graphy also starts from the literature, as the screenwriting requires excellent writing skills, and not every average person possesses these skills. There is no wonder that professional and highly talented writers often join the process of the filmmaking in Ukraine. Among them are famous and great writers, such as Andriy Kokotyukha, Oleksandr Irvanets, Lyubko Deresh and dozens of other quite famous names. But Sentsov as a film director was quite lucky in this regard too, as he actually didn’t need any external help in screenwriting. Oleg exerted himself in various literary forms, starting from the essays and novels and finishing with the theatre plays and screenplays for the movies. Later his literary attempts would be published as the separate books, while his play The Numbers, dedicated to the problems of the totalitarian society, would be performed on the theatre stages, even despite its scenic difficulty. Unfortunately, we don’t have an opportunity to make the readers familiar with this play’s content, as Oleg refused to publish even the fragments of this text, maybe viewing it more as his “first attempt” in writing and dramatic composition, than a full-featured creative work. Oleg would not stop writing even being in detention and would continue writing the screenplays for his future films. Under the conditions of a total isolation from the outside world and a constant stay in the harsh prison conditions, such a creative form would become a real lifesaver for him”.

[ 39 ] Yevhen Chernikov: “Of course, I agreed to work together with him. We tried to film this short-feature movie. We were successful in some­ thing, we failed at something else though, but, anyway, it was rather a ‘student work’ of a sort. As Oleg said after we finished working on this short-length film: ‘This first film of mine became an example for me and taught me, how not to film’. Oleg is a person, who possesses an extraordinary ability for self-organization. He knows how to better and develop himself, almost with no external help and assistance. The level of his self-education is on a very high level. He even tried to enroll at the movie directing course in Moscow, but after he had a couple of conversations with the teachers and professors there, he rapidly changed his mind regarding the study there. Then he dedicated a year or even two years of his life to self-education. He watched an enormous number of various films and read a great number of books too. Oleg tried to understand, how the movies are being created. Later he created another short-feature film, as a ‘student work’ as well. This time it was based on a novel by Ernest Hemingway ‘The Horns of the Bull’. I also participated in this work, but this time more as a stage manager. This short-feature film was already more ‘clear’. It was ob­ vious that Oleg has already gained some experience in this field. In any case, it is always good, when a person is not totally satisfied with his or her work. It means a person knows that something has to be done better, something can be improved”.

Oleg Filippenko: A film director “Some time by the end of 2008 and at the beginning of 2009 I came to the city of Simferopol. One of my Simferopol friends called me and told me about a friend of his, who has recently made a short-feature

[ 40 ] film. He just wanted to show me that film and asked me, whether he could give my phone number to the film author. I agreed. A little later Oleg Sentsov called me. I came to see him, I remember I came to his Internet- club. It was located in one of the basements in the centre of Simferopol. That was where he showed me his film. It was a short-feature film with the local young actors, based on the Salinger’s novel ‘The Perfect Day for Banana-Fish’. That work was really weak in a creative sense. I didn’t want to somehow injure his self-esteem, but I still thought that it was better to tell him the truth: the actors’ performance felt quite fake and unnatural, in a very theatrical manner, so to speak, and that it was necessary to work with them a little different, when you’re making a movie… It was something like that. That was how we parted our ways with him. Later, I remember it was already in Kyiv, I was working on one of my art-house films in one of the local studios. Artem Mostovyi helped me in those times, and he also told me about the new film of Oleg Sentsov. He said it was a very good movie, and that Oleg has already received some prizes and awards for that film. Recalling that first short-feature film I’ve seen, I couldn’t really take seriously that new film”.

Yevhenia Vradiy: Photographer, camerawoman, director assistant “I first met Oleg in 2002 or maybe even in 2001. I was eighteen years old then. He worked at the computer club and was responsible for training and preparing cyber-sportsmen for the competitions. Despite the fact that my first impression about Oleg was rather a negative one, I had to communicate with him, as he was a good friend of my husband. Generally, lots of time passed. Since we started to be real friends with him and

[ 41 ] started to communicate properly. In the beginning, I knew him just a little, really on the surface only. But after I got married to Danylo, everything changed. Later he had his own computer club in the city. I used to come here quite often to surf the Internet. It was the time when I was already actively involved in the photography field. And once, when I was in the club, Oleg invited me to his cabinet and told me that he was planning to start making movies. As Oleg explained, I was the only one creative person out there, whom Oleg knew personally and who knew how to frame a shot and built a composition etc. Oleg had absolutely no experience whatsoever in those times. I was playing a role of an advisor and an assistant. Oleg didn’t have any special education in this field, but at the same time he was a person, who read really a lot, while I had a practical experience in creating a visual content. During the filming of his first short-feature film, based on Salinger’s novel ‘The Perfect Day for Banana-Fish’, I was responsible for some general and mostly organizational issues. Actually, it was almost the same case with his next film, which was called ‘The Horns of a Bull’. When you participate in the creation of a low-budget film and work with a really small team, it automatically means that all the team members are responsible for all the creative and working processes and do everything. There was nothing about a clear distribution of our roles and functions. We were just trying to gain more experience in the field so that we would be able to use this experience in the future. These first two short-feature films were actually this first experience for us. Oleg tried to practically apply here all his theoretical knowledge he gained before from the numerous books he’s read. When we started working on Gamer, we already had some sort of understanding of the basic principles, according

[ 42 ] to which the films are being created. In addition to that, we understood that we didn’t really want to work with the professional actors or with the people, who considered themselves being professional actors, as there are always particular problems with them. The actors in the small provincial cities usually lack a certain level of skills and mastery. They often don’t know how to move and act naturally in a shot. One of the characteristic features of Oleg’s creative work is his tendency to honesty and truthfulness. It is something between the life and the illusion. You have to believe in what is happening on screen. That’s why we decided to hire non- professionals to perform the main roles in Gamer”.

Involving non-professional actors in his movies would become one of the factors that would allow Oleg to achieve an exceptional level of the vividness of what was happening on screen. This situation is somehow even quite paradoxical, as non-professional actors could be usually quite limited due to the lack of education and experience and lack of the acting skills, necessary for this job. But as it would become evident in the process of creating this film, sometimes it is easier to prepare your own actor, than to try to change the attitudes of an experienced actor with the academic education. This approach is not something very new to the world cinematography. For instance, in 1948, in the epoch of Italian neo-realism, Luchino Visconti also decided to involve the non-professional actors in his film “The Earth Trembles”. In 1948 Vittorio De Sica did just the same in his iconic film “The Bicycle Thieves”. But it’s not actually the novelty of the artistic approach that is important here, but rather the performance and usage of this approach. Anybody could try to involve non-professionals in his or her work, but not everybody would be successful in it.

[ 43 ] Oleg Sentsov during the “Gamer” filming

Yevhenia Vradiy: “It wasn’t that it was easier to work with non-profes­ sionals. It was also quite difficult working with them, but those were the problems of other nature. There is always one and the same problem that occurs constantly, when you work with the beginners: they often try too hard to memorize their texts, so that they often become almost like ‘robots’, forgetting the simple thing that they

[ 44 ] were so interesting to us due to their natural characters and types. That is why we used to spend lots of time to simply help the people to be themselves and to behave naturally. This procedure could take around five-six hours. When we demonstrated our movies during various festivals, we’ve been often asked one and the same question: how did we achieve such a level of reality and vividness in the dialogues between the characters. And the main secret was that we really didn’t want to give the actors some carefully prepared lines and texts. We just told them, what is it about in any particular scene, we actually gave them certain milestones, certain topics for their conversations. That’s why it often looked like some kind of improvising, and that was, how this almost documentary nature appeared in our film. This approach also helped to eliminate the problem of the necessity for the actors to memorize their lines. Our actors simply didn’t need to memorize specific texts”.

Vladislav Zhuk: An actor, who performed the main male character in “Gamer” “All of us were non-professionals there, except an actress who performed the role of the main character. She was a professional actress of Simferopol Drama Theatre (Zhanna Biriuk). I think it was actually harder for her. She was used to working in a totally different way, with different people, in different schedule. Nobody of us actually knew, how it all was supposed to be done. Those of us, who were able to move and behave naturally in a shot, became the actors. It was those of us, who were comfortable enough to perform some tasks in front of the cameras. Not everything worked out from the first time. There were many takes and do-overs at the beginning. But I wouldn’t say that it was very difficult at that time. I never really liked the cameras that much. I’ve never really posed in front of the cameras. It was something totally strange

[ 45 ] and alien to me, to be honest. During the first shooting days and even weeks, I only tried to get more comfortable with just being in front of the camera. I just tried to understand what it was and how I should behave. But gradually everything stabilized. Of course, I can’t say that I had some really complicated actor’s tasks so that I would need to work really hard on it. The type of my character was quite familiar to me. I think I was pretty similar to my character back then. I was quite isolated and focused person. This kind of resemblance really helped me a lot to grow into my role”. Anastasia Chorna: An actress, director assistant for the work with the actors “We met during the casting for Gamer. I was invited there, and my candidacy was immediately approved. It happened long before the filming began. In the beginning, we didn’t really communicate a lot with Oleg. But after the work on the film was already over, we became really close friends with Oleg. I had only four shooting days. Everything was being made quite fast, and my role also wasn’t that big and important, as my character actually appears only in three scenes. For me work on this film felt more like an entertainment, to be honest. It doesn’t happen on a daily basis that somebody actually starts filming a serious full-feature film in Simferopol. This city is quite strange from the creative perspective. For example, there are many really good photographers in this city, there are also many good musicians. But as for the cinemato­graphy, nothing interesting really happens here. The level of our Cri­ mean television was also quite average, that’s why it was really interesting to follow such an activity in this field. The filming itself also had almost nothing to do with how I imagined it. There was no big crew, as everybody is used to see it, there was also no chair with the inscription ‘Director’ on it. There was nothing of that sort here. It was only Oleg, and he was extremely focused and concentrated. He used to

[ 46 ] drive his own car to bring us to the shooting field. There was also Zhenya (Vradiy), who was responsible for the filming process and who actually somehow balanced Oleg’s ardor and played a role of a ‘good policeman’ there. I’ve never met the people of such a character before. When we first met, I felt his mental and emotional toughness straight away. Usually, people like this could be seen in the movies or in the books only. I was only eighteen years old back then. But Oleg and I had absolutely no conflicts on the film set. Even when I did something wrong, Oleg always explained the task I was dealing with, and he always did it calm and with lots of patience. From another hand, it always happened without too much ‘sweetness’ and that kind of ‘baby talk’, you know.

Zhanna Biriuk during the Gamer filming

[ 47 ] And he never had to try convincing me to do something. He usually explained very clearly, what was expected of me, and he could do that for dozens of times if there was a need for it. Oleg didn’t really care too much about the time that would be spent to re-shoot the same scenes. The most important thing for him was to achieve the best result he planned. He was always so much into the creative process that he could simply forget about everything else on Earth”.

Vladislav Zhuk: “I have no idea how other film directors work. I have nothing to compare with. Despite the fact that Oleg is actually a very strict and demanding person, he always knew how to control himself and how to handle his own emotions. That’s why there were almost no conflicts or stressful situations on the film set. Our shooting days passed in a very different way. Sometimes it was not actually a shooting day, but rather a shooting night. Sometimes we worked with absolutely no breaks and pauses. Everything started in the early morning, with the initial preparations. Cameramen set their cameras and prepared their equipment, sound producer worked on the sound settings. It is obvious that the actors took almost no part in all of that, that’s why often we just had to sit there and wait. We used to make a lot of do-overs. Really a lot of them. But sometimes improvisations also took place. Often it was that the actors were just given a topic for their conversation, so they just started talking. There was absolutely no script for that. This is the reason why most of the dialogues in Gamer look and feel so realistic and natural, and I should admit that I like it very much. There was a scene, for instance, where we have been shooting right in the middle of the street, without any kind of fences. Random people just crossed and walked through our

[ 48 ] film set, if one can actually call that a film set. And suddenly, in the middle of one of the do-overs, a homeless man approached us and asked a light for his cigarette. He didn’t care at all about the camera, he was just heading towards his goal. But our team put a bold face on and finished the scene. Later this improvised episode was included in the final cut of the movie. One of the episodes of the film was being filmed during the biggest international cyber-sport tournament World Cyber Games in the USA. There were almost no scenes with acting there too. Those were absolutely non-fictional shots, like a real documentary film. Oleg’s friend went there to attend the WCG finale and shot the material there. Clearly, no one of us was there. Gamer didn’t have such a big initial budget, in order to be able to afford business trips like that. Then we arranged the material shot in the USA and added the scenes with the main character there. We had absolutely no connections in the film industry back then. Oleg didn’t know anybody in that field. He just watched the video-works of some young cameramen, posted on YouTube, and he was looking for the beginner with the good perspectives. At the end of the day, the cameraman we found wasn’t able to finish his business, as he also failed to demonstrate any particular interest in the project. So, Zhenya Vradiy had to film the rest of the scenes”.

[► Gamer official trailer]

[ 49 ] Yevhenia Vradiy: “In most cases, everything Oleg just stood somewhere, where he could block the entrance and prevent strange people from entering the film set. We didn’t make any special fences to somehow close our filming set. Often the filming was quite spontaneous, but it’s worth mentioning that we never actually had any particular difficulties with that. We always found the location we needed and wanted, and we always managed to arrange it with the people we needed. But I think that it was quite typical for the movie with such a small budget, to be honest. One should be flexible and conform to the current situation. It was interesting that our cameraman actually left the project before the end of the filming process. He filmed nearly two-thirds of Gamer, while the scenes, which could be found in the middle of the film after the final cut, have been filmed by me. The final scene was the first one we filmed, and we did it in the winter. And right after that, when the spring came, we filmed the rest of the episodes that were actually the initial ones. If to speak about the outcomes of our work, then it is worth mentioning that we all were the perfectionists, both Oleg and I. From the technical point, everything is still too far from being perfect in this film. Especially it applies to the sound. We recorded the sound ‘live’ because we knew that the voiceover simply ‘kills’ the film. We used to record sound and post-synchronize the short-feature films, and that was quite horrible. As for the work with the actors, I think that we achieved pretty good results here, especially considering our active experimenting. Probably, as a person, who was inside of the filmmaking process, I cannot be so objective in assessing all the aspects of Gamer, but I know one thing for sure: Oleg was able to share in this movie an idea that he wanted to share with the world.

[ 50 ] Ultimately, it was his debut. And debuts are rarely perfect. One could recall the first films of even the greatest film directors. There was absolutely the same story with them too. That is why Oleg viewed it as another step on his path, a step he had to make. Later, when he was planning to work on his next film, Rhino, he made more preparations, and he was way more serious, as the second film you make is always a bigger challenge. The audience always expects something more from the movie director, who showed quite a good performance and gained a positive reputation in his field. Oleg made a long way for this acknowledgment of the audience. By the way, he recently asked through his sister to share Gamer on the Internet, in order to make an end with this film, as it is past history for him and a closed chapter in a way. And it is good that this chapter existed because that is also one of the reasons why people don’t forget about Oleg and still talk about him”.

Danylo Vradiy: “In any case, Gamer remains a ‘student’ film, a learner’s film. It was a transitional success, another step in his way, an opportunity to gain acknowledgment in the filmmaking industry and professional community, and also hope for the following financing of his future projects as well. It is known that nobody gives money easily. Only those, who have some creative achievements and successes behind their back, could hope to receive these funds. Gamer is a ticket for the future projects. Oleg has already gotten some experience in the field, he also had a crew that was more or less well-formed. What was necessary was to just continue to film”.

Natalya Kaplan: “By his nature, Oleg is a leader and a very good facilitator. That was the reason he actually managed to produce that

[ 51 ] film almost free of cost. He didn’t pay the actors, as this film actually unified the enthusiasm of the young performers. Of course, there were some costs and expenses, surely, but that was paid by his own money. When he was working on Gamer, we almost never spoke with him about his job. I know that he was not quite satisfied with the performance of the actress, who played a role of the main character’s mother. She was the only one professional actress in the team. With her academic approach, she didn’t really fit into the general picture. Oleg’s film is very natural, realistic and honest. Sometimes it even reminds of a documentary film. I once showed Gamer on my personal computer to a friend of mine, who works in the field of documentaries, and it took him some time to actually realize that he was watching a live- action film, not a documentary one. I remember how I was running with this film in Moscow, visiting various production companies and attending different festivals. Oleg gave me a list of addresses, and I just brought there the CDs with Gamer and actually distributed the film. It was in the winter, and it was very cold. I was ready to curse everything on Earth back then, but it still gave its results. Oleg had to do everything on his own. He didn’t even have a producer at those times. He used to say that in Ukraine the entire film industry stands thanks to the personal connections and friendships. Everybody looked at him as if he was some village boy, who made some kind of a ‘homemade product’. It is really very difficult to join this specific community, especially if you don’t really know, how all of it works, and how their ‘inner kitchen’ actually functions”.

Unlike the film directors, who work for the mainstream cinematography and aim at the wide release and public screen­ ­ ing, for the creators of the author, art-house movies the festival

[ 52 ] life becomes a measure and a standard of success. Festival life is actually what defines the following fate and life of the film and the future of its author as well. As for the beginner, it is probably one of the biggest challenges in the career and an important stage that actually determines what you are and what your creative product actually means. Festi­val awards work like some kind of positive signs and indi­ca­tors of potential success for the investors, producers, distri­bu­tors, and journalists. And if the film wasn’t noticed by them, it would be considered that this film never really existed. An author, who tries to somehow communicate with the world through his creation, an author, who tries to share his thoughts, his ideas and his views with the people, cannot afford it to film for his personal purposes only. This kind of films is already like stillborn. One cannot say that comparing to the other European film industries Ukrainian one differs too much with the bigger amount of art-house and author’s films, although a certain tendency of the increasing numbers of this kind of films is quite noticeable nowadays.

Oleg Sentsov during the filming process of Gamer

[ 53 ] Paradoxically, the crisis situation our country faces now provokes the movie directors to produce more films, despite the fact that everybody was actually waiting for quite the opposite effect. It seems that financial troubles related to the film industry and the process of producing of the movies weren’t actually the main issues for Ukrainian filmmakers and actors. An urge to emotionally and intellectually release all the gathered experience, a need of reflection, self-analysis, and communication that became crucially important for Ukrainian society during the latest years, became the main driving motive for Ukrainian filmmaking industry. And the festival successes of Ukrainian films definitely speak for the fact that such an experience is interesting not for us only, but for the entire world as well. Among the successful examples of Ukrainian festival movies is, for instance, the film called “My Happiness” (2010) by Sergei Loznitsa. It was the first Ukrainian produced film that made it to the International Cannes Film Festival. It is also worth mentioning the documentary film made by Ostap Kostiuk, called “A Living Watch” (2013) and dedicated to the disappearing Carpathian sheepherders. This film was awarded for the exceptional cameraman work during the Salem Film Fest in the USA. One of the brightest and most outstanding events in the recent times was probably a film called “Tribe” (2014), directed by talented Myroslav Slaboshpytsky. This film has received many prizes and awards during the various film festivals, among them the Grand Prix of the “Week of the Critics” of the International Cannes Film Festival. All these achievements are more important for the promotion of Ukrainian culture in the world, than the barely noticeable activities of the entire Ministry of Culture of Ukraine. Positive examples and stories of success would definitely motivate, inspire and increase self-esteem and confidence of the young Ukrainian filmmakers and directors,

[ 54 ] and it would certainly affect positively the future of Ukrainian cinematography.

Olga Zhurzhenko: Producer of the film Gamer and the project Rhino “I met Oleg in 2009, I think… I don’t think I can recall the year exactly, but it seems to me it was in 2009… Oleg found me through the Internet and came to Kyiv, and we met with him. He sent me the screenplay of Gamer (it was just a screenplay at that time) and showed me a couple of his previous short-feature movies and filmmaking attempts. We communicated with him and had a nice and in­te­ resting conversation, and at some point, he suddenly told me that he was planning to make a new film and that he was going to do it in Crimea. I was in Kyiv back than and I didn’t have a chance to go to Crimea. I was just beginning my professional activities at that time. I didn’t really have either connections or money. There was no state financing either. That is why we took a decision that Oleg would need to film Gamer himself, as there was no real possibility for me than to somehow help him and support him in this. Then some time passed. I’ve already forgotten about this project somehow and was busy with my business. And it was in 2010 when Oleg came to Kyiv again, but now he came with the ready film. Of course, he let me watch it. After the first time, I couldn’t say that I liked it. I told Oleg that I considered it being an amateur’s work. But he reacted quite calm and responded to me: ‘There’s not a lot of us over there, so we should stick together’. After this phrase, I really started thinking on what I could possibly do for him. At that moment I already had a certain amount of useful contacts and connections with some European film producers, so I decided to send this film to Guillaume de Seille, who works in the field of the arthouse cinematography.

[ 55 ] Oleg Sentsov and Anastasia Chorna in the “Cupid” pub in Kyiv after finishing their work on Gamer dubbing-in

To my surprise, his reaction on Gamer was quite positive. He said that he really liked the film and that Oleg was undoubtedly a very talented artist. He sent this movie to Nikolay Nikitin, who worked at Berlinale Film Festival back then and was doing scouting on the territory of the post- Soviet countries. He promised that he would give this film for the Berlinale film competition”.

Berlinale is Berlin International Film Festival of Category A, which is considered being one of the most important and prestigious festivals in cinematography field. Since 1952 this festival is being held yearly in February, gathering over 400 thousand visitors. Nearly 400 various films are usually being demonstrated in different categories within the framework of the competition programme. It is a big honour to every movie director to represent his or her film during this festival while receiving the festival award, the Golden Bear, basically gives you a carte blanche for your successful filmmaking career.

[ 56 ] Olga Zhurzhenko: “Parallel with that we kept in touch with a film critic Aleskey Medvedev, who also organized a ‘Two in One’ film festival. During Odessa Film Festival in 2011 we have held a mini-screening of Gamer in Odessa art-café ‘Exit’ and we invited Aleksey to join. He was on his vacation and didn’t really have a great wish to come, yet he still showed up there. He came, watched the film and said that it was a very good one. Later, after some time, he even offered to organize Gamer premiere screening during the ‘Two in One’ festival to be held in Moscow. In other words, Medvedev was the first person in the filmmaking industry, who actually recognized Oleg’s talent. But here there was a moment of making a hard choice between the Berlinale Film Festival and the ‘Two in One’ festi­ val in Moscow, as an opportunity to receive a right of a pre­ miere screening during the festival is extremely important for the further fate of any new film. Of course, first of all, we really wanted so much to attend Berlinale. It is a big and significant Western film festival, much bigger and more important one than the ‘Two in One’, and a premiere screening within the framework of Berlinale festival gives the movie director and his film enormously huge future perspectives. That’s why the decision was taken that Gamer screening during the Moscow festival would be held outside of the official competition programme. Formally it wouldn’t be considered as a film premiere screening, what would save us the opportunity to demonstrate this film later during Berlinale”.

Aleksey Medvedev: A film critic, organizer of the “Two in One” film festival “The case is that once I went to attend the Odessa Film Festival. We tried to make our own film festival back then, which was called ‘Two in One’. It was being held in Moscow and it was probably one of our most successful creative

[ 57 ] projects. It was really successful, because on the stage of choosing the films for the festival screening we had almost no limits and restrictions, as we were absolutely free to choose the films we really liked a lot. But it happened that when we arrived in Odessa, we weren’t that lucky and we didn’t actually have lots of chance to attend the film screenings. So my wife and I decided to make it a sort of vacation for both of us and we literally dissolved in this beautiful city, totally enjoying it. It was the moment when I received a call from the producer of Gamer Olga Zhurzhenko, who invited us to come and watch this movie. It was the only one film we had a chance to see in Odessa. The screening was held in one of the Odessa clubs. There were lots of people there, and there was a feeling of waiting for something exciting, a feeling of something in common, a common cause of a sort. Moreover, the film itself was made in very ‘homelike’, warm colours. And there was that specific atmosphere of the daily routine in that film as well. The first thing that really attracted me so much inGamer was the possibility to have a dialogue about our contemporary times. This film gave an opportunity to see the modern hero, to see how he looks like, how he behaves, to understand him. I immediately recalled my own life experience, my seventeen or eighteen years, when the film ‘The Messenger Boy’ by Karen Shakhnazarov just came out. There was also a very nice and pleasant main character in that film, a hooligan, who was trying to break free from all these boundaries and restrictive rules, created for him by the society. It was a little difficult to understand though, what his goal was, but it was clear that what the society offered him was definitely not enough for him. I had a similar inner feeling when I’ve seen Gamer for the first time. It was a light feeling on the tips of my fingers that appeared while I was watching this movie in that Odessa club, it was a

[ 58 ] possibility to have a conversation about our today’s reality. All of it became my strongest impressions after that trip to Odessa Film Festival. It was said a lot about Gamer, that is why I don’t think it’s necessary to carry out some kind of a cinematographic analysis of this motion picture here now. The most important thing is that there is a film, where everything worked perfect and where everything came into place. The time, the characters, the expectations of the viewers, the texture of the picture itself and the creative approach to the work with the actors — all of it came into place in this film. We have witnessed a birth of a truly talented Ukrainian film director, who was capable of creating the movies and stories about the modern characters. We invited Oleg to participate in the ‘Two in One’ Film Festival. The screening took place outside of the festival competition programme because the Gamer producers have been planning to participate in the official programme of Berlinale Film Festival as well. It was generally a quite difficult year in terms of the presence of good films. There was even a moment when I had really hard times finding a proper Russian motion picture for the official competition programme of our festival. That’s why I offered Oleg to try finding financing for finalizing of the film post-production and represent Gamer as a Ukrainian-Russian production. However, all those plans never came to life. Later we regularly received some news from Oleg. He presented his Gamer somewhere in Europe than he took part in some pitching events with his new project ‘Rhino’. Through several mutual friends, I also found out that some people from the West were very interested in his projects”.

Olga Zhurzhenko: “At the end of the day, we didn’t make it to Berlinale. Later we received an official letter from the festival organizers, which

[ 59 ] stated that Gamer did not qualify for the official competition programme. But the letter itself was quite interesting, I think: ‘Dear Olga! First of all, we thank you for your understanding. I would like to summarize our previous communication: as for the topic and the age of the protagonists, your film was a quite prospective candidate in our category. I also enjoyed the docu­ mentary style of the film: the camera that follows, but some­ times loses, the main character, the authenticity of the gamers’ events that the main hero attends… However, we found it diffi­ cult to really understand the young man, his perso­nality and his inner world. We’ve ‘seen’ it, how he was doing something, but we couldn’t really ‘feel’ him. It was what weakened the dramatic composition of your film, in our opinion. Nevertheless, it is only our personal opinion. By the way, some programme factors also influence our decision making: every year we consider over 1500 films for the competition programme, and that is why sometimes we are simply forced to reject some of the interesting projects. Please, do not hesitate a single moment, in case if you have a wish to send us another film in the future. We are waiting impatiently for your new creative works. All the best! Florian’”.

Despite our lack of luck during the Berlin International Film Festival, the Gamer team continued looking for the ways of presenting the film to the big world. The Rotterdam Film Festival was the next one on our list. This festival is also known for its long and rich history and its significant authority within the film community. This festival is being held since 1972 in various cinema theatres of the city of Rotterdam and is focused primarily on supporting of the alternative and non-commercial films.

[ 60 ] Another distinctive feature of this festival is that demonstrates its huge interest in the cinematography of the Central Asian and of the developing countries. Oleg Sentsov as an author from Eastern Europe fit perfectly in this concept.

Olga Zhurzhenko: “I cannot remember it clearly now, whether it was a scout from the Rotterdam Festival, who found Oleg, or whether it was the opposite, and Oleg found him, but anyway, we decided that after Berlinale this festival is probably the biggest and most important platform for the future premiere screening of Gamer. After we got a refusal in Germany, it made absolutely no sense to apply for participation in the International Cannes Film Festival. That’s why the Rotterdam Film Festival was the best option available to us at that moment. And so we went to the Rotterdam Film Festival. It was my wedding trip, by the way. I had my wedding, and the next day we headed for the festival already. Everything was quite modest, and there were not a lot of people during the Gamer screening. But the experience itself was really interesting. The festival employees took the technical and organizational moments very seriously, and they gave us so much of their time. It was obvious from the very beginning that they realized it wasn’t just a regular screening, but an international premiere. It is important for them to organize the proper demonstration of the film, just as the film director wants it. Before we went to the Rotterdam Film Festival, we had a screening of Gamer during the Kyiv International Film Festival ‘Molodist’. I always keep forgetting this festival, when I tell the story of Gamer, as this festival didn’t actually change anything in terms of informational support. Everything looked just like sort of a favour from the ‘Molodist’ organizers, it wasn’t actually about recognizing Oleg’s talents. At least, for me, it all looked like that.

[ 61 ] Our screening was simultaneous with the screening of another Ukrainian film, ‘Rock’n’Ball’, and the audience that attended its screening was much bigger than the Gamer audience. I think it was in ‘Kyiv’ cinema, and the halls were located in front of each other. I don’t remember already, whether we had the packed audience, but ‘Rock’n’Ball’ definitely sparked more excitement and interest”.

Andrii Khalpakhchi: Director of Kyiv International Film Festival “Molodist” “We always receive so many films before the opening of the ‘Molodist’ festival. And we don’t usually receive Ukrainian films on time. If our deadline is 15 July, Ukrainian filmmakers always tend to appear later. And there are often too many useless films among the works the present, to be honest. There isn’t really lots of interesting things there, as we usually follow the interesting projects, and we usually know these people since the time of their student works and first attempts. And five years ago a person called me and said that he has made an independent film and that he wanted so much to show this film during the ‘Molodist’ festival. I received it with incredulity, to be honest, as I was very much familiar with the quality of the films Ukrainian amateurs usually bring to us. But anyway, we made an appointment, and that was how I met Oleg. He came to Kyiv, brought his film Gamer and left it for us to watch. Later, when the time came to watch the movie, I started watching it with incredulity, and, to be honest, I immediately noticed a lot of amateur signs there. To film something like that without a proper education and background is quite a difficult task. He was working on this film almost on his own, with the very low budget. In other words, it was an absolute enthusiasm on his side.

[ 62 ] But later I started noticing that something in Gamer really drew me a lot, even despite some imperfection and lack of professionalism. I saw a personality in this movie, a person, who didn’t just create a film, but a person, who had some ideas and a creative background as well. Oleg definitely had something to say. By the way, the young filmmaking industry often lacks it. Sometimes people master the form perfectly, they can work with the excellent cameramen and so on, but there is just emptiness behind all of it. Everything was totally different with the filmGamer . I saw that a new strong and talented person is about to appear in the Ukrainian film industry. We made a Ukrainian premiere for this film during the ‘Molodist’ festival. The film was extremely successful. Oleg has found that nerve that was so important for the youth today. We realized that he was a person, who definitely has a future path towards cinematography. We communicated a lot with Oleg afterward, and his movie was noticed by us. The next premiere, this time the international premiere screening, took place in Rotterdam. He called me a lot. He wanted to hear some of my advice regarding his future plans, and his new screenplay Rhino was already quite deep. It was clear that Oleg could become a really great master in this industry”.

There are about several dozens of various film festivals in Ukraine, being held on a regular basis, focused on different themes and dealing with various trends. Any movie fan would definitely find something interesting among this variety. There are the festivals aimed at the documentary films, such as Docudays UA, “86”, The Contact etc.; the festivals of the short-feature movies, such as Wiz-Art and Kyiv International Short Film Festival; and there are even the festivals dedicated to the classic silent movies.

[ 63 ] It is worth mentioning the two most significant and important regular film festivals of the feature-length story films. This is Kyiv International Film Festival “Molodist”, which has a long and rich history and was being held since 1970, and the younger, but also important and significant “Odessa International Film Festival”, which is being held since 2010. These two events are very important and have a huge impact on the microclimate in the Ukrainian film industry. There is no wonder then that receiving an award of one of these two festivals, of the Kyiv based “Molodist” festival or of the Odessa International Film Festival, is a very important achievement for Ukrainian filmmakers.

Ivan Kozlenko: Director of Dovzhenko Centre “I first heard about Oleg in 2012, when his debut film was included in the official competition programme of the Rotterdam International Film Festival. I was a member of the expert board of the State Cinema Committee, and we were responsible for the first pitching of the film projects in accordance with the newly invented producing system. It was a time, when the first films, created according to the new regulations and supported by the state budget, have been already released, and their budgets were much bigger than the budget of Gamer. The professional level of the crew of those projects, supported by the government, could not be even compared with the amateur crew of Gamer. But it was one of the reasons, why it was so surprising and exciting to find out that this film was the first new Ukrainian film, produced in the 2010s, which was one of the first films from the new generation of Ukrainian movies that was recognized by and gained acceptance of the international filmmaking community. I think it even disrupted a little bit work of

[ 64 ] the expert commission, raising a question of whether lack of financing is actually to blame for the absence of the new Ukrainian cinematography. Since then Sentsov’s name was heard more and more often, and everybody was waiting for his new project. He has basically received a carte blanche for his following projects among the experts in the field. I’ve watched the screener of Gamer at home, and at the beginning, this film didn’t really impress me. The level of reality and non-fiction in the film seemed to be so raw and materialistic, so detached, so literal and so matter-of-fact, that it seemed to me to be rather some kind of a raw documenting of the routine and boring reality. It was only later in time, when this feature of the film came before me as an interesting creative approach while achieving of the certain level of easily recognizable reality was actually an unprecedented creative truth in Ukrainian cinematography on the last decade”.

Oleg Filippenko: “Before I’ve seen Gamer first, Oleg and I met during one of the screening in ‘Zhovten’ (‘October’) cinema theatre in Kyiv, but yet again, it was quite a short encounter. I remember that right after the film screening Artem Mostovy, Oleg and I were drinking cognac at the cinema theatre café, I was wearing a scarf wrapped around my neck, and Oleg made a joke that every genuine film director must have a similar scarf. It was all I remembered from our conversations. Later on there was such a period in my life when there was absolutely no work, so I decided to organize a festival of independent films in Kyiv ‘Kinopanorama’ cinema theatre. Within the framework of this festival, I wanted to gather the really independent films, those that were created without any state financial support. But it turned out that there were almost no films of this kind in our country.

[ 65 ] I offered Oleg to demonstrate his film during our festival. He accepted my offer and agreed, but first, he stressed that I should have watched it first anyway, before making a final decision regarding this movie. I remember that I’ve watched only the first twenty minutes of the film, and it was enough for me to understand that it was a really good one. What I remembered from that first short film he once showed me and what I’ve seen in Gamer was impossible to compare. I understood that Oleg had some sort of a creative breakthrough since that time, that it was a huge step in his artistic development. It seemed to me that these two films were created by two completely different persons. I called him and told that I liked the film very much, but that I’ve watched only the first twenty minutes or so, but he answered that I had to watch it till the end, as there was still a possibility that I could become disappointed with the film. I told him that the first five-ten minutes are usually quite enough in order to understand the level of the film director,

Oleg Sentsov together with the film director Oleg Filippenko

[ 66 ] and I also added that I was not going to watch it till the end, as I really wanted to wait till it would be demonstrated on the big screen”.

That good old “Zhovten” cinema theatre, where Oleg Filippenko met with Oleg Sentsov, sadly doesn’t exist any­ more. On 29 October 2014, during the screening of the film “Summer Lights” that was happening within the framework of the LGBT-programme “Sunny Bunny” of the “Molodist” Film Festival, the unknown persons threw the smoke bombs at the back of the cinema hall, what cause a fire. The fire damaged seriously the roof and the ceiling supports the building. Technical rooms of the cinema theatre and some of the cinema equipment were also damaged as a result of the fire.

Later, thanks to the efforts of the community and the support of the city council, Kyiv iconic cinema theatre would be restored. But unfortunately, the new “Zhovten” cinema theatre differs too much from the good old one. Generally, only the familiar granite floor reminds somehow of the old interiors.

The festival initiated by Oleg Filippenko had a quite provocative name “The Dogs Rebellion”. Oleg himself states that the festival’s name derives from the name of a famous movie of an American movie director Barry Levinson “Wag the Dog”. “A Dog represents a movie director,” Oleg Filippenko explains. “And the modern film industry rules the director the way it wants to. According to the logic, a dog should wag its tail, and not the opposite. So, it is sort of a metaphor”. A timely character in the film “Wag the Dog” can be felt today as never before. The main character of the movie, an emergency cases specialist and a top spin doctor Conrad Bream is called to the White House. He has to help to distract

[ 67 ] the society’s attention from the sex-scandal related to the US President. And what does he do for that? Together with a famous Hollywood film director Stanley Motts, he decides to “direct” a little war conflict, which is happening like a global scale shows. But anyway, despite the fact that Oleg Filippenko uses his festival as a reference to the plot of the famous American film, he doesn’t actually propose to simply accept this way of things, but rather the opposite. He offers the path of rebellion, the path of fighting the simulacrum of this “fake reality”, he tries to put the messed up reasons and consequences in place.

Natalia Soboleva: Director of “Kinopanorama” cinema theatre “We didn’t really communicate a lot with Oleg Sentsov. Oleg Filippenko introduced me to him. We worked together on the project of the independent film festival, the festival of the films created without the state support. So, we decided that the festival should be opened with the screening of Sentsov’s Gamer. Oleg Filippenko said that this film was the brightest and the most extraordinary one among those available. At that time Gamer has already gained fame during the Odessa International Film Festival, everybody was talking about this movie, and Oleg’s name was like a household word. Of course, it wasn’t like it is today, but it is worth mentioning that usually, the debut films of the young movie directors do not stick to the people’s memory like this one did. We decided immediately that this film screening should have to be really pompous, with lots of interesting people involved and with the participation of the cinematography community. Oleg came to attend the opening ceremony. I didn’t like him a lot from the beginning, as he seemed to be not a quite comfortable person in terms of communication.

[ 68 ] His behaviour was totally different from what the Ukrainian film community was used to. That’s why we couldn’t really have a deep and meaningful conversation with him back then. We just chatted a little bit, yet we didn’t build a real friendship with him. But of course, there should have been no friendship between us, and that was understandable, as I was a director of a cinema theatre, while he was a movie director. Oleg just did what he was expected to do: he presented his film and then left to do his business. Oleg also dedicated all of his powers to the filmmaking. His Gamer was an extraordinarily good job, considering the fact that it was actually his first attempt. And it was also really good in terms of the concept, composition, and construction. His film is very rapid. Oleg understands perfectly, what he is talking about, what he is telling it for, and it was not for nothing that somebody once wrote about Oleg that he was always more interested not in ‘why’, but rather in ‘what for’”.

Oleg Filippenko: “By the way, there were really lots of people who gathered to attend the first screening of Gamer. The cinema hall in ‘Kinopanorama’ cinema theatre was almost half full. There were lots of students from the film and theatre high schools and colleges. The audience took the fil very well. I also liked Gamer very much, although I raised my remarks regarding the dramatic composition and shared them with Oleg. The finale of the scene where the main character drinks vodka, the crack in his inner world doesn’t really look very convincing. It feels as if some event, some important stage of his life is missing. Oleg told me that he heard a similar remark from Roman Balayan as well. We met a couple of times afterward at various film screenings and events. As far as I was concerned, he watched

[ 69 ] very much different movies. He never missed any film screening and any film-related festival. Once he even dragged to one of those screenings. I mean, this person always worked on his self-education. He never graduated from the cinema school or college, he didn’t have any classical cinematographic education, but at the same time, he used to watch loads of movies. It was clear even from talking to him. This story is quite an exemplary one. It tells us that we should never ever give up on an artist, telling that this artist is hopeless or doesn’t possess any talent. Nobody knows what would happen in the next moment, what quality his talent would gain. Oleg is a perfect example in this sense”.

Vitaly Mansky: A documentary film director “I just want to say that Gamer is a film that gives us a feeling of a very deep, powerful and thoughtful artist, who has a great creative future lying ahead of him. It is really very rare because usually, a film director doesn’t really trust either himself or his viewers. Often everything is so dense in the movie that it feels as you could cut through its space with the knife. The real life, unlike life in the movies, is usually less intense and filled with less interesting events and peak moments that the screenwriter always tries to bring to life in his screenplays. Gamer is a film lying on the borderline between the reality and the live-action film. In this sense, this film is very much similar to the documentary genre. One can feel the freedom here”.

Andrii Khalpakhchi: “You know, what disappears now from the profession of the movie director is the ability to work with the actors. Nowadays the majority of debutants come to the industry

[ 70 ] from the TV, with an experience of creating various TV shows. But his skill levels off here. Oleg had those skills, although this case isn’t that unique. There are many movie directors, who work with the non-professional actors quite successfully. We could remember about Visconti, for instance. He also uses this approach in his second film ‘Earth Trembles’, but it is really hard to believe that you can see non- professionals on the screen. There is where the mastery and excellence of the movie director lie: to use the people in those circumstances, in which he films them, and to achieve the real sincerity in their performance. It is one of the signs that mark a real master. Today even documentary genre experiences lots of changes. For example, let’s talk about the film that has won on Berlin International Film Festival, Gianfranco Rosi’s film ‘Fire at Sea’. This film is made like a documentary, but Rosi uses people in the shot as if they were the actors. This mutual convergence of the documentary and live-action movies speaks for a great mastery of the film director. Live-motion movies always try to achieve a certain level of truthfulness, just as in the documentaries. All of it has to do with Oleg’s personality. He always tells the truth, and it is reflected in his creative work as well. I remember how we met after I watched his movie. I voiced all my remarks regarding Gamer, and he took it abso­ lutely calm and adequate. You know, it sometimes happens with our young movie directors that after they would make a more or less proper film, they immediately start taking themselves for the real maestros and geniuses. Oleg though understood very well that this film was only his first attempt to say his world to the world and to claim his right for this profession, and he saw all the weaknesses and defects of his work. We would not exaggerate. Gamer is a very fresh film,

[ 71 ] where you can feel the position and the nerve of the director, and the other things too, yet there was still no perfection in there. It was just the first attempt, and Oleg understood it very well. He agreed with most of my remarks and behaved with me very polite. Oleg is a person who had no cinematography education and who also had not enough short-films in his portfolio. But at the same time, it was obvious that this person was very well educated and smart, it was a person who knew the world cinematography well and who’s also read lots of books. Sometimes I have to meet the people who haven’t even seen the iconic world masterpieces, yet at the same time, they are really trying to create their own product, thinking that they are reinventing the bicycle. Everything was different with Oleg. In the course of out quite short conversations, he often told about the movies he recently watched or the books he recently read. He constantly developed himself, improving his education. Sometimes, when we say about someone ‘a person of natural gifts’ or ‘a person who appeared from nowhere’, we mean a person without a corresponding educational or cultural background. But Oleg had that background. When it comes to the autobiography aspects, there is always a big issue here. The more a master, an artist could have it, the more of the autobiography elements could be actually found in his films. Most of the movie directors usually reject those claims, but for all intents and purposes, the artist’s sincerity should be based on the certain autobiographical moments anyway. The way it is implemented in the film is another story. Whether it’s just a story of an artist’s life as it is, or whether it’s an ability to use some inner moments, problems, issues and character traits in your creative work. When Oleg was asked whether Gamer was an autobio­ graphical film, he always answered negatively. Certainly,

[ 72 ] this is an artistic film, but at the same time, Oleg has also implemented his own life experience in this movie, his ability to notice the smallest details in the daily routine and to even make some generalizations. Thus, Gamer brings up the issue of cyber-sport of the level of its storyline, but it is not restricted to this aspect only. Movies like this tell the story of something universal, something that is understandable and important for the entire society”.

Yevhen Chernikov: “Definitely, when we communicate with somebody, when we tell a certain story when we try to convince somebody of something and to prove our point, we are not always present in the process of the dialogue at that moment. When we raise some questions, we often try to find the answers ourselves, to understand something for ourselves. Of course, it applies to the people, who are ready to change and not to those, who are just willing to engage in unfounded and empty moralizing. By the way, Oleg has never done it, and he always leaves the space for unique thoughts and perspectives. Haruki Murakami stresses that he always takes the stories from his own life and his own experience, changes them so much that they become almost unrecognizable, and then just describes them in his books. I think Oleg was doing some­ thing similar. Talking about Gamer, for instance, it’s worth mentioning that it’s not exactly his own story, although it was based on his own life experience. But when it comes to his literature, to his novels, they are very much autobiographical. It also applies to the screenplay to his film ‘Kai’, based on his own life and lives of his beloved ones and his friends”. Oleg’s festival geography expanded not only in the di­ rection of Western Europe or Moscow but also in the direc­ tion of the eastern regions. In 2012 Gamer was demon­strated

[ 73 ] during the Russian film festival ‘Spirit of Fire’ that was held in the city of Khanty-Mansiysk. During this festival of movie debuts, Oleg was awarded the prize of the film critics guild, while Vasyl Stepanov pointed out to the resemblance of this film to Karen Shakhnazarov’s ‘The Messenger Boy’ on the one hand, and to the works of Aleksei Balabanov on the other hand. Before the war erupted, Oleg cooperated quite actively with Russians and attended often various Russian based film festivals and events. Those connections and networks in the industry played a very important role in the initial stages of his movie career. It is hard to predict now, what the consequences of the current confrontation between our two countries could be and how they could influence the future collaboration between Russian and Ukrainian artists and filmmakers. On one side, the attempts of Ukraine (for example, in the person of ‘Derzhkino’, Ukrainian State Cinema Committee) to avoid any possible cooperation with the country aggressor and to curb distribution of the Russian produced content in Ukraine look totally logic and understandable. But at the same time, it is impossible not to mention a great number of the filmmakers and artists from Russia who expressed and continue expressing their support of Oleg Sentsov till now.

Vasyl Stepanov: A movie critic “I first met Oleg during the film festival ‘The Spirit of Fire’. It was an ordinary encounter at the festival. His movie was quite good and very interesting, especially comparing to the films of other festival participants, as ‘The Spirit of Fire’ is a festival that deals with the debut film directing works. I think Oleg’s film differs from the others, and that’s why there is no wonder that Gamer was rewarded with the film critics’

[ 74 ] guild prize. We all thought that it was a very important work. We all had a feeling that this person was not random in the filmmaking industry, and that we will see many more great movies created by this director. What I found really cool in Gamer, from the cinemato­ graphic point of view, was his attempt to tell the story about the computer games. It is really quite difficult to make a film about a person, who spends most of his time in front of the monitor, and at the same time to show what was happening to that person. It was not a movie about, let’s say, boxers, or about any other sportsmen. However, Gamer is basically a sports drama. All the changes happening to the main character, such as that destruction that is happening to a person, who understand perfectly well that he couldn’t be the first and the best one and who could never become the most prominent figure in the field which was important for him, all those changes were shown with the minimal cinematographic means. Probably, this moment was actually a moment when the main character starts being mature when you realize and accept the fact that there are the things that you can do and there are the things that you aren’t capable of. And all that matters is your dream. In other words, it’s a story of psychological growing up, but at the same time, it is also a story about the sportive wish to prove something. This film gave a feeling that there was a bright future for its director, that there will be a quite understandable and calm development, that there would be the new films. That was what was meant to happen”.

A poor Gamer: www.svoboda.org, Lilia Palveleva, 26 June 2014 “We’ve organized at the human rights advocacy group ‘Memorial’ a charity screening of the film called Gamer,

[ 75 ] created by the famous Ukrainian movie director and a pro­ minent activist of the so-called ‘Auto-Maidan’ Oleg Sen­tsov. Today the Gamer author is imprisoned in ‘Lefortovo’ in Russia, where he was conveyed from Crimea. Oleg Sentsov was detained by the officers of Russian FSB (Russian intelligence forces) on 11 May. He is accused of preparation of the terrorist attacks to be carried out in the cities of Simferopol, Yalta, and Sevastopol with the aim of destabilizing of the political situation on the Crimean Peninsula, and if convicted, he could be sentenced to twenty years behind the bars. All the costs we managed to gather during the film screening, and it’s about 36 thousand Russian roubles, are intended for support of Oleg Sentsov. The main character of the debut film made by Oleg Sentsov is a young gamer, who takes computer games for serious and sees it as a serious sport. But everything that is related to the computer games, the psychology of the gamers and specific subculture of gamers, represent just one of the storylines of this film, as a famous film critic Andriy Plakhov emphasizes in his speech at the ‘Memorial’ centre before the film screening. ‘I’ve seen Gamer during the International Rotterdam Film Festival,’ he said. ‘It is a festival that represents mostly movies of the young artists and filmmakers. It is a Ukrainian film, and Ukraine doesn’t really produce lots of movies. It’s a great country, but unfortunately, the position of cinematography is not the best there. This film didn’t disappoint me. It is successful in many ways. An example of Oleg Sentsov demonstrates that it is actually possible to produce a really good, high-quality film operating with the quite low budget. The action takes place in the city of Simferopol. I was really impressed with the international atmosphere of this film. I mean, when they say that Oleg Sentsov has some ultra-

[ 76 ] nationalistic views, it seems to be so strange to me, because I’ve actually seen this film. I’ve seen this man too. He is Russian-speaking, by the way. And his film is set in Russian too. Gamer is like an imprint of a truly cosmopolitan atmosphere that ruled in Simferopol just a couple of years ago. At the same time, he also documented the atmosphere of depression, as the film was made in the times when Ukraine was already plunging towards deep depression. When people say that Yanukovich brought the country to the verge of a total economic and social collapse, it is definitely true, but he actually only finalized what his predecessors have started before him. For example, during the rule of the previous president, right after the events of the so-called First Maidan, Ukraine continued sinking deeper into the economic stagnation, when the people were driven to really miserable condition. And it is very easy to notice in Gamer.

Oleg Sentsov and Vladislav Zhuk during the filming process of Gamer

[ 77 ] Oleg Sentsov and Vladislav Zhuk during the filming process of Gamer

It simply shows the life of young people, who are quite nice and pleasant people and are ready for the normal communication, but the environment they live in is quite depressive, difficult and too provincial. It is also about the difficult economic situation when it is nearly impossible to earn money, to gain a proper education or to find a good job, because the country is in the state of half-collapse. And, of course, all of it is also shown in the film. It was very interesting for me that this kind of a film appeared, a very honest and realistic film, which simultaneously reflects the traits of the world perception of the younger generation. It is not a classic movie; it is rather a contemporary film, made with regard to the new technologies, what was quite surprising, considering the relatively low budget of the movie. It was when I invited Oleg to participate with his film in the ‘Spirit of Fire’ film festival held in Khanty-Mansiysk. It’s a festival of film debuts, representing cinematographic

[ 78 ] works of the young filmmakers and artists from all over the world. And Oleg came and attended the festival, he brought his film with him, and the film was very successful, he even received a special prize from Russian film critics. We became closer with Oleg, and he impressed me as a very intelligent, smart, well-educated and prudent young man, with his perspectives and his ideas that weren’t even close to being destructive, violent or extremist. It was rather the opposite, as his ideas were quite normal and productive. It is a very creative and artistic person, aimed at creativity. That’s why it is especially bitter and painful to see, what is happening to him now. We all understand that we can lose a very talented person, and we don’t have too many talented a r t i s t s”. But actually Gamer had all the chances to remain a film that nobody watched. A successful debut never becomes totally successful right after the film is finished. Only hard and diligent work of those, who truly believe in their creation and who is ready to promote it, can bring any significant results. And the traditional PR-campaigns cannot really be very helpful here. The festival movies have totally different, non-commercial ideology, and, respectively, strategies for its promotion are also quite different. Festivals and film markets are among the main resources that could lead a talented young filmmaker and producer of the arthouse movies to the real success and recognition.

Olga Zhurzhenko: “It was a totally different story after Rotterdam. It seemed that the world suddenly woke up. We started receiving various invitations, the attitude towards us changed. You know, Ukrainians have a specific mental trait that recognizes something only after it has been already

[ 79 ] recognized abroad. It was exactly what happened with Gamer too. During that time there was already the possibility to involve the state financing for the film’s production. That’s why we decided to apply for the two projects at the same time, for the new project called Rhino and for the final works on Gamer. In addition to that, before the state financing programmes started, the first source of financing in Ukraine was a grant from Renat Akhmetov’s fund. All of it somehow helped us to carry out some post-production procedures, to make the right colour correction and to record Ukrainian voice-over”.

Unfortunately, the state financing of the filmmaking industry in Ukraine is a never-ending and very sad story. Along with gaining the independence and the legitimate destruction of the old governmental mechanisms and insti­ tutes, Ukrainian film industry was forced to comply with the constant lack of financing. It is understandable that such a situation had a very negative impact on both the quality and the quantity of Ukrainian film production. But step by step, despite all the difficulties, the Ukrainian film market was demonstrating the signs of improvement and gradual development. In 2011, after the State Cinema Committee introduced a stable pitching system, Ukrainian film industry received a quite transparent, clear and efficient system of government funds distribution. The budgets being allocated for the support of the Ukrainian film industry also grow. As of 2017, Ukrainian state budget planned to allocate nearly half a billion Ukrainian Hrynvyas for the financing of Ukrainian film production industry, and it is an unprecedented sum in the history of Ukrainian state financing. Just for the reference, this sum in 2011 was only seven million.

[ 80 ] Of course, we can state that the situation with the state financing of the film industry gradually improves, but it is still too far from the ideal state of affairs. Half a billion Ukrainian Hryvnyas is still a very little amount of money for the proper support of the Ukrainian filmmaking industry. In addition to that, the State Cinema Committee financing covers only half of the film’s budget. Another half of the budget is the author’s concern.

Artem Mostovyi: A sound producer “I felt from the very beginning that if we’d start to record a new voice-over for the film, we would simply kill it. But the actors did their job very well. I hardly believed that non- professional actors would be able to learn that fast how to work during the recording of the voice-over. We managed to record everything fast and with a high quality. We’ve also recorded the film soundtrack anew, as it turned out to be impossible to get the right to use the licensed tracks in our film. In the beginning, we thought that we would somehow find the way to get the licensing for them, but halfway through the work on the film it was clear that it would be easier to simply create the new soundtracks”.

It is worth mentioning that Ukrainian voice-over turned out to be of very high quality, it was also quite natural and managed to preserve all the truthfulness and “documentary character” of the Gamer dialogues, which was one of the distinctive features of Sentsov’s creative style. The only one thing that was a little unnatural and too theatrical was the voice of the main character’s mother. And it was the only one character that seemed to not really fit in the general picture even in the film itself, as she was a professional theatre

[ 81 ] actress, so her performance was also quite “academic” and “theatrical”. As for the soundtrack, the motives of some songs of System of a Down and Linkin Park are easy to recognize in its newly recorded version.

Volodymyr Tychyj: A movie director “I first met Oleg in 2011 during Odessa International Film Festival. I remember that he was still into the entrepre­ neurship back then, so he looked a little bit like a busy businessman. I do recall that he even had a man-purse, which was quite typical for the businessmen of those times. I would never ever imagine that he could be a movie director. Oleg looked more like a person, who was passing by chance and decided to attend the festival and to talk to the people here just out of curiosity. His personality is very introverted, that’s why he didn’t actually find the way to somehow advertise himself and to prove effective. He told me that he just made a film and that he wanted me to watch it. It was a DVD with the already recorded Gamer on it. Oleg’s film was absolutely different from what Ukrainian films usually looked like. In addition to that, there were also some technical problems with sound there; there was also the usage of the shots from the computer games and of the un­ licensed music tracks. It was nearly impossible to demon­strate it somewhere on the official level, but despite all of it,Gamer was approved for the International Film festival in Rotter­­dam and even received an award there. Sentsov’s appearance as a movie director was possible only thanks to this event. He managed to travel the path other talented people make during seven-eight years, and he did it with one film only.

[ 82 ] Later Oleg received financial support for recording of the new voice-over and sound correction for Gamer. I remember that when this pitching took place, Sentsov was asking for some quite modest amount of money in order to be able to finish work on the film. He was a beginner in this field back then, and I was trying to explain to him that if you intend to get the state financing for your project, then according to the contract, you must also make a certain number of the film copies, and the money he was asking for wasn’t enough even for that. There is a tribe of movie directors who like creating the films about themselves. Author’s cinema is an alternative perspective of the world, and the people who produce movies of this sort, usually work on bringing their inner world to life with the help of various visual images. An author becomes a part of the film he created, and Oleg wasn’t an exception here. Of course, he is not the main character of Gamer, but the motive he brings to life in his film has an important place in his life position. It is very interesting, how he expresses and shows the dramatism of the existence of the person living ‘in the periphery’ to show the hero, who tries to fight against his hopelessness and predestination to remain ‘in the periphery’. There were many films about the gamers before, but Gamer was the first one that handled this theme in this way. Seeking the truth becomes the main motive in Oleg’s artistic work, that’s why Gamer doesn’t really try to win over the viewers immediately. In order to really understand how deeply and naturally Gamer shows the teenager gamers environment of that time, one has to be one of those teenagers. After watching the first twenty minutes of the film, I almost immediately recognized myself as the main character. I also lived in a quite small Ukrainian town, where there was almost nothing to do. I also systematically escaped the school, spending the days

[ 83 ] after days in the local computer club and playing Counter- Strike 1.6 and sometimes even Quake 3 Arena. Computer games are often perceived with a lack of understanding on the part of the older generation, but it is actually one of the media forms, just like the literature or the cinema. They are also capable of telling the stories, to teach something, to entertain, to create the entire new worlds and universes, where you sometimes want to stay forever. In many cases, the computer game is a form of art that has a certain advantage before the other forms of art due to its interactive nature. When a gamer interacts with the entire virtual world in the real time, when he has an opportunity to somehow influence this virtual world, it gives you an unprecedented level of compassion and empathy. It is hardly surprising that for me and for my peers in 2000s computer games became one of the ways to escape the reality of the gray post-Soviet routine. But these attempts to escape were just the initial impulses, just the top of the iceberg that could open the whole new world and the deep cultural layer to anybody, who would be genuinely interested in it. The deepness of this cultural level could impress practically anyone! This experience was so familiar to me that I had almost no chances to resist the feeling of compassion one would definitely have while watching Gamer, I’m sure of it. Of course, one could raise some questions regarding the authenticity of what was happening on the monitors of the games in this film, as the people who are familiar with the computer games and understand something in this field, would definitely notice any smallest disparities. Especially it was the case of the cyber-sportsmen. But I cannot argue that Oleg was able to fully develop this theme in his film”.

[ 84 ] Denis Ivanov: A film producer “When Oleg came to our office with his film Gamer, we thought at the beginning that he was another local idiot who filmed something in Simferopol. We didn’t know back then that his film would make it later to several important film festivals, and that we would also demonstrate it within the official programme of our Odessa International Film Festival. I always liked Oleg, because I knew that I could always talk with him about the cinema. I am friends with many filmmakers, but I cannot talk with all of them about the cinema on the same level as I used to discuss it with Oleg. He was really so much into cinematography. He used to read a lot, he watched loads of movies, I think that maybe he even watched more films than I did. Oleg’s case is not a typical one for Ukrainian film industry and for the film industry in general. A typical case is when a person decides for himself or herself to work in the filmmaking industry, and it happened quite early in life. Usually, people start working in this field in their twenties, and then, when they are thirty or forty, they usually make their first feature-length film. But it’s not Oleg’s case. You know, a personality defines the fate. With his personality, Oleg was able to achieve significant results in his former activity, namely in cyber-sport. The same logic worked in the film industry as well. If we want to be objective, we should understand that Gamer is not that kind of the movie that would remain in the filmmaking history forever, leaving its mark in the field, but the next projects Oleg would work on would have all the chances to be there. It’s just when people start making an icon or an idol from a living human being, while we know this person with all his positive and negative traits, it all looks like some sort of simplification.

[ 85 ] Cameraman Yegor Petryk during the filming ofGamer

I know Oleg a little bit and I can say that if we would walk around telling that Gamer would make it to the top-100 of the best movies of all times, there will be no good in it. It was a very great debut work. And it was great that he did it. Gamer is not a masterpiece, but it is a very good debut work, made on a very good level. It is a real claim for the further great film directing career. It often happens here in Ukraine that a truly talented person would be recognized her only after he or she is already recognized abroad and received some awards and prizes of the international festivals. This is some kind of manifestation

[ 86 ] of the inferiority complex Ukrainian film industry suffers from. But on the other hand, this view from outside is often quite refreshing, because when our artists constantly remain in their familiar environment and watch loads of our films with all their weak points and imperfections, then “a new approach” turns out to be really effective and useful, sometimes even more adequate. This problem affected not only Oleg. There are generally very many similar examples globally, when the good, the talented film directors live for years in their own countries, while their creative work remains unrecognized and unap­ pre­ciated. And then, after a successful foreign festival, fame finally comes to them. Another good Ukrainian example is Myroslav Slaboshpytsky. Until he hasn’t started participating in the first class international festivals and film competitions and actually winning there, he remains like in some of a ghetto with his films.

Sound producer Volodymyr Kozlov during the filming of Gamer

[ 87 ] Another reason why there was a certain amount of skepticism towards Oleg at the beginning was that we constantly followed all the beginners in the industry, we usually follow their student works, we see these people attending various film-related events. They are the part of the cinematographic circle. And when a person of a quite mature age appears like from nowhere, and nobody knows anything about this person, then it is really quite hard to join the community. But anyway Oleg has managed to break this wall. Eventually, everybody usually finds it difficult at the beginning, because people estimate you not because of what you actually do, but because of what you’ve already done. But art isn’t a sport. There is nothing like jumping higher than the others or establishing any other records. Art also exists thanks to the film critic that is responsible for shaping the opinions. That’s why when we return to Oleg’s case again, we can say that he just started knocking on all the doors he saw, and at some point, they started opening in front of him, one by one”.

Julia Sinkevich: General producer of Odessa International Film Festival “I encountered Oleg first through the email and phone conversations when his film Gamer participated in the national competition of Odessa International Film Festival. I remember that his film was very different from the works of other young Ukrainian film directors, and, probably, not all of the people were ready for this kind of cinema. I also remember the quarrels and arguments of the jury member, as their opinion regarding this film divided. Half of the jury wanted to give the main prize of the festival to Oleg’s film, but the head of the jury took a different decision. I remember very well an episode when I was woken up at four o’clock in the morning by my colleagues from the guest

[ 88 ] service, who told me that they forgot to meet Oleg and to pick him up and that they were looking for the car urgently. I asked them whether he was angry or nervous because of that, and they told me that he wasn’t angry and that he took this situation with understanding. Oleg is a very sincere person. He doesn’t take his film for a masterpiece, what happens quite often with many young film directors. On the contrary, he wanted to show his film to the audience and to hear critique and some advice. I don’t think that Oleg’s case is very typical for the film industry. But he wasn’t afraid to risk, he wasn’t afraid to experiment, to make the movies the way he wanted to and to tell the stories he wanted to tell. There are not so many people of his age in our country, who would have a professional edu­ca­­tio­ n in the field. But often it only makes the things more complica­ ­ted, I reckon. I think it was Oleg’s spirit and Oleg’s sen­se of pur­pose that helped him to begin his career in the film industry. I think that the situation with Oleg now is absurd. Un­ fortu­nately, he is treated as a collateral damage these days, a trade-off that Russia keeps, waiting for the moment to use it in its political game. I think that the global outcry definitely helps in Oleg Sentsov’s case. There are so many political prisoners, who are unjustly held behind the bars, but nobody knows about them. A huge attention to Oleg’s case gives us the hope that his case wouldn’t be forced onto the back burner. Both Ukrainian and Russian citizens should do every­ thing possible in the legal and civil fields in order to make the day of Oleg’s release from the prison closer. We need practical help (for example, financial support for paying for the services of the lawyers and for support of Oleg’s family), and also the moral support because the most important thing is to prevent the person’s will from being broken. However, I think that it wouldn’t be easy to survive such a deep trauma”.

[ 89 ] Myroslav Slaboshpytsky: A movie director “I remember that it was in 2013. Our media reported that the film Gamer made it to the International Film Festival in Rotterdam, I think, it was included in the programme called ‘Bright Future’. I also participated in this festival, and I had good relationships with the organizers of this event, that’s why I became very interested in this film. The director’s name didn’t ring a bell to me. I decided to use an application Festival Scope that allows the professionals to watch the festival films, and I watched Gamer on my laptop, in my hotel room, while I was visiting the festival in Locarno. That was how I knew the creative work of Oleg Sentsov. I had a very positive impression of the film. I should say that Gamer was a good film produced on a very limited budget and in a very progressive way, especially in the context of contemporary Ukrainian cinema. It’s a good quality European cinema. But on another hand, my film Tribe after the screenings in the cinema theatres was bought by one Russian TV channels, and Oleg had a chance to watch it on TV when he was already detained. Through his cousin Natalya he shared his impressions, while I sent my thanks to him, also through Natalya. It is quite strange that we haven’t met before, even despite the fact that we both simultaneously took part in the pitching of the State Cinema Committee and even had some mutual friends and connections. Start of the career in this field often starts from the recognition abroad, and it happens not only to the Ukrainian film directors. There are different paths to the success. The case is that the most important film festivals are being held not in Ukraine. As for Ukraine, there is a significant interest to the

[ 90 ] author, arthouse cinema, as there is no shortage of the ‘films for the wide audience’ in the world. The cinema mass market is supplied by the notional Hollywood and by some local film industries, that’s why people expect to see totally different kind of cinema coming from the post-Soviet countries. Not only Ukrainian film directors, but actually any other film director, who gets a chance to be featured in Berlin or in Cannes with his work, usually tries to use this platform in order to let the world know about his movies. These events are usually attended by all the most significant figures in the industry, including film distributors, producers, and international press. That’s why this process is quite objective and really worth an effort. The filmGamer was kind of a manifest of Oleg Sentsov, with which he sent a message to the world that there was a new and interesting film director in Ukraine, and his next film Rhino already had a wide international support. This debut work became his creative breakthrough, but unfortunately, the arrest interrupted all of it”.

Krzysztof Zanussi: A movie director “This is what usually happens in all the ‘not great countries’. What are the ‘great countries’ though? France, Great Britain, Germany to some extent, and, of course, United States. They know how to appreciate their own product and they don’t wait for any foreign recognition. The rest of the countries have some sort of an inferiority complex. It seems that we don’t really trust and appreciate our own culture, and that’s why success abroad is perceived as the wings that let you fly high in the sky. But before these ‘wings’ appear, people in the professional circle of a certain country are usually scared to admit and say aloud that ‘there is a real talent here among us’.

[ 91 ] During the filming of Gamer

Don’t forget the fact that even in the Soviet Union times all the great and important film directors have been also noticed and recognized first in the West, and only afterward they enjoyed recognition and fame at home. It is a very sad situation. Of course, everything has to be different, but in order to achieve it, we need to have really strong intellectual elites, the elites that would feel this creative independence and would have the courage to make their own conclusions and to make value judgment”.

Support of the national cinema in Poland is being conducted by the Polish Film School. This institute was founded in 2005 together with the adoption of the bill about cinematography in Poland. The budget of the Polish Film School consists of the subsidies of various state funds, charity payments, and fees, earnings from the film screenings etc. The same as in Ukraine, the Polish government provides the films only with the half of the budget. However, when it

[ 92 ] is about the non-commercial arthouse cinema, then this part could reach even 70%. A special status is also enjoyed by the history films, as they are perceived as extremely important for the cultivation of the Polish national identity. The state support of the cinematography in France is being carried out by the National Centre for Cinematograph and the Moving Image of France and by the special support fund, which is being accumulated through the taxes and special fees (for example, there is an additional tax imposed on each ticket sold in the movie theatres, there is also a special tax imposed for the television services, the taxes for the Internet-providers etc.). In addition to that, there are also special communities for the financing of the film industry and audio-visual sphere in France that involve financial actives of the private individuals and invest them in the production of movies and other audio-visual content. Every year nearly 600 million Euro are being allocated for supporting of the film industry in France. It allows the artists to create from 170 to 190 movies every year.

Vitaliy Mansky: “I hope that the future films of Oleg Sentsov would be calm and confident like Gamer is. I wouldn’t like to see any kind of hatred or aggression in them. What is happening in his life now could very possible push him to something aggressive. It is important that Oleg saves his identity as an artist, instead of turning into some kind of a ‘mouthpiece’. I am totally sure that he wouldn’t need it. We can lose a talented film director, who can feel this world on a very delicate level. But at the same time, I think I would like to also see a documentary film made by Oleg, a documentary that would tell his story, what was happening to him and what would happen next.

[ 93 ] Simferopol, Zalisska Street. A forest near the house, where Oleg lived. He used to walk his dog there every day.

Maybe time he spent in the Russian prison would somehow enrich him too. We all know the examples of the great artists who had to go through the arrests and imprisonments, among them the great poets, writers, artists, and the prison didn’t break them but made them stronger. I really want to hope that this terrible story that is happening with Oleg now would not destroy him”.

As of today, the film Gamer is that magnum opus of Oleg Sentsov that makes the people talk about him and recognize him all over the world. This is a work that marked the birth of a new and talented artist and received significant festival acknowledgment. ButGamer saves this status not because it is the top creation of Oleg Sentsov. The agenda of the situation lies in the fact that Oleg was literally physically prevented from producing the new movies, and

[ 94 ] if he wouldn’t be imprisoned, maybe we would discuss his new film now. It is known that right before his detention he was busy with preparations for his new project. Rhino was supposed to become the next, higher step in the creative biography of Oleg Sentsov. But, unfortunately, all of it was interrupted before the work even started. Due to the unpredicted circumstances production of Oleg’s new film had to be postponed for an unknown period of time. And it is still totally unclear when there would be a chance to resume the work on this project. About “Rhino”

[ ■ ]

As it was already mentioned before, Oleg’s first project, Gamer, had a quite difficult fate. This film that told the story of a teenager from the small provincial town, who was trying to achieve his dreams, remained unwatched for a very long time and wasn’t recognized after its release. But, as it’s known, the second attempt is always harder than the first one. And it applies not to the cinema only, but rather to any form of creativity and art. The audience already knows what the author is capable of, so it always demands more from him and would expect him to raise his standards and the level of his work. Rhino was supposed to become that new height for Oleg. If earlier Oleg’s way as a film director met lots of various obstacles and difficulties, then this time the conditions were more favourable. This film had a bigger budget, it also had the support of several funds and of some influential producers, there was also a strong and unified crew, but the most important was that this film had a talented and experienced movie director. Nobody could even imagine that despite such positive conditions Rhino project would have an even harder fate, than the debut Gamer, made in very “Spartan” conditions.

[ 96 ] Olga Zhurzhenko: Producer of Gamer and Rhino “When there was a wave of interest to Gamer and when we found out that we were about to attend the International Film Festival in Rotterdam, Oleg told me: ‘Why do I need to attend all these festivals? It doesn’t make sense at all!’ Of course, it wasn’t exactly what he said, but our conversation was something like this… You know, Oleg is not among those people, who attend various festivals and events for the sake of entertainment or out of curiosity. He wanted to move forth, he wanted to work and to create something new. That’s why the decision was taken that we would use all these festivals not only as a platform for demonstrating Gamer, but also as a powerful promotional instrument for our next film. I asked him whether he had an idea for his next project that could be announced during the festival. That was when he just sat and wrote very quickly, in about two months only, the screenplay for Rhino. We shot the teaser, translated the screenplay into English and started sending it for various pitching sessions”.

Oleg Sentsov: Live on the “Blacksea TV” channel “We’ve finished work onGamer nearly two and half years ago, and we spent all this time trying to present it somewhere, during various events. At the beginning we made it to the festival circles, then we’ve finally stepped in the world of producers, then we’ve created an official film campaign, then we finalised Gamer and finally we can release it in Ukraine. Later it will be also shown on TV. Now for almost a year we are working on the new project called Rhino. It is a big film about the gangsters, I could say. In terms of the plot it’s a film about the gangsters, but on the inner, deeper level this film tells us about something else.

[ 97 ] Again, if I could just tell about it in a couple of simple words, then I would just write it down on a sheet of paper and just show it to you right now. That’s all. But it’s impossible, so we would need to make a movie in order to express it all <…> We attended four pitching session with this project, and we won two of them, and we also came the second in the other two of them. It’s a very good result. Thanks to that we’ve managed to gather a million dollars. Now we are dealing with the co-production, and it’s for the first time in the history of Ukrainian film industry when Germany and France allocate some funds to finance a film, where Ukraine would play the main role. We are not somewhere at the end of the list, but the main producer of the product, and the rest of the countries actually joined us. Something like happened in Germany only with Sergiy Loznitsa. <…> It’s a great film. Ten years pass there, there are nearly 600 characters involved, 50 locations, lots of shooting, blood and other stuff <…> I prefer to film the way that it’s as close to the realistic style as possible”.

Rhino is a story about an experienced and well known gangster from the 1990s, who was destined to go through many bloody and really tragic events in his life. He remembers about the different periods of his life, about his fall, where he’s actually lost both himself and his family. He understands that all the trials of life happens not “because of something”, but rather “for the sake of something”. That’s why he is confident and full of determination to change something in his life. Some people consider this story to be more tradition, comparing to our first movie, as the theme of the gangsters in 1990s is quite popular in the post-Soviet cinematographic space, and it seems that so many talented directors have already addressed this topic in their films, such as Brother, Brigade, Boomer, Gangster Petersburg and others. But the evidence from practice shows that the most important thing

[ 98 ] is not even the topic, but rather the mastery and method of performance. Eventually, all the plots and storylines that existed in the humankind history and culture have been already used to the best effect during the Antique times (for instance, “Odyssey”, “Iliad”, “Aeneid” etc.), but it doesn’t mean that we could already put an end to them and give them up for lost. Taking into consideration a unique and very distinctive realistic style of Sentsov and his obvious focus on doing a follow-up of the story and delivering “the message” rather than some superficial screenplay elements, one could expect to see in Rhino a very fresh and unusual interpretation of the at first sight very usual and familiar things. The first real success would come toRhino during the pitching held in Sofia, in Bulgaria. Sofia Film Fest is in the top-fifty of the most important film festivals in Europe. At the beginning it was a thematic event aimed predominantly at the musical films, but later it transformed into the main film festival of the country. Since 1997 over 1600 fiction and documentary films have been demonstrated during this festival, and nearly 1000 most influential film producers and distributors from all over the world have attended this event as well. Surely, considering the fact that Oleg already had his success with his debut Gamer, it was quite understandable that he would draw attention to his new project too. Sofia Film Fest became the first step to the implementation of his future criminal drama.

Olga Zhurzhenko: “Finally, Rhino was noticed in Sofia (Bulgaria)”. “During the festival in Sofia Mira Staleva presided in the jury of the professionals’ section. We’ve been communicated with her before that too, so she was already familiar with our project. We’ve been awarded our first prize there and met many important people in the industry. There was also a

[ 99 ] famous German film producer Alexander Ris in the pitching jury. Later he would become a co-producer of Rhino and would help us to further develop our project. Thanks to him, our film would receive German financing. We’ve also attended Yerevan International Film Festival “Golden Apricot”, where we received another award. And after this festival, we’ve also participated in the Odessa International Film Festival. It is always interesting in Odessa, as the entire Ukrainian filmmaking industry representatives usually gather there, everybody communicates with each other there, and everybody discusses something. Actually 2012 would become a real benefit performance year for Oleg Sentsov. Both of his feature-length works would receive the awards, including the financial ones. It would give us the chance to normally work on the next project. We’ve been planning to start filming at the beginning of 2014. We’ve already started the casting process, we’ve found the locations we needed and wanted… Generally speaking, when Oleg was suddenly arrested, we had everything ready to begin the filming, and almost the entire crew of Gamer was ready to continue working together on this new project”.

Anna Kachko: A film producer “I met Oleg Sentsov after the first success of his filmGamer at Rotterdam International Film Festival. It was the time when he already started working on his next feature-length project Rhino in cooperation with my good friend, Ukrainian film producer Olga Zhurzhenko. His team had a wish that Rhino would become an international co-production, that’s why Oleg and Olga presented their future film, while it was still on the stage of the screenplay and preparation. They attended various festivals and pitching sessions with the screenplay and teaser.

[ 100 ] I was also actively working in the field of co-production back in those times, I traveled a lot, so we started meeting more frequently. Sofia, Tallinn, Cottbus. We saw each other quite a lot, yet we never had an opportunity to actually talk properly. I arrived at the film market Connecting Cottbus that is being held within the framework of the film festival in Cottbus in 2013 with the newly born baby. I remember there was a dinner in some restaurant, organized by the festival. Oleg saw a baby stroller and sat next to me. Later, after talking about the movies for quite a long time, we moved to discuss children. Oleg told me a lot about his son and his daughter, shared his parenting experience. When my little son woke up, Oleg held him and started cradling him in his arms, trying to calm him… When I think about Oleg, I immediately recall the images of that evening. He opened up for me back then, like a person, like a simple human. I think it was the only one time when we really had a deep and warm conversation with him. Oleg was already well known in European filmmaking community thanks to the success of his first filmGamer and the following successful work on his next project, Rhino. Oleg’s film Rhino received the support of the biggest and one of the most influential German cinema funds Mariendboard Berlin Brandenburg. As far as I know, for the first time in the entire history of this fund’s existence, it gran­ ted its support to a project from Ukraine. In addition to that, Rhino project also received several prizes and awards of the international pitching sessions, what means it was mentioned among the hundreds of other movies. It means also that the project was really good and talented, and even before the filming began, it enjoyed the real international support and success. Oleg was known in European filmmaking circles. Film producers, funds and representatives of the various film festivals also followed closely his artistic activities”.

[ 101 ] Anna Palenchuk: Film producer of the 435 FILMS Company “I met Oleg for the first time during the International Film Festival in Odessa, when he participating in the pitching. I’ve heard about him already, and those ten pages of his new screenplay sent to be shown during the pitching were really quite impressive. It was written in a very clear manner, with the very interesting characters and with the inner development of their lines and personalities, and it was totally clear that it was a worthy project and that it has to be chosen and supported. I was responsible for organizing the work of that professional section of Odessa Film Festival. When we have been gathering the participants, I’ve noticed Oleg straight away. He stood a little bit aside, all by himself. One could sense that he wasn’t trying to join any particular group, that he didn’t try to impress the other people, ‘to be heard’ and to deliver his message to them. It was obvious that he also had his own personal position, and I became very much interested in this position. I remember his speech at the festival very well. He was talking very confident, he knew exactly how his film should be, in what style it should be created. He was so confident on the stage that somehow it fascinated the people. Despite the fact that Oleg has no special cinematographic education and background, he performed even better than many others. I think that he was convinced in his victory at that moment. When he went to the stage to receive his award, every­ body was so happy for him, because most of our colleagues understood how confident and persistent this person is on his path towards achieving his goal. Oleg is a person of original genius. He created his debut film Gamer beyond the cinematographic environment, in the city of Simferopol, where there was no film studio, no resource base to make a movie. Under these circumstances, he was still able to bring his ideas to life. That festival success he suddenly experienced gave him that confidence with which he made his speech on the stage, representing his next project. He also knew that his project would be supported by the State Cinema Committee too because such independent and talented artists as him had to be supported. I like the tandem of a director Sentsov and a producer Zhurzhenko. They were really like a real team during the film festival in Odessa, and this achievement, I mean their victory in pitching, was totally earned. After Odessa Film Festival I asked Oleg to send me the screenplay of Rhino. We used to communicate with him a lot back then, texting each other on Messenger and sharing our creative plans and ideas. I’ve read the screenplay in the same breath, as all the events he described and the manner in which it was written,

TheGamer team during the award receiving ceremony

[ 103 ] that clear and cinematographic manner, were just un­be­ lievable. After I’ve read this screenplay, I understood that Oleg must bring this project to life. Nobody taught him how to write the screenplays. I am sure that he has lots of other screenplays, but there are not so much of them written in such a form and easily available. In addition to that, Rhino also possess certain criteria of actual significance. It’s the film that tells us a story of a gangster, who walked along his life path, growing his ‘rhino’s horn’, yet who suddenly comes to realization that he somehow became an unapproachable, senseless, hard-hearted person with no principles in life, and that he left behind all the human qualities he used to have at the beginning. What happened in Sentsov’s screenplay happened to a very huge number of people in our country, and that’s why this film is on time these days too. I really hope that this film and its idea would come to life after Oleg would be finally released. We were very happy for Oleg when we found out that the project got a German co-producer and that the main German fund was ready to allocated financing for the project of this film. It had to be a very interesting co-production”.

Andrii Khalpakhchi: Director of Kyiv International Film Festival “Molodist” “I remember the presentation of Rhino in front of the commission. It was when he [Oleg Sentsov] was really fighting for his film. He was asked so many questions, he received so many remarks regarding his film, yet despite all of it, he remained steadfast and uncompromising. He defended his ideas and his position. There are so many film directors who are trying to conform, who are working for their producers’ interests or for the audience only. But the real artist always speaks for his idea and his point of view, he creates his own cinema. It seems to me that during this presentation lots of

[ 104 ] people really sense this straightforwardness Oleg possess, and it would be also felt later in his civil position as well. He knows how to stand for his truth. How to work with him? Well, maybe one should treat him like a great artist, who he could become and who he would become in the future, and one should always remember that it wouldn’t be easy to work with such an artist”.

Brigitta Manthey: An advisor of Marienboard Berlin Brandenburg for the financing of the cinema in Eastern Europe “I used to tell a lot about the exceptional character of Oleg’s talent back in Germany, I had lots of conversations about it with our film producers and with our filmmaking industry and community, and in 2013 Oleg Sentsov’s Rhino received financial support of the German co-producer. There was already lots of noise around this project, and it was very pleasant to me that our fund also joined and decided to support Oleg’s film. One evening in 2013 Oleg and I had an opportunity to talk personally, face to face. It was during the film festival in Cottbus. We met at the sport-bar nearby. In the beginning, he behaved quite shy, and I should say that this personal trait is actually very common among the very talented people. In addition to that, we’ve been communication in English, and it wasn’t the first language for the both of us. Oleg shared with me some of his ideas and thoughts regarding his new project Rhino, and we engaged in a lively and very interesting discussion. It was evident that both of us could wait for the beginning of the filming. I was so excited, while Oleg was quite calm and stressed modestly that if everything would go well, it would be a very good film. In his film Rhino Sentsov wanted to show a really pure person, I think, a pure person that exists until some counter-

[ 105 ] forces start affecting him in his environment. The idea of this film that tells us a story of a person, who found himself in very unjust circumstances, intruded Oleg’s life too now. Sentsov’s works gave me the chance to realize that nothing is decided in advance, that every person, with the help of his or her inner power and spirit, can choose any possible path to walk and can withstand everything and bear all the tests in life”.

As the filming of Rhino didn’t even start, the only one source of the visual information about this film that is currently available to us is the teaser, which was used as a presentation of the film during the various pitching sessions and events. Yes, unfortunately, this teaser doesn’t really give us a perspective about the film itself, as the actors who participated in the tease were not the same actors who have been approved by the crew for the film. Oleg decided to continue sticking to his creative approach, familiar to us from his Gamer, as he was trying to involve non-professional actors in his film again. But this time more attention was paid to such a parameter as the character’s type.

Volodymyr Tykhyj: Movie director “We talked a lot about Rhino. Oleg wanted to show this story on the screen using the same approach he’s already used in his Gamer, when he decided not to involve professional actors, but to rather look for the ‘types’, who don’t only look like the gangsters from the 1990s, but who were actually those gangsters. He was trying to find the most natural people for these roles. I recall that when the teaser for Rhino was finally released, Oleg actually disliked it a lot, because the actors who performed in the teaser didn’t comply with Oleg’s ideas about the movie characters and their types. Actually, he was

[ 106 ] doing a very serious job on this film till the very last moment, until Maidan protests erupted”.

Yevhenia Vradiy: Photographer, camerawoman, director assistant “We wanted to make Rhino on a higher level than it was before, but at the same time preserving that unique directing approach we had. We strived to preserve that ‘vividness’ and ‘life’ that could be felt in Gamer, but at the same time, we wanted to improve the quality of the cameraman work, the quality of sound etc. We also wanted to find a different approach to some organizational issues, as all of it fell like a burden on the director’s shoulders, draining lots of his precious creative energy. The director shouldn’t be thinking of the issues like how and where to feed the crew or how to transport us to the movie set. We used to work earlier in a team of five, that’s why Oleg was forced to accept some of the administrative and managerial functions as well. We’ve organized casting for the non-professional actors; however, Oleg really wanted to have the experienced and professional actors for some of the roles. For example, he wanted to give a role of a journalist, who constantly speaks with the main character, to Timofey Tribuntsev. The most difficult issue was that we had to find an actor for the role of the main character, who would be able to play the part of both the twenty-years-old and the thirty-years- old character. The movie plot had a quite wide chronological framework. But we got this thing done. We’ve managed to find a charismatic young man who was also a boxer. Then we’ve been choosing the rest of the characters keeping in mind his personality. We’ve carried out the castings in different cities through­ out Crimea, and we’ve been looking parallel for the locations as well. The story happens in the 1990s, that’s why we needed

[ 107 ] to find the places where there was not so much contemporary advertising and similar things. We paid special attention to the city of Kerch, as there were really so many ‘Soviet-style’ landscapes and locations there. We really wanted to film most of the scenes closer to home, because the farther our locations would be, the more expensive the transportation and, consequently, the filming would be. Transportation of the crew is always quite costly”.

A fragment from the screenplay of the Rhino project:

“The camera looks outside through the windshield, there are two male shoulders visible in both corners of the frame. The camera starts crawling inside the car’s interior. The big raindrops run down the car windows, lit from outside with the dim street lights. One man’s hands lay on the wheel, and he switches something on the control panel, while the hands of another man are thrumming on the surface of the glove-box. The first man is Rhino, he is in his thirties already, although he looks even older: he has wrinkles on his forehead and in the corners of his eyes, there are also a couple of scars on his face, with the biggest and the scariest one on his nose. He sits at the wheel. Another man is Zhenya, he is also in his thirties. He is a medium height and of a medium stature as well, and he is obviously a stranger to Rhino’s criminal world.

Rhino Everything seems to be so different when you’re a child. When you’re a child, you often think that adults are smart people and that they know everything. They never lie and they do everything just right. And you should listen to them. But later things change, and everything looks completely different. Not only children could be treacherous creatures and liars.

[ 108 ] And then it turns out that adults aren’t any better than the kids in this regard, why, they are often even worse… And at some point in time, you also become an adult, and you don’t even notice when exactly that happens… As for the moment, when you turn into a bad person, is even harder to notice…

Zhenya gets the bottle with some alcoholic drink.

Rhino I haven’t seen my father since that time. Where did he go, I wonder?..

Zhenya drinks from the bottle and hands it to Rhino, but Rhino seems to not even notice it.

Zhenya Do you want some?

Rhino shakes his head.

Zhenya So you don’t drink while driving, do you? Rhino When I drink, I become a different person…

LOCATION. A STREET IN THE SUBURB. EVENING. SUMMER. Rhino walks with Marina on his arm down the narrow street, passing the private houses. The camera moves parallel with them on another side of the fence, from the side of the inner yards, catching some moments of their inhabitants’ lives. A father and his son are trying to repair an old car. The father’s hands are black from the oil fuel residual. His son hands him the instruments.

[ 109 ] A housewife is trying to finish washing a white shirt fast, twists it and pours the water out. A family consisting of a father, a mother, a granny and three kids of different ages are sitting at the table under the tree, preparing to have their dinner. Children are playing in a huge heap of sand near the fence. They are digging the tunnels for their tiny toy-cars. Somebody of them got some sand on the eyes, started crying and ran away. The older children are playing some game on the asphalt, throwing the wooden sticks to the two cans, standing one on another. The walk of Rhino and Marina started at the “golden hour” of dusk and finishes in the twilight. They approach the building of a local disco with the inscription “Community Centre”.

LOCATION. DISCO ENTRANCE. EVENING There is a big announcement hanging near the club entrance, behind the glass, written in colours. It says: “There is a disco today”. Somewhere distant music could be heard. A couple of guys in their twenties stand at the entrance. Rhino greets them all and shakes their hands, one by one, then he enters the club, Marina follows him, and the camera moves together with them.

INTERIOR. DISCO. EVENING There are three ticket collectors standing near the doors. One of them holds a sheaf of tickets in his hand. Music is louder here.

The first ticket collector Five hundred karbovanets. A thousand for the two of you. Rhino lets Marina go in front of him and then follows her without uttering a word and without paying attention to the ticket collectors. The camera follows them. The first ticket collector is trying to stop Rhino and to say something to him, but the other two ticket collectors are trying to persuade him to retreat. Marina and Rhino are walking over the corridor, one of the walls of which is a huge burgundy curtain. Music becomes louder. A couple is kissing at the end of the corridor. Marina and Rhino enter the dance hall, while the camera follows them. Music is extremely

[ 110 ] loud here, there are lots of young people dancing inside, while there are groups of people standing along the walls on the perimeter. Several girls are dancing in the middle of the dance hall, standing in line. Somebody calls Rhino, and he comes back with two guys. Marina sees her friends and approaches to greet them. Rhino loses Marina from his field of attention for some time, but he doesn’t feel worried, as he feels very confident here, just like at home. Looking for Marina with his eyes and failing to find her, he starts moving through the dancing crowd, avoiding the dancing centre, greeting someone from time to time. And it’s worth mentioning that there are more people who are willing to greet Rhino, than the people he actually greets in response. Someone screams into Rhino’s ear that they need to talk later, Rhino nods and keeps walking forth. The camera moves right behind him, sometimes losing him from sight, stopping for a moment in order to look closer at the people here, but then the camera finds Rhino again, following his massive figure. Rhino approaches the DJ, and the DJ shakes his hand with a smile. Rhino leans to the DJ and tells him something, the DJ nods and then points to the microphone, Rhino shakes his head, thee DJ nods again, and Rhino goes in the midst of the dance hall again. Rhino finally finds Marina with his eyes and starts moving towards her. The fast and energetic music stops and the slow one starts playing. Rhino takes Marina’s hand, leads her to the centre of the dance hall, and they start dancing. Two or three other couples only dance close by. Marina feels that there are so many pairs of eyes looking at them right now, she feels herself like a real star and behaves like the one. Their dance is quite simple, but very tender. The slow melody doesn’t end and turns suddenly into another fast one. Marina starts dancing wildly together with her girlfriends, who are actually filled with envy towards her, while Rhino starts his walk around the dance hall territory again. In the half dark corner of the room, on the window sill, there is a gang of seriously looking guys drinking vodka, and Rhino joins this company too. He drinks almost an entire glass right away. He tries to talk to them, screaming to outroar the music. Rhino drinks more and becomes more relaxed and more laddish. Marina keeps dancing and tries to search for Rhino with her eyes from time to time, but doesn’t see him. A girl finally whispers something in her ear and points with her finger to the corner, where Rhino stands together

[ 111 ] with those guys. Marina rushes there like a vulture, approaches Rhino in a rush, makes a face and leaves the dance hall immediately, in anger. One of the girlfriends runs after Marina. Rhino though doesn’t really react on these tricks and pours himself the third glass of vodka. Rhino starts moving slowly and in wide and somehow dangerous movements in the direction of the exit.

LOCATION. DISCO ENTRANCE. NIGHT Marina stands and smokes, leaning on the parapet, near the disco entrance lit by one of the dim lamps. A little farther, in the corner stands a small company of young people, they speak loudly and laugh, and there are only their shadows and light of their cigarettes to be seen. Some people enter the club, some other people leave it. Music can be heard playing inside. Marina somehow deepens and intensifies her bad mood and her offense, her girlfriend stands next to her. Rhino appears on the scene. He is not in a good mood, his look is quite scary. Marina’s friend sees Rhino and decides to retreat, going back to the club.

Marina I asked you though! What’s the matter?

With the deft movement, Rhino knocks the cigarette from Marina’s hand, and the cigarette falls on the ground, continuing to smoke.

Rhino I asked you too… Marina Very well then! I am quite normal after that, by the way. And you also said that you didn’t care!

One figure from the company of silhouettes, clearly drunk, separates from them and approaches the club entrance, finding

[ 112 ] himself in the light zone. He tries to greet Rhino, tapping him on his shoulder. Let’s call this guy Vityok.

Vityok Vovan! What’s up? How are you doing?

Rhino turns to Vityok in a rush and suddenly punches him in his face. Vityok sits down on the ground and covers his face with his hands. Blood starts streaming down his face between his fingers. A friend of Vityok, let’s call him Sanyok, runs towards him.

Sanyok Vovchik, what are you doing? Why the heck would you punch your own guys?

Rhino hits Sanyok right in his eye, and Sanyok falls down, disappearing from the light zone. Another friend of Marina, Natasha, goes out of the club, starts smoking and looks in silence together with Marina on the atrocities Rhino is doing. Two skinny guys approach the club. Natasha points Marina’s attention to them.

Marina What are you doing here? The first skinny guy Why not? We’re the same people as you though! The second skinny guy Right, just a little bit better.

Rhino approaches them too, and his mood is still quite bad and aggressive.

The first skinny guy What is happening here?

Rhino suddenly punches one of them in the jaw, while the second guy starts running, disappearing in the darkness”.

[ 113 ] Considering the fact that Setsov’s works are often compared by the critics with the works of a famous Russian film director Alexei Balabanov, and also the fact that in one of his interviews Oleg Sentsov confessed that he saw all of Balabanov’s movies, a question arises: how similar this new film of the Ukrainian film director would be to the works of his Russian colleague, especially taking into consideration that, unlike Gamer, Rhino deals with the criminal topics. It is known that Balabanov himself had some kind of a weakness to these topics and that his film heritage comprises several great criminal dramas. Alexei Balabanov could be seen in many ways as a director of grotesque. The reality in his movies is very often quite hyperbolized and excessively expressive. But Oleg Sentsov moves in the opposite direction. He is looking for the natural reality, the reality as it is, he is trying to catch the flow of life with all its colours and nuances, both the bleak ones and the bright ones. But one should not forget that till now we can actually discuss Oleg’s creative work in the context of the only one film, his debut workGamer , that’s why it is very possible that his style could change drastically in the future. However, what really unites Oleg Sentsov and Alexei Balabanow and what they definitely have in common is their interest to the character of an outsider, who is trying to find his place in this world, to find the natural harmony with the environment and the people around.

Anastasia Chorna: An actress, director assistant for the work with the actors “Considering the fact that Oleg usually prefers working with the non-professional actors, the standard casting, such as the casting agencies usually organize, couldn’t really work for our purposes. At the beginning we’ve been trying to look for

[ 114 ] the types we needed in our film ourselves. We’ve been using all the possible approaches and means for that, including friends, relatives, social networks, friends of friends, sports grounds, streets etc. When we found the people, we organized the closed castings for them, but we’ve been also carrying out the open castings too, parallel with the closed ones. We could have dealt with a very big number of people during the day, sometimes around 100-150 people. All the participants who came to us on their own initiative were considered without regard to the type. We asked them various questions: we asked them to tell a little bit about themselves, what they do in their lives etc. The actors are not often asked about the things like that, but in this case, we were dealing with the non-professionals, who were working in totally different spheres and fields. All of them had very different motives and reasons for being on this casting. We also asked them what they were ready to do in order to fulfill their actors’ tasks. Of course, we didn’t plan to demand something extraordinary from them, but we somehow wanted to know, whether those people were actually ready to do something like that. Sometimes we asked them quite provocative questions, aimed at the wish to understand the personality of each person who attended the casting, to understand what their fears and interests were. I remember women reacted especially nervous when we asked them whether they were ready to change their hairstyle for the role, for example, or whether they would be comfortable with the nudity or the scenes of raping. Even when they refused things like that, it was quite interesting to see their reactions. Alongside this, people also differed a lot depending on the city we held the casting in. It emerged that residents of Simferopol were completely different from the people residing in Kerch or Armyansk, where nothing interesting

[ 115 ] really happens, except the weekly meetings of some local Protestant communities. For those people, an event like a casting for a film is almost the same as the City Festival. Initially, they took all of it with some portion of distrust, as they didn’t really believe that somebody came to talk to them, to communicate with them, but later they got more used to it and started to even advertise our castings among their friends and acquaintances. Feodosia and Sevastopol are the cities where shootings of the movies happen quite often, that’s why there are lots of people here, who actually have some sort of experience of being in the scene or who participated in the crowd shots. Consequently, they usually attended our castings with some previous background and preparation, knowing the answers to the majority of the questions we’d be asking them. As for the residents of Simferopol, which is a capital of Crimea, we had to literally beg them sometimes and persuade them to attend the castings. Working during these castings was a very interesting experience. Dealing with so many different people, we already knew how to see immediately what they can do and what they aren’t capable of. Finally we’ve managed to find the types we needed, we’ve also found the candidates for the main characters roles and also for the secondary and supporting roles as well. We continued carrying out other castings as well, but the main cast was already chosen and approved”.

The new project of Oleg Sentsov was already on the final stages of its pre-production when Oleg was detained. Everything was ready to begin the filming process. It is unknown at the moment, what would happen to Rhino in the future, but most of Oleg Sentsov’s crew still hopes that the work on the film would resume. According to the film

[ 116 ] investors, the movie budget is currently frozen and waits for the return of the film director. But everything can change. Maybe Oleg will decide that he doesn’t want to finish this film, but rather will switch his attention to something else. It is also known that he is currently working on the new screenplays in detention, mastering his author’s skills. Nobody knows, whether he still has an interest to Rhino. But at the same time, Oleg isn’t somebody, who would leave the case unfinished. It is quite interesting that the story with writing while being behind the bars is something quite typical for Ukrainian culture. And what is characteristic too, very often this “detention” had something to do with the Russian authorities, be that the Russian Empire or the Soviet Union. Putin’s Russia consistently and expectedly brings those sad practices back to life. Vasyl Stus, Ivan Svitlichny, Valerian Pidmohylny… In the reality, this list is very long, much longer than this… The generation of the “Executed Renaissance”, the generations of the dissidents of 1960s and 1970s, those are dozens if not hundreds of people, who were forced to create his artworks in the harsh conditions of the Soviet camps and prisons in Siberia or on the Solovetsky Islands. It seemed that after so many years of fight, after the USSR collapse, such a situation would never repeat again… But the history has its own wicked irony…

Danylo Vradiy: A close friend of Oleg Sentsov “Oleg is among those people who are very much excited about what they do. He gives himself to the creative process totally. Probably, that’s what enables him to achieve the goals he has. If it’s the cinema, then it’s the cinema for hundred percent. If it’s the games, then hundred percent of his efforts

[ 117 ] would be given to the games. He is always so passionate about what he does. I think that if there would be no Maidan, Oleg would be already finishing his new project, which was interrupted with all these events. All the necessary preparation was done, the castings took place, but then this terrible thing happened. Oleg was lured into this revolutionary vortex, and unfortunately, today he is not an actively working movie director, but a prisoner”.

A fragment from the screenplay of Rhino: “Rhino and Zhenya are sitting in the car. It’s not raining anymore outside, there are only several big raindrops on the car window.

Zhenya Have your enemies bothered you again? Rhino No, they haven’t. But are they really the enemies? The archenemy of every person lives within. It’s the weakness, it’s the cowardice, it’s the faint- heartedness. Once you defeat this archenemy, all the other enemies wouldn’t be scary for you anymore… Zhenya Well, I think, only the strongest people are capable of doing something like that… Rhino A strong person is looking for the strength within. A weak person is looking for the strength in other people. All these religions, sects, parties and other bullshit exist in our world only because of these weak people…

[ 118 ] Zhenya Does it mean that you don’t believe in God? Rhino Why is that? I do believe in God. I just don’t follow any particular religion. It’s easy, there are too much unimportant things in them, things that didn’t come from God but rather from the people… Zhenya And who you believe more in? In yourself or in God? Rhino I don’t really know. I only know that if one wants something badly, one can always achieve it. Always. But one should want it very badly. And one should work hard and do everything for that. Everything. And to ever stop. It is clear to me now. And it is not actually so important, who will help you more in this, you yourself or God. I just know that it works. And I want to teach people this. I want to teach them to believe in themselves, to believe in God, to do what they planned to do, and to achieve their goals if only their goals are really worth it. I want to teach people to be strong. I want to teach them to find the power and the courage inside… I want to build a place, where people could come and live there. To leave and then to come back again.

[ 119 ] A place that would become a real home for them, and it’s not important, whether it will be their first home or their second one… Let it be even not their home. Zhenya (sighing) And when are you going to do that? Rhino Soon, very soon… Zhenya But it’s already five years, and you are still going to do it, and what changed? You still continue catching someone else’s debtors, don’t you? By the way, those two are already very close… And you are running of time actually… Rhino (swallowing) How much? Zhenya Well, it’s enough to be on time, but it’s definitely not enough to keep waiting for longer. Rhino So what am I supposed to do? Zhenya Go!

Two young men are passing by in front of the car, walking very close. Rhino leaves the car slowly and walks behind them, as if not understanding what is happening. Rhino calls them. They stopped and turned around, facing him. Rhino approaches them. One of them gets the gun suddenly and points it right in Rhino’s face. Rhino came very close to them and looks them straight into the eyes. The man doesn’t have the courage to pull the trigger, and Rhino grasps the gun from his hand.

[ 120 ] Rhino Never get the weapon out, if you’re not going to use it! Two young men are passing by in front of the car, walking very close. Rhino leaves the car slowly and walks behind them, as if not understanding what is happening. Rhino calls them. They stopped and turned around, facing him. Rhino approaches them. One of them gets the gun suddenly and points it right in Rhino’s face. Rhino came very close to them and looks them straight into the eyes. The man doesn’t have the courage to pull the trigger, and Rhino grasps the gun from his hand.

Rhino Never get the weapon out, if you’re not going to use it!

The second guy hits Rhino with the knife from the back. Rhino makes a jerk, but doesn’t resist and doesn’t even turn around. The man hits Rhino for the second and then for the third time. Rhino turns around slowly. He holds a gun in lowered hand and looks somewhere through the man. The first man strikes Rhino’s head with the stone. Rhino doesn’t do anything again, just runs his hand through his hair. There’s blood on his hand, on his hair, and blood starts dripping on his shirt. All the three of them remain startled. One man holds a knife in his hand, another one holds a stone, while Rhino still holds a gun. Finally, Rhino unclenches his fingers, opens his hand, and the weapon falls down on the ground. Rhino waggles and starts walking back towards the car. The men throw the stone, clean the knife and take the dropped gun. Then they leave. Rhino falls down, in a couple of steps from the car. There is no one here, neither inside of the car, nor somewhere near it. Rhino is alone.

LOCATION. THE VILLAGE OF BRUSKOVE. MORNING. SUMMER The camera makes a long passage starting with the frame with the field flower, grass and a fragment of the yellow brick wall. The camera goes forth along the brick wall and peers through the window inside. The house is newly built, the interior is very simple, even ascetic: a table, a bed, the icons hanging in the corner, a big rhino’s horn hangs on one of the walls. A viewer can see a man from

[ 121 ] the back, dressed in the pants, shirtless, his naked back is covered with the scars, three of them were obviously caused by the knife wounds. He puts the shirt on and goes out, leaving the house. The camera goes around the corner, catches a man and starts following him from now on. It’s Rhino. His hair is quite long now, his face is thin, he is barefoot. Rhino walks down the street of the village. The camera moves, following him and showing him from the side, in a wide shot. The village is mostly not built yet, there are only a couple of houses that are ready, but most of them are half built. There are also many tents and lots of people around. All these people are very different, but all of them are busy with something. There are also lots of children here. Rhino keeps walking, he greets everybody, yet he doesn’t stop. The people greet him back and leave their work for a short time, some of them bow to him, and others follow him with their eyes. Some of the people carry the woodblocks, some of them cut the boards with the saws. Other people are making a roof for the big barn. An old lady runs towards Rhino and prostrates in front of him, but he helps her to get up without saying anything and keeps walking. A group of children runs in front of Rhino, cutting off his way, they are screaming and laughing, making lots of noise, but nobody is trying to stop or hush them. A huge biker stands with his back to the camera. He wears a black t-shirt with the white letters on it, saying: “There is no one below us, and above us is only God”. Rhino walks pass the open kitchen, where a couple of young women cook. They smile and laugh at Rhino. The atmosphere is very warm, friendly and pleasant. A girl runs to Rhino silently, hugs him and says nothing. Rhino stays like that for a couple of seconds, then he eases her away gently and with a smile and continues walking. On the outskirts of the village, a group of hippies sits in a circle on the porch, and one of them, the eldest one, plays guitar and sings the song “A fool walks around”. Rhino approaches them, stops and starts listening to the song. Rhino looks into the distance. A man is walking towards the village, approaching slowly. This man resembles Rhino in his stature. Rhino touches his forehead with his hand, covering his eyes from the sun in order to see the approaching man better. CREDITS. THE END”.

[ 122 ] It is interesting that these final scenes of the movie closely echo Ukrainian poetic cinema, although one could only think that it was just a coincidence. It is highly unlikely that Sentsov consciously decided to play nice with this trend of the classic Ukrainian cinematography. In any case, his style is closer to the modern realism which is not characterized by the interest to the ethnography or to the games with the irrational feelings. It seems that this obvious difference and even contrast nature of the film finale comparing to the rest of the episodes of the screenplay was necessary for Oleg in order to emphasize that “point of exit” of the main character, his release from the kaleidoscope of the violence and routine, and it was actually what he was striving for. The horn that hangs on the wall in his house is a symbol of this release. The main character got rid of his protection, he overcame his fear of the outside world and opened up for it. However, anything that is poetic or metaphoric on the paper could be interpreted and shown totally different on the screen. Now we are dealing with the screenplay and our imagination only, and based on it we can build our ideas and make our assumptions about how this film would be. The final word though is with the picture itself, in other words, with the movie director.

[► Rhino Trailer] About Maidan and Crimea

[ ■ ]

On 21 November 2013, a couple of days before the start of the Eastern Partnership Summit to be held in Vilnius, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine took a decision to temporarily freeze the process of preparation to sign an Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union. This decision was proclaimed by the former Prime Minister of Ukraine Mykola Azarov, who will remain in the memory of Ukrainians as the least talented for the languages Prime Minister in the history of Ukraine. Despite the fact that the government service in Ukraine demands all the officials to speak Ukrainian language fluently, Mykola Yanovich, who spent so many years in this country, still didn’t manage to learn this language, provoking fellow Ukrainians to make fun of him and create countless memes and jokes. Some of Azarov’s phrases and words became really “iconic” and “legendary”. In response to the blockade of Ukrainian exported goods by Russia Ukrainian Cabinet of Ministers charged its respon­sible structures “to introduce measures … aimed at the develop­ment of trade, industrial cooperation and technologies exchange with the countries members of CIS (Common­wealth of the Independent States)”. According to Mykola Azarov, this decision was determined with the impossibility of the rapid

[ 124 ] modernization of the Ukrainian enterprises and industry and maintaining of the healthy competition with the European producers, what would definitely occur right upon signing of the Association Agreement with the European Union. Since the time of regaining its independence, Ukraine remained in the limbo of constant stagnation. The multi- vector uncertainty of its foreign policies was beneficial maybe only for the local “elites” that continued using the shadow economy to rob the already poor country. None of them was ready to play according to the generally accepted civilizational rules and principles, that’s why Ukrainian non-aligned status, cheap Russian gas and imaginary “stability” literally slowed down the time in the country, almost on a physical level. Ukrainian didn’t move in any direction, it didn’t develop and didn’t evolve. It seemed that nothing would change in this country, never ever. Ukraine looked like kind of a “gray zone” laying somewhere between Western Europe and Russia. That’s why, when the perspective of the possible inte­ gration of Ukraine with the European Union, however weak and distant, appeared on the horizon, many Ukrainians tried to seized this opportunity and this idea, as it felt like a real salvation for the country. They remembered that in fact, Ukraine is not some faceless transfer zone between the two worlds and two cultures. They remembered that both in cultural and in the geographical sense, Ukraine actually belongs to Europe and was always inseparable with Europe, until the totalitarian regime divided the continent with the “iron curtain”, creating two enemy camps. The so-called “European integration” was seen by many not like a “civilizational choice”, but rather like a return to the “European family”, as in fact, the country that is actually a part of Europe has no other choice. It has only one way, and it’s the way forward. The Russian alternative that was always there on the horizon too, as a possible future for Ukraine too, was strong­ly

[ 125 ] associated only with the past, with all its repressions, eco­no­ mic and cultural decline, imperialism, totalitarianism, anti- Ukrainian sentiments and all of those things Ukrainians were trying to escape from since the times of the USSR collapse. Unfortunately, the government headed by Viktor Yanukovich was programmed for the return to the past. After Ukrainian authorities failed to adopt the Euro- integrational laws that have been the indispensable pre­ requisites for the future signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union, it was clear that the former Ukrainian government decided to turn back to Russia and to the Custom Union, which was an alternation economic entity that was actively promoted by the pro-Rus­sian forces and was seen by many Ukrainians rather as the “USSR-2”. The evening of the same day, when the Ukrainian government announced that it suspends Ukrainian movement towards the association with the EU, the first unorganized mass protests commenced. The first protest action took place on the Independent Square in Kyiv (the so-called Maidan) at around ten o’clock in the evening. According to the various estimations, nearly a thousand people have gathered on the main square of the country that night. The authorities reacted fast and prompt, as the units of “Berkut”, riot police and security forces were immediately deployed on Maidan and in the city centre.

In fact, it was the beginning of the events that later would be called “The Revolution of Dignity” and would cause the really tectonic changes in Ukrainian society. It was probably for the first time since Ukraine has gained its independence when the protest actions would develop into the real national movement that would later sweep the entire country. During the first days of the protests in Kyiv, there would be the

[ 126 ] first reports about the similar demonstrations to be held in Donetsk, Ivano-Frankivsk, Lutsk, Kharkiv and in other big cities of the country. On 24 November Kyiv demonstration would gather over 100 thousands of protesters. On 26 November students of Kyiv Shevchenko National University and of the National University “Kyiv-Mohyla Acade­my” would gather for the students strike. 1500 students of “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy” would form a column and would march towards Kyiv Shevchenko National University, where they would unite with the other students, and a unified massive column of students would march towards Maidan, the Inde­ pendence Square. These student strikes would continue till 28 November and would result in a general student strike, sup­ported by the dozens of Ukrainian universities, institutes, and colleges. In the night of 30 November at the personal order of the head of Kyiv riot police General-Lieutenant Valeriy Koryak the units of “Berkut” (Ukrainian riot police) would violently disperse the crowds of the protesters of Kyiv Euromaidan. Dozens of the peaceful protesters would be injured that night, and those of them who would manage to escape the “Berkut” units, would hide inside of Mykhaylivsky Golden Dome monastery. A massive demonstration would be held on the next day, where there would be calls for the general mobilization of all the good citizens. This moment would become a turning point in the Euromaidan history. After the violent dispersal of the peaceful demonstrators, many of whom were students, even the most politically indifferent citizens would start realizing that there is something wrong with this country. The numbers of the participants of the following protests would grow tenfold. On 1 December, on the anniversary of the Referen­ dum on the sovereignty of Ukraine held in 1991, between

[ 127 ] 500 thousand and 1 million protesters have joined the demonstrations in the capital of Ukraine, according to the various estimations. One week later, on 8 December, a massive People’s Council was held in Kyiv, when over a million people participated in it. The decision was taken to deepen and enlarge the protest activities and to start blocking the Presidential Administration, the building of the Cabinet of Ministers and the other government buildings as well. President of Ukraine Viktor Fedorovich Yanukovich faced an ultimatum that was strengthened with the promise to march on his residence in Mezhyhirya. On the same day, the monument of Lenin on Bessarabska Square in Kyiv would be demolished by the protesters and the activists, and it would cause a chain reaction with the so call “Lenin-fall” all over the country. Kyiv Million-Man march would be supported in twenty cities worldwide.

24tv.ua, 8 December 2013: “For instance, in USA demonstration in support of Ukrainian pro-European protests would take place in at least ten cities,’ according to the media-portal VIDIA. In Chicago Ukrainians supporting Euromaidan hang Ukrainians flags and blue and yellow ribbons in the Ukrainian part of the city. One of the communities even created its own ‘Yolka’ that would be decorated with the banners, just like the main Christmas Tree on Kyiv Maidan. In New York, the Polish community would join the Ukrainian one, and the local Euromaidan would be streamed on the Internet. A solidarity march would be also held in Vancouver, in Canada. Here it was even planned to gather some funds for helping Ukrainian protesters.

[ 128 ] It was not the first time when Ukrainians from Vienna, Rome, and Paris also joined Ukrainian demonstrators. The rallies have been also planned to be held in Madrid, Lisbon, Porto, Faro, and London. Ukrainians would also stream to the streets of Boston, Philadelphia, Rochester, Saint- Paul, Los-Angeles, San-Diego, San-Francisco, and Miami”.

On 16 January 2014 Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian Parlia­ ment) would adopt with the grave violations of the voting procedures the ten dictatorship laws aimed at curbing of the Constitutional rights and freedoms of the Ukrainians, among them: — Restriction of freedom of assembly and peaceful gatherings, guaranteed by the Article 39 of the Constitution of Ukraine; — Restriction of the freedom of speech in the press, mass-media and in the Internet, creation of the preconditions for the state control and censorship; — Just like in Russia, it would be offered to implement the procedure of registering all the NGOs and organizations receiving financial support from the foreign states as the “foreign agents”; — Prohibition to gather any information regarding the financial situation of the judges, law enforcement officials and the members of their families; — Adoption of the strict anti-extremism laws that could be easily used against the peaceful protesters as well. Yanukovich would sign five of the dictatorship laws adopted by the Parliament, while the MPs from the ruling “Party of Regions” would start telling that they didn’t know what laws they were voting for. But the path towards the mass repressions against the rivals and all dissenters would be officially open. Later on, the events in Kyiv city centre would

[ 129 ] unfold fast and intense, until they would turn into the mass and violent clashes. It is a quite predictable scenario when the dictator comes to power in the country. It’s worth mentioning also the recent events in the neighboring Turkey, where the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan after an attempt of suppression of the anti-government coup on the country came out for the death penalty for the coup organizers, despite the fact that the death penalty was abolished back in 2004. In addition to that, during the times when he was the Prime Minister of the country, he was actively supporting violent dispersals of the demonstrations with the use of rubber bullets and tear gas. Once during his speech at the Parliament Erdogan would say: “What did the protesters expect? That we would fall on our knees in front of them?”. It sounded as if he was referring not to the citizens of his country, but rather about some enemies who want to attack the sovereignty of the state. One can say that both Erdogan and Yanukovich are the representatives of one and the same “governing style” that has absolutely nothing to do with the modern democratic values. On 22 January 2014, the first fatal casualties would appear on the side of the peaceful protesters after the violent clashes between the demonstrators and the fighters of the special unit “Berkut” and of the riot police that took place on Grushevsky Street in Kyiv. Sergiy Nigoyan and Mykhaylo Zhyznevsky would be shot dead during the clashes. Roman Senyk and Oleksandr Badera would succumb to their wounds and die at the hospital the next day. These people would become the first ones who would be on the tragic list of the “Heavenly Hundred”. Due to the unwillingness of the government to listen to its people, the peaceful protest would turn into the violent and bloody revolution.

[ 130 ] It still remains unclear for many, why and how a film director from Simferopol Oleg Sentsov found himself in the midst of these events. Why would he travel to Kyiv and why would he not just participate in the rallies and meetings, but would also risk his health and life and to take part in the activities of the various self-organized volunteer structures of Euromaidan. It is known that his friends had different stances towards his active civil position, while his wife Alla always thought that “Oleg was always absolutely indifferent towards all the political processes in the country”. But at the same time, it is not surprising at all that a person of such a strong and passionate personality like Oleg jumped right in the middle of the social and political processes happening in Ukraine. Maidan was localized within the perimeter of one city square, yet it became a real magnet for all the passionate, active and creative people from all walks of life and social layers from the entire country. Many famous and important Ukrainian artists participated in and supported Euromaidan, among them writers Yurii Andrukhovich, Oleksandr Irvanets, Oleg Lyshega, artists Ivan Semesiuk and Oleksa Mann, movie director Volodymyr Tykhyj and sculptor Kostyantyn Skrytutsky and many others. The list goes on and on. Several arts communities and organizations even appeared during Euromaidan (for example, “The Artists Hundred”, “Berbakan” and others). Many of them continue their activities even in the post- revolutionary times. Everyone, who felt his responsibility for what was happening in the country back then, became a part of the “Revolution of Dignity”, and this scenario looks totally understandable, natural and consistent. When Oleg Sentsov would appear on the wrong side of the bar in the Russian court, he would say that participation in the events of the Euromaidan was the most significant deed of his life.

[ 131 ] Yevhen Chernikov: An actor, a friend of Oleg Sentsov “At the very beginning Oleg didn’t tell anything to anybody, he just sat in the car and went there. At that time I already lived in Sevastopol and worked in the local theatre. I was preparing actively for the premiere of the play, so I was working intensively and had absolutely no idea that something was happening in Kyiv. I never watch the TV, and anyway, they never really show anything good and worth of attention there! But once I’ve noticed that Oleg was not here, and once I’ve heard about what was happening in Kyiv, I immediately understood that Oleg must have been there. He came back to Crimea from time to time, but most of the time he spent in Kyiv, on Euromaidan, from the beginning, and till the end”.

Natalia Soboleva: Director of “Kinopanorama” cinema theatre “I’ve seen Oleg on Maidan. He was full of an unbelievable and strong energy and devotion. Everything he was doing was being done even not one hundred, but probably two hundred percent. It seemed to me that it was one of his characteristic features. I think he joined Maidan not only because everybody else did. People like Oleg take lots of time and effort to think over the decision like this, to analyze them, and only then they start bringing them to life. It was simply impossible to impose something upon him!”

Olga Zhurzhenko: Producer of the film Gamer and the Rhino project “My husband and I lived on Saksaganskogo Street at that time, close to the Film Centre. Suddenly Oleg called us and said that he would come and visit us now. It was

[ 132 ] very spontaneous. He didn’t tell me in advance that he was planning to come, he didn’t say anything about that. It turned out that he was in Kyiv because of Maidan. During the first day, he spent most of the time on Maidan and lived in the tent city. But when he understood that the conditions there were very harsh and Spartan and that it was nearly impossible to stay all the time there, as he had to take a shower or to sleep properly, he started to come to us from time to time, especially considering the fact that we actually lived almost nearby. It was that in the nights he was on Maidan, while in the day he was at our place, taking some rest. Sometimes he came in the evening too, and he, my husband and I sat in the kitchen, we often talked about Maidan. I remember how he brought later a bulletproof vest and a helmet, and how he also showed us his Maidan badge. He said that if one would be caught with this badge, one could be sentenced to several years in prison for that. Generally, I wasn’t a big fan of Maidan. I am usually quite scared when such a big number of people gather in one place simultaneously. I was also pregnant at that time, and once I had to visit a bank that was located somewhere in that neighborhood. I had to call Oleg so that he could meet me and walk there with me! I also remember how in the midst of all these revolu­ tionary events we were planning to meet with the head of the State Cinema Committee Katerina Kopylova. We had to somehow bring Oleg with us, but it was impossible to access Maidan with the car. That’s why we agreed that we would pick him up on Institutska Street. So, we came here and suddenly saw Oleg, dressed in some horrible winter jacket, holding a white paper bag in his hands. When he got in the car, we immediately felt a strong smell of something burnt. It was so horrible. I asked him: ‘Oleg, what is it in your hands? We are going to meet the Head of the State Cinema Committee

[ 133 ] though!’, and he replied: ‘That’s the Automaidan money. There’s no place where I could leave it, that’s why I have to carry it with me all the time’. So, that was how we went to the meeting. I was wearing an elegant dress, and he was wearing that horrible winter jacket, smelling with smoke, and with that terrible paper bag in his hands. Later this smell would fill the cabinet of Mrs. Kopylova straight away”.

Volodymyr Tuchyj: A movie director “When I met him on Maidan, I was honestly very surprised, because I thought that he was somewhere in Crimea, preparing for the filming. It was the time when we just started making out project ‘Babylon 13’, we’ve been working on it at the Film Centre, so I offered him to join and to film it with us. He refused, as he couldn’t imagine himself as a ‘person with the camera’, telling that it was more important for him at that moment to take part in various rallies and Maidan activities. He didn’t want to be just a witness of those events. When the things calmed down a little, when the oppo­ sitional politicians were trying to somehow play down this whole situation with Maidan, signing some agreements, Oleg was in a quite depressive mood. Once he just came to our office and sat silently for about an hour. It was obvious that it was a difficult moment for him, and that he held all his emotions and thoughts to himself. At the end of the day, all of those who have been more or less involved in the protests started to feel that the politicians really were trying to play Maidan down. It was really crazy at our office at that time, everybody was running on errands, it was insane, so Oleg decided to just take a French leave. Next time I met him was on 20 February, on Grushevsky Street, after the shooting of the ‘Heavenly Hundred’. We spend two sleepless nights before that. Several huge wooden

[ 134 ] blockhouses and frames were brought to Maidan, and the activists helped to unload them. Oleg was also among them”.

On 30 November 2013 within the framework of Euro­ maidan, a movement of the motorists called Automaidan would be established. It was actually a mobile unit of the Maidan activists who were ready to help with their private vehicles. The Automaidan mobile groups were responsible for patrolling the streets, they also help to block administrative buildings and residences of the pro-government officials and escorted and evacuated the activists as well. The Automaidan branches would appear in December 2013 in Donetsk, Lutsk, Lviv, Odessa and many other cities of Ukraine. Automaidan activists participated in several various protest activities and events, starting from traffic blocking and finishing with the carrying out of the motor rallies to the residence of Viktor Yanukovich in Mezhygirya or with the finding of criminals and gangs, the so-called “titushki”, brought by the pro-government forces with the aim of de­ stabilizing the situation and escalation of the protest moods. The initiatives of Automaidan turned out to be so effective that they even forced the Yanukovich regime to opt for quite repressive methods. In particular, on 16 January 2014, the pro-government majority in Ukrainian Parliament has adopted the law that prohibited the motorists to move in the columns consisting of more than five cars. Same as many other organizations and structures that were formed during Maidan, Automaidan also didn’t stop its activities after the end of the revolution. It became the foundation for three civic organizations aimed at ensuring of the civilian control of the current authorities, among them the All-Ukrainian group “Automaidan”, “Automaidan Kyiv” and “Automaidan Community”.

[ 135 ] Despite the fact that Oleg Sentsov arrived in Kyiv without his car, it would not prevent him from joining the Automaidan structure. He would demonstrate his extra­ ordinary organizational skills there, actually taking a position of a head of the headquarters of the Ukrainian House, after it was taken by the Maidan protesters. The Automaidan members continue to carry out the rallies to the pro-government officials, who, in their opinion, violated Ukrainian law.

dt.ua, 10 January 2014: “Automaidan members picketed the house that, accor­ ding to their information, belonged to the acting commander of the third troop of Kyiv based ‘Berkut’ forces Yevhen Antonov, says a statement on the group’s Facebook page. By the account of the Automaidan activists, several police cars have been patrolling Antonov’s house and the neighboring area. Automaidan activists think that Yevhen Antonov was a ‘Berkut’ fighter, who in the night of 29-30 November 2013 attacked Reuters photo correspon­ dent Gleb Garanich, beating his legs and his camera as well, after what Antonov’s fighters hit Garanich in the head with the sticks, reports Liga.net. It’s worth mentioning that Automaidan activists have made a list of the police officers, prosecutors, judges and other officials they were planning to visit. There are about twenty-five persons on the list. It was reported that on 5 January Automaidan has surrounded and picketed the vacation house of the Minister of Interior of Ukraine Vitaly Zakharchenko, located in the village of Pidgirtsi of Kyiv region”. Automaidan and Kyiv residents started patrolling the streets of the capital city together.

[ 136 ] News.liga.net, 21 January 2014: “A group of activists is driving with their cars throughout the city, maintaining order and keeping an eye on the activities and behaviour of the so-called ‘titushki’ gangs. In Kyiv activists of Automaidan together with the city residents on their private vehicles started patrolling the streets of the capital city in order to control the groups of the young persons of the typical appearance that are being often called ‘titushki’. One of the Automaidan activists, Oleksiy Gritsenko, told about when he was a guest at the ‘5 Channel’. According to him, the aim of this patrolling is not hunting the so-called ‘titushki’ carried out by the Euromaidan activists, but rather prevention of the illegal and often violent activities of the people brought here to Kyiv specifically for organizing of different kinds of clashes, provocations, pogroms, and attacks against the peaceful citizens in order to escalate the situation around the protests. It is to be recalled that in the night of 12 January 2014 in Kyiv activists of Automaidan, the ‘Right Sector’ and Kyiv residents started finding ‘titushki’, the organized gangs that were brought to Kyiv for disruption of order and organization of provocations. Some of the guys were detained by the activists, and they admitted that they’ve been brought to Kyiv and paid for participating in various types of hooligan activities”.

Katerina Butko: A journalist and an Automaidan activist “I knew him [Oleg Sentsov] better and closer on the morning following the events in Kriposny Lane, when ‘Berkut’ forces attacked the Automaidan cars. I was in one of those cars. All of the activists who have been caught that day have been beaten violently, detained and escorted to Mariinsky Park. Later they let some of our guys go, but those

[ 137 ] who remained there were arrested, so they were forced to spend two months in the pre-trial detention centre. I was also released back then. Then I went to attend a press-conference dedicated to these events, as it was the first serious attack of the law enforcement bodies against the Automaidan, nothing like has ever happened before. I called one of our activists, and he said that somebody would come to pick me up now. The person who came to pick me up turned out to be Oleg Sentsov. Later, probably in a month, I met him again, this time, as an Automaidan activist, because till that time he was just one of the Maidan protesters, as far as I can understand, he constantly took part in all the rallies and demonstrations. A week later we organized the headquarters of Automaidan in the building of the Ukrainian House, and since that time Oleg was constantly present there, playing the role of a coordinator. He was responsible for all the administrative issues, organized the duty, communicated with those enormous numbers of people, who from various reasons addressed our organization. It was really quite difficult to cope with such a huge amount of managerial activities and responsibilities. Dozens of people come and leave. Each of them tells something very important. One needs to listen to them all, to remember them all. This movement continued non-stop, twenty-four hours a day. Oleg has managed to somehow organize it all and to maintain it, so all of it functioned properly. And it applied to all the levels, from the presence of the needed amount of tea, water and other important things in the headquarters and to the important coordination events. When one came to the Ukrainian House, it was always sure that one could eat something here, have some rest and find the people who would be able to answer your questions. Thanks to Oleg’s efforts all this Maidan chaos was organized and functioned as an integral form.

[ 138 ] I still can’t really understand how he managed to do that all, because when he left us a couple of times for his short trips to Crimea, there was an absolute chaos here. Everything came into places only after he was back again. He was really capable of organizing everything. He didn’t even tell to anybody that he was a movie director. We just knew that it was Oleg, that he actually lived in the Ukrainian House, and that he was a person you can always rely on. It was later, after Maidan and after closer personal communication, when I finally understood who this person was”.

It is interesting that I didn’t have a chance to encounter Oleg personally during those months. I used to visit the captured Ukrainian House quite often, as for some time I was engaged in the volunteer activities in the local commandant’s headquarters and in some other structures that had their offices in the same building. The Ukrainian House became the real foothold for the Ukrainian activists. Its location, right in the middle between Maidan and Grushevsky Street, where the most of the violent clashes took place, explained its strategic role and importance. The medical centre, dining room, library, information centre, common rooms, rooms for rest and stock storage depots, all of it was located inside of this building. The Automaidan headquarters were located in the other part of the hall of the Ukrainian House, in front of the commandant headquarters, which occupied half of the room of the former press-centre. Oleg was always somewhere very close to me. Maybe I even saw him several times, I just didn’t remember him. Euromaidan was that kind of a place, where you could meet and communicate with hundreds of different people during the day, and on the next day you would probably already forget what they told you, not to mention their faces.

[ 139 ] Despite the fact that there was actually a commandant in the Ukrainian House, all kinds of disagreements and misunderstandings occurred frequently between the various organizations based here. It happened often, when some people, who took the power or who were given the power and the authority, got used to their position and their new status too quick, forgetting that this status was actually based on the people’s trust only. All of it is like an illustration of a famous Ukrainian proverb that goes as: “Where there are two Ukrainians, there are three Hetmans. A Turkish photojournalist once visited the com­man­ dant’s headquarters. He wanted to have a short tour inside of the Ukrainian House with the possibility to take some photos. We had an agreement with many local “hetmans” that our Turkish guest would be able to take photos inside of the building, but upon the condition that neither the people’s faces nor some artifacts and objects that could be later used by the government for identifying of certain persons and the following repressive measures would not be in the frame. I had the chance to show him many interesting things at that time. We had a tour of the library, then we visited the “Artists Hundred”, then we had a conversation with the Maidan Self-Defense fighters… But at some point of a time, right in the moment, when the Turkish journalist was photographing a Balaclava wearing person against the background of an empty wall, a commandant of the Ukrainian House suddenly appeared and started expressing his disapproval of what we were doing, repeating in a quite paranoid manner that it was very dangerous and that allegedly we were risking the safety of all the people who were inside of the Ukrainian House at that moment. Our explanations that we weren’t photographing the people’s faces or some iconic and easily recognizable locations

[ 140 ] weren’t sufficient for him. It looked like he generally was not really in the mood to become more familiar with the matter. During our conversation, he was concentrated more on his leading role and on his lack of love to Balaclavas, which, in his opinion, were an expression of fear, as “an honest man has nothing to be scared of”. As an example of bravery and courage, he mentioned his own self, of course, telling us about his hypothetical readiness to defend Maidan and protesters from “titushki” with the weapon in his hands and without covering his face. It was really difficult to say, what did it all had to do with the matter of safety of the activists of the Ukrainian House, for the sake of which we didn’t allow to photograph their faces. Of course, we couldn’t also leave without the attempts to find out about who and on whose barricades stood during the protests, and who didn’t stand there at all. It is quite funny to remember about it now. The funniest thing is that the Turkish journalist actually wanted to meet with the commandant of the Ukrainian House too, he wanted to make a short interview with him and to ask him a couple of questions. But, unfortunately, this meeting happened under a little bit different circumstances, and those circumstances didn’t really encourage a normal conversation. At the end of the day, he was even forced to delete the photos made inside of the Ukrainian House.

Oleksiy Gritsenko: Head of the civilian organization “Automaidan” “In Automaidan Oleg was responsible for the direct orga­nizing of our headquarters’ work. He was responsible for its 24-hour operation, he was maintaining the phone connection, coordination of all the activities and logistics as well. He created an order in all of this organization. We

[ 141 ] always knew that we had a safe and dependable home front there, so we could be back there and get the help we needed any time. Oleg also participated in our initiatives, he took part in our picketing of the officials’ houses, he traveled a lot with us in the city, helped us look for the necessary things and supplies for Maidan. It is hard to recall the particular stories now, as those days were filled with so many events that everything is mixed in my head… But my feeling that Oleg is a very reliable person is very strong. I know it was hard for him. He had some problems with his wife. They were in the middle of their divorce process, and he was also thinking of how it would be better to bring the kids to Kyiv. He also had some financial problems as well, and I was trying to help him as much as I could. But the most important is that Oleg was that kind of a person who really lived with all these events. He gave himself totally to that civil action, and he didn’t want to accept the reality of Ukrainian politics of those times. Although I highly doubt that he would like what is happening here in Ukraine now”.

Gennadiy Veselkov: A cyber-sportsman “There was an episode when we came with Oleg and other Automaidan activists to the hospital, where the woun­ ded Maidan protesters were treated. And we saw several broken cars near the hospital. We’ve been told that the wounded person was taken from the scene and rushed to the hospital somewhere on the Left Bank. We decided to follow and to try to find this person, but instead, we fell into the ‘Berkut’ ambush. They blocked the road and tried to prevent us from passing, because we’ve been totally blocked by them, and then they

[ 142 ] rushed in a crowd to our cars. There were around fifty of them. Our column consisted of five vehicles, and Oleg was in the first one, in other words, in the head of the column. We tried to leave the place as fast as possible before we were surrounded, so we started to turn our cars around. And of course, Oleg was the last to do that. That was when he was ‘hit’. I guess they’ve even managed to cut his tires. It was a real miracle that he escaped that trap. If the ‘Berkut’ fighters would capture Oleg that night, nobody knows, how this story would end”. During those revolutionary days, Automaidan activists took for themselves the responsibilities of the law-enforce­ ment bodies, as the actual law-enforcement structures actually turned into a repressive machine. The police in cooperation with the “titushki” were terrorizing the entire city. That’s why the decision was taken to carry out regular patrolling of the city. Every night at least ten cars have been patrolling the streets of Kyiv. Sometimes this number could reach even two hundred vehicles.

[ 143 ] Sergiy Khadjinov: An Automaidan activist “Oleg was responsible for the administration of our headquarters. He made everything possible so that the headquarters functioned properly, and that we always had the things we required etc. He was also coordinating our patrols. At the beginning of March, he wanted to go back to Crimea. We all couldn’t understand, why he would want to do that, but he said that the most important part of the fight is on the Crimean Peninsula at the moment. I thought at that time that there were only the thoughts of a person, who was sure that his ‘small motherland’ was more important than our entire country. I couldn’t even imagine back then that those ‘people in green’ could appear there all of a sudden, and that Putin would start doing what he did. Before going to Crimea Oleg presented a detailed financial report mentioning all the donations the Automaidan received. He also made a list of items that have been already bought and a list of goods to be purchased. I remember that he also asked to add the shoes to that list. When I asked him why he would need the shoes, he answered: ‘You know, when I came to Maidan, I was wearing my shoes, and during all this time I was walking in those shoes. They look so horrible now that I am utterly ashamed to show up in front of my relatives and friends in them. That’s why I inquire to allocate some money from the Automaidan fund for purchasing the new shoes’. We laughed about that back then, but I remember we decided that we have to give the money for those shoes”.

On 22 February 2014, after the violent and bloody confrontations and clashes on Maidan, Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine removed Viktor Yanukovich from the position of the President of Ukraine. Protesters overthrew the dictator,

[ 144 ] but at the expense of hundreds of lives. But that was only the beginning. On 23 February nearly twenty thousand people took part in the rally held in the Crimean city of Sevastopol, as a result of which the decision was taken not to send the taxes to Kyiv anymore, while on 25 February the separatists have already gathered for their demonstration near the building of the Parliament of Crimea. Two days later the building would be taken by the militants without insignia, who would hang the flag of Russian Federation above the building. The members of the Crimean Parliament under the barrels of guns adopted a decree on the date of the referendum regarding the administrative and state status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. The unknown militants have also taken the “Belbek” airport in Sevastopol and stopped the operation of the ferry in the coastal city of Kerch. On 28 February the so-called “people in green” would start blocking Ukrainian military units all over Crimea. Due to the official position of their higher command, Ukrainian soldiers offered no armed resistance and by any means didn’t try to prevent the blockade. As it would turn out later, many of them have been already recruited by the Russian secret forces back then, so they basically defected to the enemy’s side, gravely violating their military vows. On 1 March the so-called “Head of the Council of Minister of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea” Sergiy Aksyonov would address Russian President Vladimir Putin calling for help, after what, on the same day, he would offer that Russian Federation has to be allowed to use its armed forces on the territory of Ukraine. It was the beginning of the occupation. Very quickly, on 16 March, the new “authorities” of Crimea have carried out the “referendum” on the

[ 145 ] independence of the Republic of Crimea, which was aimed at legitimizing of the occupation of Ukrainian territories by the armed forces of a foreign state. A couple of days later Crimea would be officially declared to become a new subject of Russian Federation. Along with these events, the blockade of Ukrainian military units continued till 24 March. Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel were granted the right to leave the peninsula occupied by Russians and to also evacuate the military equipment and vehicles. As one of the most prominent Crimean activists, Oleg Sentsov simply couldn’t stand aside as these events unfolded, moreover, this time his native land turned out to be in the epicenter of the dangerous developments. After the end of Maidan, he went directly to Crimea, in order to continue his civilian activities there.

Yevhen Chernikov: An actor, a friend of Oleg Sentsov “Since the first days of Maidan protests, Crimean television was trying to shape public opinion on the Peninsula, presenting Kyiv protests as something extremely bad and portraying revolutionaries as fascists and Nazis. Later, after the end of the revolution, there were the stories about all those ‘trains of friendship’, which would come to Crimea and start forced Ukrainization of the local population. I can’t say that all the residents of the peninsula really believed in it, as there were so many passive people, who were generally totally disinterested. There were also some pro-Ukrainian activists though, who tried to launch their own initiatives and organize rallies here, but they were rather a minority. Pro- Russian forces definitely outnumbered the pro-Ukrainian ones. Everybody knew, how the ‘local activists’ were being

[ 146 ] brought here to Crimea from Russia, on the ferries, and how the entire hotels have been booked for them. I remember, when Oleg came back on 25 February, certain events have already started to unfold in Crimea. He immediately joined local civilian activities”.

Katerina Butko: A journalist and an Automaidan activist “After the Maidan protests were over, when it was clear that something bad was happening in Crimea, Oleg was among the first ones who decided to go there. His family was there. He was certain that he would be more useful for his region if he would act on the regional level. Later more and more information about what was really happening in Crimea started to appear. There was some information from Oleg, some information from the mass media, but all of it was rather more confusing than clear. The only one thing we knew for sure was that our military units in Crimea were blocked and that they desperately needed our help. That’s why we decided that we had to start going to Crimea. We went there in smaller groups, we tried to communicate more with our soldiers, to know more about what kind of help they required, what things etc.”

Sergiy Khadjinov: An Automaidan activist “When we understood, what Putin was planning to do in Crimea, we coordinated our actions with Oleg and at the beginning of March we arrived on the peninsula in two groups, as we were planning to help our blocked military units and garrisons, to support them morally and to provide them with material and food supplies as well. We went to the local shops, buying various batteries, socks, the food there.

[ 147 ] Ukrainian army looked quite sad and even miserable at that time. There was a lack of even elementary things. Oleg was our guide in all the military units located around Simferopol, Sevastopol, Feodosia and other Crimean cities. We’ve been engaged in these activities almost on a daily basis. Then, on 9 March, on Taras Shevchenko’s birthday, Oleg delivered a speech during the rally in Simferopol. There were quite a lot of people, and it was already strange enough, as it was clear that Crimea was about to be annexed, so all the pro-Ukrainian demonstrations looked like a real heroic deed.

Oleg Sentsov. Mountains in Bakhchisaray region

[ 148 ] If one decided to raise the Ukrainian flag back in those days, one was considered being a very brave person. Oleg came to the rally totally wrapped in the Ukrainian flag. He never tried to hide his position and refused to believe till the end that things could go the way they actually went. He sincerely defended his ‘small motherland’ as a part of Ukraine and was sure that people would not allow the annexation to happen. After all these activities om Maidan, I think he was trying to implement the same mood and energy here in Crimea, but sadly the majority of the population there is quite passive. It was the last time when we’ve seen each other with Oleg. Later we tried to keep in touch, but mostly on the phone. One of our mobile groups returned to Kyiv, while another one stayed in Crimea and continued delivering help to the blocked Ukrainian military units. Later this group was taken captive by the so-called ‘Crimean self-defense’ units, and they gave our guys to the Russian military units. Oleksiy Gritsenko, our head, was detained in the premises of the Black Sea Fleet of Russia in Sevastopol, while the rest of us were in Simferopol, in the building of the former military recruitment office. We tried to contact anybody possible, just to release our guys. Finally, they were exchanged on some Russian spies, who wanted to blow the electricity lines. And then, in the midst of those dynamic and tragic events, I suddenly found out from the news that Oleg was arrested and accused of an attempt to blow the Lenin monument and the Eternal Flame as well”.

Katerina Butko: “My activist friends and I left Kyiv on 8 March, and on 9 March, early in the morning, we crossed the border in Kherson region and found ourselves on the border with Crimea. We were stopped by the ‘Berkut’ personnel on the checkpoint, they wanted to check us, and some of them

[ 149 ] suddenly recognized me. They started to search us thoroughly, checking all our things, then they found Ukrainian flags and greetings from Maidan, which we were going to give to the Ukrainian military units. After they saw all of that, they took a final decision that we were to be detained. They tied our hands behind our backs, they forced us on our knees, they were beating us, interrogated and tried to scare. They said that they would untie our hands now, let us run in the field and then shoot us one by one. All of it continued for several hours. Then they packed us in the truck and transported us like this to Sevastopol. We found out about it later, when we were already on the territory of the military base. Before that, we couldn’t even imagine where they were transporting us to. They left us in the street for about an hour. We just stood outside near the wall and couldn’t imagine how all of it would end, but that was actually just the beginning. After that, they locked us in a small room and started to call us for interrogation, one by one. They were filming all of it, asking us with the details, where were we heading to, what were we transporting, what the purpose of it was. All of it continued for three days. The beatings were only there at the checkpoint. Here there were only questions from the people in Balaclavas. They had our cell phones and our computers, so they tried to formulate their questions according to all the information they’ve managed to find there. Some of us were accused of being the members of the ‘Right Sector’, they made up lots of crazy stories. I was trying to explain that we haven’t been planning on carrying out of any terrorist or sabotage operation and that we were going to Crimea because we wanted to see with our own eyes, what was happening here. In addition to that, I regularly visit Crimea for the March

[ 150 ] weekend during the latest five years, so there was nothing strange in my appearance on the peninsula. On the second day, I found out that pro-Ukrainian activists were actively searching for us, and that there were reports of our disappearance on the TV. And surprisingly, we received this information from the same people who held us captive. I am sure they weren’t any ‘Berkut’ personnel. I think, they were either the former SBU agents (Ukrainian security forces) who defected to the Russian FSB, or maybe they were even Russian FSB agents. During the interrogations, they behaved quite professionally and asked us very clear and detailed questions. It was clear that they weren’t just some ‘Berkut’ guys, like those who detained us on the checkpoint, but they were rather the people, who knew their business well. On the third day, they offered me to go to the city so that I could see with my own eyes what was really happening on the streets of Sevastopol. But they did it in a quite a strange manner. They brought me there together with a journalist and a cameraman of some local TV channel and offered me to ask the locals about their lives and whether they wanted to be a part of Ukraine. Of course, it was totally surreal. After these three days of detention I was wearing ragged and dirty clothes, I was beaten and tired, and I had to ask the people about this kind of things. It lasted for about half an hour. Then they brought me back to the military base, where they told us that they would finally release us. And they really did release us. We got on the bus with some Russian soldiers, and they transported us to the same checkpoint, where we’ve been previously detained. They gave us back our vehicles there, but without

[ 151 ] our things already. The cars were totally empty. We managed to save only what we had with us when we were brought to the military base. Afterwards we went to Kherson, somebody had to meet us there. At the same time, I contacted Oleg and told him that everything was fine, that we were already free. During these three days he was in Crimea together with other Automaidan activists, and they tried to find us. They traveled all over the peninsula, they visited lots of military units and bases, military recruitment offices, all kinds of places, where hypothetically his friends could have been detained. There was no information regarding our whereabouts at that moment. We could be anywhere. But they helped us a lot with the search process itself, as it drew attention to our story both in Crimea and in mainland Ukraine and helped to cause the public reaction to this situation. Oleg was our contact in Crimea. He was trying to look for other detainees, to find out information about their whereabouts, helped the servicemen and their families to get to mainland Ukraine. Without his extraordinary organizational skills, we wouldn’t have been able to evacuate so many people from Crimea. Especially it applies to the families of the Ukrainian military personnel blocked on the military bases. Oleg really helped them a lot. He was looking for the transport and for all the necessary means. It was the time when Ukrainian officials didn’t really care too much about the evacuation of Ukrainian servicemen from Crimea, that’s why civilian activists took these tasks upon themselves. Oleg was such an activist too. In addition to that, he always tried to support the spirits of the pro-Ukrainian people on the peninsula, who still stayed there. They used to organize various demonstrations, rallies, and initiatives, they’ve been painting the fences, the

[ 152 ] trees, post and the bridges in yellow and blue in the nights. They were doing anything possible in order to demonstrate their presence on the peninsula. There were also several attempts to carry out an automobile rally with the Ukrainian flags, however, these attempts always ended with some blockades and resistance”.

Volodymyr Tuchyj: A movie director “When Oleg came back from Crimea, we used to com­ municate with him on the phone only. The main motive of our conversations was that two members of our ‘Baby­­lon 13’ team, Yaroslav Pilunsky and Yuriy Gruzinov, went to the peninsula and disappeared there. As it became known later, they’ve been detained by the ‘Crimean self-defense’ and held in the building of the military recruitment centre in Simferopol. We tried to obtain any kind of information. There were lots of controversial news, some people claimed they saw them and even talked to them. It was extremely difficult to find out, where they were and what was happening. Oleg made an entire lecture on this issue for me back then, explaining that there were so many people, who just wanted to be in the spotlight, and for the sake of this they were ready to tell anything possible and impossible. That’s why it was wiser not to take all of this news and information too seriously and not to waste our time and efforts for checking and evaluation of this information. At the end of the day, Oleg was right. As a person, who knew the situation on the peninsula from within, he understood the local hysteria quite good. Judging by his voice, he felt quite confident. I reckon, he just believed that the situation in Crimea would develop in a similar way with Maidan and that there would some

[ 153 ] kind of a turning point. He really hoped that the active and pro-Ukrainian part of the Crimean residents would start to act. Of course, these are only my assumptions, as we didn’t really talk about these issues with him, but I didn’t feel any kind of worries or uneasiness in his voice. It seemed to me that he was in the state of calm and confident elation and enthusiastic drive”.

Oleksiy Gritsenko: Head of the civilian organization “Automaidan” “In Crimea, we met with Oleg a couple of times when we went to bring the supplies for Ukrainian military bases. He was one of those who organized the pro-Ukrainian rally on Taras Shevchenko’s birthday, together with Crimean Mejlis and other activists. Another time we met was when we were trying to escape the pursuit. We visited Sevastopol delivering supplies and help for Ukrainian soldiers, when later, on our way back to Simferopol, we suddenly noticed that one and the same car was constantly following us. We didn’t know Simferopol good, that’s why, once we’ve reached the ‘Meganom’ shopping centre, we decided to call Oleg. He said that he would come and try to block our pursuers on the exit from the shopping centre parking. He succeeded in it that time, but it turned out that there were actually four cars pursuing us. We tried to reach the Mejlis office, but when the pursuers opened fire on us, and when several bullets hit our car, we were forced to stop. I also know that Oleg was trying to find us and other activists later when we’ve been captured. Oleg also helped to organize the process of evacuation of Ukrainian servicemen from the territory of Crimea. He was looking for the transportation and for the costs, which were supposed to be repaid later by the Defence Ministry.

[ 154 ] Oleg managed to find only one carried who agreed to help evacuate Ukrainian soldiers and officers. He also supported the military units and bases in Sevastopol, sending them food, clothes, medicines, and other necessary supplies. At the same time I was trying to somehow explain him and persuade him that it was dangerous and that he had to leave Crimea, but he never listened, he didn’t believe that he could be in any kind of danger. After Maidan he thought that nothing extreme could happen to him, especially considering the fact that there was actually no so strong and massive unrest on the peninsula, as everything was carried out mostly with the help of the so-called ‘Crimean self-defense’ and Russian intelligence agencies”. About the detention

[ ■ ]

On 10 May 2014, Oleg Sentsov was abducted close to his house by the agents of the Russian Federal Security Service and was accused of conducting the terrorist activity on the territory of Crimea. On 13 May Sentsov’s case was already combined with the cases of his other “accomplices”, among them photographer Gennady Afanasyev and professor of military history Oleksiy Chirniy, both of them known Crimean activists speaking against Russian annexation of Crimea and engaging in civilian activities on the peninsula. That was how the so-called “Crimean terrorists case” appeared, as newly alleged offenders would be added to this case with time, while Oleg Sentsov finally took up the place of the main ideologist and a mastermind of the non-existent terrorist group. Because of the testimonies of Oleksiy Chirniy and Gennady Afanasyev, who have been detained a couple of days before, on 9 May, the entire focus of the criminal case would switch to Oleg Sentsov.

A fragment from the telephoned message to Oleg’s wife, Alla: “This is to inform you that on 11.05.2014 your husband, Sentsov Oleg Gennadiyovich, born on 13.07.1976, was detained by the investigative department of the Federal Security Service Directorate of Russian Federation in the

[ 156 ] Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol and is charged with committing the crimes set in the Part 2 of the Article 205.4, Part 1 of the Article 30 and paragraph ‘a’ of the Part 2 of the Article 205, Part 3 of the Article 30 and Part 3 of the Article 22 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation with regard to the case No. 2014427002. On the same day, Kyiv District Court of the city of Simferopol of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea sentenced Sentsov O.G. to detention in custody, for the term of two months, whereupon he was sent to the temporary detention facility of the city of Simferopol”. It took the occupation authorities of Crimea very little time between the illegal ‘referendum’ on 16 March and the May arrests to take over the massive oppressive activities and repressions against the pro-Ukrainian activists. Crimean Tatars for have a long and tragic history of relations with Russians, starting from Russian conquering of the peninsula and resulting in the deportation of Crimean Tatars from the peninsula in 1944, and they fell for the special control of Russians. From the first days of Russian occupation, Crimean Tatars made a stand against the annexation of Crimea and supported Ukrainian side, what resulted now in the massive repressions against them (including burning down of their houses and properties, violent beatings, abductions, murders, fabricated criminal cases etc.). The new administration in Crimea extended lots of efforts and continues doing it for the sake of suppressing of all the opposing forces in the region. Demonstrative cases against the terrorists became a powerful instrument of intimidation of the pro-Ukrainian citizens, who were ready to continue expressing their position during the rallies, demonstrations and various civilian initiatives.

[ 157 ] Arrest and detention of Oleg Sentsov definitely came as a hard letdown for the Crimean resistance movement. According to the information in the report of the organization “Crimea SOS” published on 19 August 2016 during two years of annexation it was registered between 12 and 23 cases of the politically motivated violent abductions and kidnapping of people on the territory of the Crimean peninsula. None of those cases was investigated by the occupational government, and not a single abducted person was found alive. And it was a small wonder, as the biggest threat of abductions comes from the Russian intelligent forces and security services.

Anastasia Chorna: An actress, director assistant for the work with the actors “Of course, the situation was very critical. But until the end, we still hoped for some miracle. We really thought that it was possible to somehow make all these things end. After the referendum was held, I was still thinking for

[ 158 ] about two days that something had to happen, that soon we would be released from all of it, but then this feeling left me. I was responsible for the coordination of the journalist groups, and that’s why I constantly communicated and kept in touch with the people sharing very different views and positions. According to my observations, is to compare the numbers of pro-Russian and pro-Ukrainian people, it was obvious that there were still more pro-Russian ones. But taking into consideration our demographic situation, when there are more of the older people than younger ones, and when there are less educated younger people than uneducated ones, such a state of affairs doesn’t really wonder. Nearly 60% of the Crimean population supported the transition of Crimea to Russian Federation and they were sure that most of the protesters on Maidan were some drug addicted people. In those days, on 11 May, at about four o’clock in the morning, I received a message from the journalist Ekaterina Sergatskova that Oleg was arrested. Two days earlier, on 9 May, Gennadiy Afanasiev was also arrested. It was clear that we were dealing with the beginning of the serious and massive repressions, and there was no use for us to wait for any good news. We started to write press-releases about all these events and to spread information among all the journalists and reporters. It was the only weapon we had. During quite a long period of time, we couldn’t even find the details of Oleg’s arrest. It was unclear where Oleg was being held and what he was accused of. The situation was also more complicated because we weren’t Oleg’s relatives, so their ‘security forces’ didn’t want to give us any useful information. Later, when we’ve heard about all those accusations of

[ 159 ] terrorist activities, I was really shocked. I couldn’t believe that all of that was happening with Oleg. When I came back home in the evening, my father was already waiting for me with the ticket. He told me that next time they would come for me, that’s why I had to leave as soon as possible. That was how I ended up in Odessa, at my sister’s place, and on 19th, right on my birthday, when the prisoners held in Crimea were about to be conveyed to Russia, I received a text with the message: “Shut up, or you will be next”.

Denis Ivanov: A film producer “This information spread like a fire. He was arrested right on the eve of the Cannes Film Festival. We’ve been preparing the press-releases, we tried to establish some contacts and some connections so that this case would break into the open and become known. We wrote a lot to our Russian colleagues as well, trying to resolve the situation calmly, so that it wouldn’t turn into some sort of a demonstrative trial process. We had the hope that we could resolve all these issues quickly, but then they showed on the Russian ‘First Channel’ that story about the detained terrorists, so we all understood that the solution would be delayed”.

Yevhen Chernikov: An actor, a friend of Oleg Sentsov “I’ve heard about Oleg’s arrest right away, on the next day. At the beginning we were trying to actively search for him, we tried to find out about his exact whereabouts. Since the Russian annexation of Crimea many people disappeared here with no trace, that’s why there was a real threat that we would be simply unable to find him. In the beginning,

[ 160 ] they held him in the former building of the SBU (Ukrainian Security Service), which was taken by the Russian FSB already, and then he was held in the local pre-trial detention centre. When we understood that he was held at least in the more or less official places, we calmed down a little and started to involve the filmmaking industry and cinema community, so that the situation would become better known. It helped to prevent the more radical actions of the Russian security forces. Of course, they also wanted that this story would become known to some extent, but they didn’t wait that there would be some a splash. Their main task was to scare the local pro- Ukrainian population and to demonstrate to them what could happen to them if they would start to actively show their position. It was important that it was known by the people inside of Crimea, not beyond it. They succeeded in it a lot. After Oleg was arrested, the entire resistance movement on the peninsula disappeared”.

Aleksey Medvedev: A film critic, organizer of the “Two in One” film festival “In March 2014 my wife and I went to Crimea because we wanted to see with our own eye, what was happening there. We came here right at the time that was a turning point. The referendum wasn’t held yet, but there was a feeling that even yesterday nobody really considered a scenario in which Crimea would be annexed by Russia. In those days there was like a signal that ‘it was time’, so the pro-Russian part of the population actively supported this mood. In other words, there was a feeling that all of that happened not naturally. It was clear that someone has already taken a decision regarding this situation.

[ 161 ] Of course, we kept in touch with Oleg on the phone, but we didn’t have a chance to meet. He told me that he was attempting to organize an automobile rally with Ukrainian flags, but when it came to business, only a couple of cars showed up. But anyway, he was determined to continue fighting with the means available to him. When we came back to the airport, there were the ‘people in green’ everywhere, and Ukrainian flag was hoisted down. Many flights have been also canceled, so we didn’t even know whether we would be able to fly back home. But our plane came on time and was able to depart. I talked to Oleg again on the phone and wished him the best of luck, I also told him that we supported him as a real patriot and a real son of his country. And later, already in May, I was in Moscow, when I received the news about his arrest”.

Yevhenia Vradiy: Photographer, camerawoman, director assistant “Oleg called me on 9 March and invited me to walk with him and his kids in the park. He never called me before to meet like this. We are friends with him, but I would say we are more like colleagues. And suddenly he called me to go for a walk. I refused that time. And then I found out through Facebook that he was arrested. I immediately went to FSB and SBU to inquire about him, as Oleg’s relatives didn’t reply to my calls. But I’ve been told there that they couldn’t tell me anything and that they would give such information only to his close relatives. Later a lawyer contacted me and told me what the charges against Oleg were. I couldn’t believe it. I thought that Oleg wasn’t such a fool. He was always a humanist and a pacifist. He is not

[ 162 ] among those people who could harm the others on purpose. For at least I can make such a conclusion from my experience of communicating with him. He never really told me about his ‘man’s’ business, but it was obvious that his stance was very much pro-Ukrainian. After the referendum, he carried out various peaceful motor rallies, helped to evacuate Ukrainian servicemen and their families. His path is a path of art and changing the world to better, and he wanted to change the world through his art. He couldn’t do anything bad and harmful”.

Danylo Vradiy: A close friend of Oleg Sentsov “Of course, you can call Oleg a volunteer and an activist, but what about the reality? Did he take part in the hot phases on Maidan? Yes, he did. What did the adult men do during these hot phases? They did different things. I don’t really know what exactly Oleg was doing, as I never asked him this sort of questions. The case is that in this story I’m rather on another side of the barricades. But I am his friend and I never intended to cut my friendship with him. He has other friends too whose views and positions differ from that of him. What Oleg was doing in Simferopol that he was detained is also unknown to me. Because yet again, due to the differences in our views, he never told me a lot about it. Generally, people who knew Oleg think that he just damaged his life, and there was no point in it. He had some responsibilities and commitments for his family, which he had to support. And now he is in prison. His children grow up without their father for a couple of years already, and it is still unknown how long it will take. Is it right? I think that it’s not right. He could avoid this course of events in his life.

[ 163 ] Clearly, he is not from those people who would stay aside, when something so huge and important is happening. He always dives deep, whatever he does. I don’t want to accuse him of anything, but here is how it looks like. A person who actively participated in Maidan events, who wasn’t a doctor or a cook there, comes to Simferopol and starts engaging in some kind of civilian activities. I have no idea how far he went in this. There was not a terrorist, but revolutionary activity on Maidan, but it can be seen and explained as an attempt to forcibly overthrow the legitimate government. I wouldn’t want to see how some people beat the others in m city, how they make fires and chant various mottoes. I don’t think my city needs it. And those are not the right approaches to achieve something. Of course, it’s a very long conversation, what caused these activities, whether it was good or bad in terms of the longer time distances, but if we talk about Oleg and his story, that was how it happened with him. When he will be back, we will probably discuss these things, and even if we won’t discuss them, it won’t be that important for me anymore. In any case, I will always remain his friend. These things are for him to deal with, and I am no one to judge him”.

Katerina Butko: A journalist and an Automaidan activist “I remember, somebody called me and told me that Oleg was arrested and that there were some brutal searching happening in his home. I talked to several Crimean Automaidan activists so that they could check this information. It turned out to be the truth. We couldn’t contact Oleg. During the first several days we couldn’t even understand what was happening to him.

[ 164 ] The last time we talked with him was on 1 May, on my birthday, and he told me that he was planning to come to Kyiv on 11 May or something like that. And now we receive such horrible news on 11 May. Then I heard that he was being held in the at the military recruitment office in Simferopol. Considering my previous, quite short, but a very traumatic experience of Crimean captivity, I still hoped that Oleg would get lucky too, and they would release him quite soon. But when the information appeared that they were planning to convoy him to Russia, it was understood that we were dealing with a totally different situation. But despite all that, I still hope that this horrible situation will resolve in a good manner and faster. At the moment of his arrest, there was almost no one from our people in Crimea. And those who were there didn’t have any chance to somehow ‘rescue’ him from Russians. Almost immediately we started to organize our rallies and pickets in Kyiv, at the offices of SBU and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, we tried to somehow push them to take more active steps. It was nearly impossible to make something in Crimea”.

Adaptation to the new power hierarchy of the former agents of Ukrainian security and intelligence services who defected to the enemy couldn’t pass painlessly. In order to demonstrate their ‘professional abilities’ and to create an image of frenzied activities, it was necessary for them to immediately work on the ‘terrorists’ plan. But on the other hand, it is still very possible that the orders regarding the arrests and opening of the criminal cases against particular persons could have come straight from the Kremlin circles.

[ 165 ] Natalya Kaplan: A cousin of Oleg Sentsov “He invited me to come to Crimea for the May holidays, and I was planning to come, but there were some difficulties due to work. And on 10 May Oleg was arrested. On 11 May, in the morning, our mutual aunt called me on the phone and shared this news. Of course, it was an initiative of the locals. They had an excuse to justify the annexation, to show that the ‘Right Sector’ was depriving Russians of their rights. Consequently, they needed to find this ‘Right Sector’ at any cost. In addition to that, they probably wanted to also gain themselves promotion, who knows. In April they founded a counter-terrorism organiza­ ­ tion, and in May they’ve already found the first terrorists on the peninsula. Everything happened too fast and too easy, and I am sure there could be anyone in Oleg’s place. Most probably they didn’t even know that Oleg was a movie director, as he never talked about that either on Maidan or during the Crimean rallies. Not a lot of people knew about it, actually. I am sure that the FSB agents didn’t know that either. There are not many of them who would be really interested in culture. Maybe, they just wanted to report quickly that they caught some ‘Right Sector’ activists, to show it on the Russian TV channels, to receive some promotion at work and to continue living their lives. I doubt that they could imagine that this case would become so wide-known and controversial. Despite the fact that I spent all my life in Russia, I was never a fan of Putin. I’ve seen various repressions and politi­ cally motivated court cases as well. It wasn’t something new to me. The main task was to find out what really happened”.

[ 166 ] Vasyl Stepanov: A movie critic “Russian government has so many problems that, I think, this one doesn’t have a priority for them at the moment. It is hard for me to understand who would actually benefit from the case like that, as it would seem to be there, in the government circles. Politics is so isolated in Russia. It happens somewhere within the state institutions. We can only make some assumptions about that” There is a possibility that this was an initiative coming from the bottom. It is also possible that somebody would need to demonstrate that there were some activities taking place, that there were certain steps and deeds, there were the arrests. And then it was just hard to reverse it all. Everything is possible. I’m afraid that even a search for those who could possibly benefit from Oleg’s arrest and imprisonment would bring any certain answers. My position is easy and clear. There is a person called Oleg Sentsov, he is a movie director who was preparing to work on his next film. This story has started in 2014, and he did the way he thought was right. I don’t think that he was doing something terrible. He is not one of those people who could burn or blow off something. The story around him developed the way that no one can really retreat now. I can understand why Oleg can’t retreat, because actually, he has nowhere to retreat. Why don’t the people who hold him captive retreat? Because they cannot accept that they were wrong. I can’t see any way out of this situation, except the scenario, when someone from the Russian government circles would probably arrange the prisoners’ exchange. I really hope that it would happen as soon as possible because it is actually so scary for me to even think about this entire story. All the

[ 167 ] people who know a little bit more about this story are quite depressed now. And what is happening with Oleg Sentsov in this situation is really hard to imagine”.

Volodymyr Tuchyj: A movie director “We all had hopes that Oleg would be released soon. Even very influential people, the real icons of the world cinematography, stood for him. We really believed that they won’t charge him and that they would release him quite soon. Even despite the fact that the demonization of Putin’s regime is quite strong and everybody knows what kinds of things are happening in that country, nobody thought that it could reach this level of absurdity. Additionally, we had a story with our cameramen, Yaroslav Pilunsky and Yuriy Gruzinov, who have been also detained in Crimea, but then released relatively soon. True, they had a couple of their ribs broken, but in any case, they actually came back home, and it happened even without any special prisoners exchange procedure. It seemed that Russian spin masters would somehow resolve this situation, so everything would okay, and Oleg would be able to come back to Ukraine and to continue working on his “Rhino” at last. All of it characterizes the government machine that exists today in Russia. It is deprived of any kind of common sense. Actually, it functions at the cost of the most primitive corruption. If Sentsov would become some kind of a political person and if he would join some political party, or if there would be a lawyer who would be able to bribe Russian officials at the highest levels of powers, then he would probably switch to the category of the ‘actual prisoners exchange’, just as it happened with Nadiia Savchenko. That system doesn’t function in another way. I think that they

[ 168 ] simply don’t see any reasons to actually bother themselves with this. Oleg is a person who doesn’t accept any compromises, both in his civilian position and his creative activity too. I don’t know whether he would be ready for some compromises if there would be no Maidan, but it is obvious that these six months of being in the midst of all these Kyiv events left a mark on him. First, he believed in his place in the sphere of the author cinematography, and later he believed that he had a place in the civil society as well. He felt the measure of his responsibility and he wasn’t scared to pay such a high price for it. Any attempts to avoid it would be considered being a moral suicide by him, I think”.

Dmytro Dinze: Lawyer of Oleg Sentsov “We’ve never talked with Oleg about the possibilities to avoid the detention. Unfortunately, at the places, where we had a chance to communicate with Oleg, mostly in the pre- detention facility where he was being held, we always received the heightened level of attention. It is not a secret that despite the fact that surveillance cameras are forbidden in the pre- trial detention centres, they are still everywhere there, and there is also an audio-recording system as well. They could watch us, but they can’t record us. We went on a premise that we’ve been watched, that’s why we couldn’t discuss the possibilities to avoid the detention in the period of time when Oleg was still in Crimea. But when a question arose of whether he was able to leave the territory of Russia, while he was still in Crimea before his arrest, such a situation presented itself. Somebody called him, either Chirniy or Afanasiev, and they told him something about the arrest. But there was nothing extraordinary in

[ 169 ] those events. Dozens of people were being arrested in Crimea on a daily basis, so people were disappearing, and somebody was always searching for those who went missing. Oleg couldn’t even imagine that he could be arrested and accused of engaging in the terrorist activities. That’s why, when he found out about the arrests, he didn’t really pay attention to it. He was sure that even if he would be arrested as well, he would be able to explain the situation, so they would release him, as it usually happened”.

Oleg would admit later that he was tortured in Crimea, while he was held in the pre-detention facility in Simferopol. They tried to obtain the testimonies they wanted to hear and tried to force him to cooperate with the investigative officials and security service officers. “They were beating me with the sticks, standing, sitting and laying. Then they tried to strangle me with the plastic bags. I’ve seen that in movies many times. They strangle me four times. They stripped me naked and threatened me that they would rape me with the stick. They threatened to kill me and to bury me somewhere in the forest,” Oleg told in the court. After that, they brought him home for searching, which was carried out right in front of Oleg’s twelve-year-old daughter. Surely, they’ve never found any pieces of evidence in Oleg’s house that would prove his affiliation with any terrorist group, that’s why the FSB officers had to carry out several additional “control” searching procedures, as a result of which they finally “found” the weapons. Chief investigator of the Russian Federal Security Service Special Cases Directorate, Major of Justice Artem Burdin presented Oleg Sentsov with a real challenge: either he would give testimonies against the leaders of Maidan and

[ 170 ] Oleg Sentsov in the courtroom would be sentenced to seven years in prison or he would be proclaimed to be a leader himself and would be sentenced to twenty years. At this stage, it was already clear that Oleg’s fate was already decided, so all the further events would be just the development of the theatre play. The process against the famous Ukrainian female military pilot Nadiia Savchenko was the same theatre play as well. She was also, just like Oleg, basically kidnapped from the territory of Ukraine and illegally sent to Russian Federation, and just the same like with Oleg, they also tried to force her to give the testimonies in the pre-detention centre. One could say that this play called “Russian Justice” is on the stage not for the first and even not for the second time already. It’s a smooth-running scheme, with which the regime creates the “criminals” and forms an image of an enemy, which is so much in demand in the loyal Russian society.

[ 171 ] They could do anything possible with Oleg Sentsov, as nobody even knew about his exact whereabouts for quite a long time. The disappearance of a famous civilian activist in such a small city as Simferopol was a controversial event, so many people rushed to search for him. But unfortunately, it didn’t give a proper result. Oleg Sentsov didn’t spend a long time in Crimean captivity. Soon afterward he was conveyed to Moscow predetention facility “Lefortovo”, where he spent over a year of his life waiting for the end of the pre-trial investigation and the beginning of the criminal trial “essentially”, sche­ duled to be held in Northern-Caucasian district military court. Oleg Sentsov’s lawyer filed an application regarding the crime of the FSB officials, who during three hours pressured and abused Oleg both psychologically and physically in an attempt to get the testimonies they needed to hear.

Oleg Sentsov, Oleksandr Kolcheno and their lawyers Volodymyr Samokhin and Svitlana Sidorkina

[ 172 ] In addition to that, it was mentioned in the application that Oleg had to be transferred to another pre-trial detention centre, which wasn’t a subject to the Russian Federal Security Service. It had to do with the fact that the FSB officers have an immediate access to these pre-trial detention centres, so they would have a chance to continue to execute pressure on Oleg. Of course, the application was declined.

Zoya Svetova: A journalist and a human-rights lawyer “Since 2008 I am a member of the Public Monitoring Commission for the detention facilities of Moscow, and the commission representatives often visit pre-trial detention facilities of Moscow. In accordance with the Russian federal law on the ‘Public Control’ we have the right to visit the detainees only in the presence of the prison administration represen­ tative, and we also have the right to talk with the detainees regarding the conditions they are being held in. All our conversations take place either in the cells or in the separate rooms if a prisoner has a wish to talk privately. All the conver­ sations are being recorded with the dashboard camera. We have no right to record our conversations with the detainees with the tape recorder. Unlike in the other local detention facilities, employees and administration of ‘Lefortovo’ take it too harsh and nervous, when the lawyers and human rights advocates are trying to talk with the detainees about their criminal cases, about the lawyers or about the tortures they’ve experienced during their arrest and detention. When we came to ‘Lefortovo’ for the first time in May 2014 in order to meet Oleg Sentsov and to talk with him, Mykhaylo Savitsky, the head of the FSB investigative group, showed up in the cabinet. He took the conduct of Oleg Sentsov’s case. He tried to make

[ 173 ] me and my colleagues sign a non-disclosure agreement. Mykhaylo Savitsky was very scared that during the meeting with us Oleg Sentsov, Gennadiy Afanasiev, Oleksandr Kolchenko or Oleksiy Chyrniy would tell everything about the tortures they’ve experienced here. We refused to sign such an agreement, despite the fact that he threatened us with the opening of a criminal case against us accusing us of the divulging of the secrecy of the investigation. When we met Oleg Sentsov for the first time, he was quite careful and reserved. Gradually we managed to build trust between us, and last time we came (in July 2015 his case was already transferred to the Russian district military court), we had a quite warm conversation and said each other goodbye warmly. I think that I had some kind of a friendly relationship with Oleg, as much as it is possible under these circumstances. In August 2015, when I arrived in Rostov to attend a trial process in the case of Sentsov and Kolchenko and when I tried to enter the hall of the Kyiv district military court, where Oleg’s case was being heard and where there was so little space, Oleg almost cried from the cage he was in, when he saw me: ‘Let Svetova in, she is almost like a mother to me!’ Oleg Sentsov was accused in the organizing of a terrorist group. Usually, in Russia, people accused under the article 205.4 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation (‘organizing of a terrorist group and engaging in the terrorist activities’) are being held in ‘Lefortovo’ pre-trial detention facility. It’s a former KGB/FSB prison, which in 2005 came under the control of Russian Ministry of Justice and of the Federal Penal Service. But it was rather a formality that the Federal Penal Service became in charge of this prison. Traditions and customs were preserved there since the Soviet times, when this jail was a KGB

[ 174 ] prison, where they held mostly political prisoners, among them dissidents, anti-Soviet elements, spies, traitors of the country and other people accused in some controversial and notable cases”.

During all the time of the pre-trial investigation, Ukrainian consul was not allowed to meet Oleg Sentsov. “Gravely violating the provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Consular Relations and of the Consular Convention signed between Russian Federation and Ukraine, Russian competent bodies during thirteen months didn’t grant permission for the meeting of Ukrainian Consul with Oleg Sentsov, despite fifteen official addresses of the Ukrainian side,” was stated in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Ukraine. When the lawyers filed a notice at court, the General Prosecution found the reasons to decline it. Russian Federation was never used to playing in accordance with the international laws and rules, so it decided to distort the situation in their own manner, referring to the current “status” of Crimea as a subject of Russian Federation.

A fragment of the response of the General Prosecution Office of Russian Federation: “In accordance with the Article 5 of the Agreement between Russian Federation and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea on accepting the Republic of Crimea as a subject of Russian Federation and on creating of the new federal subjects from 18.03.2014 and in accordance with the Paragraph 1 of the Article 4 of the Federal Constitutional Law from 21.30.2014 No. 6-FKZ, since the day of accepting the Republic of Crimea as a subject of Russian Federation and creating of the new subjects within Russian Federation,

[ 175 ] citizens of Ukraine and persons destitute of nationality, who permanently resided at this moment on the territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea or on the territory of the city of federal status Sevastopol, are to be recognized as the citizens of Russian Federation, with the exception of the persons, who within one month since this day would declare their wish to preserve citizenship of their countries or would prefer to preserve their status of the stateless persons. As it was found out in the course of the investigation, at the moment of the affiliation of the Republic of Crimea with Russian Federation, Sentsov O.G. was arrested in the city of Simferopol and didn’t file an official application for preserving of his Ukrainian citizenship. Consequently, Sentsov O.G. was granted citizenship of the Russian Federation based on the abovementioned regulations, what was reported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia to the responsible investigative body <…> Citizens of Ukraine, who automatically gained citizen­ ship of Russian Federation based on the abovemen­ tioned circumstances and who didn’t give up their Ukrainian citizenship, can preserve this citizenship along with the citizen­ship of Russian Federation. They are subject to the norms and regulations on the dual citizenship. In parti­ cular, as it is stated in Paragraph 1 of the Article 6 of the Citizenship Law, a citizen of the Russian Federation, who has also a citizenship of another country, is viewed by Russian Federation only as a Russian citizen, with the exception of the cases introduced by the international agreements or the federal law. Consequently, due to the absence of an agreement between Ukraine and Russian Federation that would regulate the issues of the dual citizenship, Sentsov O.G. is considered

[ 176 ] by the Russian law exceptionally as a Russian citizen, despite the fact that he still has Ukrainian citizenship too. Under these circumstances, there are no reasons for granting him the consular protection of Ukraine”.

For over a year Oleg Sentsov remains totally isolated from the outside world. It was almost impossible to carry out any real communication with him, except for the letters that didn’t always reach the addressee. The attempts to isolate Oleg from the society, to find his weak spots and to break him were the typical pressure methods used since the Stalin’s times. The wheel of this horrible machine works exceptionally well, but it is not always capable of breaking the really strong personalities. One can recall many examples. One of them was a poet Taras Melnychuk, who was imprisoned in 1972 by the Soviet authorities literally for his poetry. Later, in 1979, he would be arrested again, and then he would be even sent to the psychiatric ward. The KGB would do anything possible in order to deteriorate the post-camp life of a poet and to prevent his normal socialization. Against all odds, Taras Melnychuk would overcome all the challenges and would live till the day when the independence of Ukraine was declared. His poetry would be acknowledged and celebrated. In 1992 he would receive Shevchenko Award for his book “Prince of mildew”. Another example is that of Yevhen Sverstyuk. He was a writer, who was fired from work multiple times and persecuted in the Soviet times due to his fight against discrimination of Ukrainian culture and promoting of the so-called “samizdat” (self-published books), and then, in 1973, he would be arrested and sentenced to seven years in camps and five years of exile.

[ 177 ] Yevhen Sverstyuk is still alive, sound in mind and disposition, and he would be considered being one of the most respectful moral examples of our country. Oleg also didn’t break. During all the time of his previous detention, he didn’t agree to cooperate with the Russian investigators, he refused to admit his guilt, he didn’t give any false testimonies, either against his imaginary “accomplices” or against himself. He continued standing in the position of his total non-culpability and views this case as a politically motivated one.

Zoya Svetova: A journalist and a human-rights lawyer “Remand prison ‘Lefortovo’ is designed for 300 detainees. There are 190 persons there at the moment. The cells are for two persons, nearly eight square metres. Usually, there are two prisoners being held there. They transfer the detainees from one cell to the other one from time to time. Oleg Sentsov was held in ‘Lefortovo’ a little longer than a year, and, I think, he must have changed six or maybe even eight cells during this time, if not even more. There is a video-recording installed in the cells. The bathroom is separated from the living space with the little- tiled wall. The toilet bowl is of the old construction, conus- shaped and made from the stainless steel. When one of the detainees uses the bathroom, another one can see him waist-high. He can also be seen by the prison employee, who watches the detainees on the video. There are the carpets lying in the corridors of Lefortovo prison. They are there since the Soviet times. The carpets’ purpose is to conceal the sound of the inspectors’ steps, when they walk along the corridor, approach one of the cells and can listen or see through the little slit window.

[ 178 ] Lefortovo is the only one prison in Moscow where there is no hot water supply. The shower is available for fifteen minutes only, once a week. Unlike the other Moscow remand prisons, there are no cell phones here. The prison employees would never ever smuggle them here, even for the big money. There is also no connection between the cells in Lefortovo too, the so-called ‘trails’ normally used in all the remand prisons, when the detainees extend the ropes through the windows of their cells in the night, what allows them to send the letters, cigarettes, tea or anything of that sort to the other cells. In ‘Lefortovo’, as actually in many other Russian prisons as well, they practice using the so-called ‘informants’. They are the cellmates, who are usually infiltrated in the cameras with the other detainees, especially when it is about the high- profile and notable cases. It is being done for the sake of the psychological pressure of the detainees. It would be very hard to pressure Oleg Sentsov, but it was still possible to make his life unbearable. Oleg spent several months with the cellmate who was accused of the terrorist activities. He was an Arab who didn’t speak any Russian, and, judging by Oleg’s hints he gave during one of our meetings, it was very hard for Oleg to share the cell with that person. However, during one of the visits, Oleg asked us to bring the glasses for his cellmate, as he had bad eyesight and couldn’t see properly. For some time Oleg was in the corner cell, and he used to call it ‘a rat hole’. There was no sunlight there, and in a couple of months, he had serious problems with his eyesight. Once, during one of our visits, he asked the prison employee to transfer him to another cell. Sentsov said that he understood that someone else would be brought to that ‘bad cell’, but he simply couldn’t bear it anymore to stay there. His request was satisfied, and he was transferred to another cell.

[ 179 ] Oleg Sentsov in the courtroom

Oleg used to read a lot when he was in the remand prison. He showed us a list of books he was planning to read while he was there. I think there were nearly a hundred books on that list. ‘Lefortovo’ has a very good library since the imperial times. His friends sent him books about the cinema. There, in the prison, Sentsov has read many books he hasn’t read before, among them Rybakov’s ‘Children of the Arbat’, for instance. He also liked my book called ‘To determine the guilt of the not guilty one’, which I gave to the library of ‘Lefortovo’. This is a book about the case of a Chechen woman Zara Murtazalieva, who was convicted for the terrorist activities and sentenced to nine years in prison, and her case was fabricated. Her case was very similar to the one of Oleg Sentsov. Zara Murtazalieva was convicted in 2005 when they used to fabricate the terrorist cases against the Chechens in Russia. Oleg Sentsov was convicted by the same patterns, just ten years later.

[ 180 ] We’ve been discussing with him the possibility of the staging of his play The Numbers at the ‘doc.’ Theatre. It was very important to him that it would be staged at the theatre. I told him the names of the famous Western and Russian film directors who supported him now, and it was very important for him. He always said ‘That’s so great!’ and smiled. He took his popularity with so irony, and he kept repeating that he would want that the people would remember and appreciate him not because he was behind the bars as a political prisoner, but because of the movies and theatre plays he created”.

Yevhen Chernikov: “Oleg has written his play The Numbers because he wanted to understand the world of the theatre. He was never a big fan of the theatre because there were actually no good theatres in Simferopol anyway. But once, when he was in Moscow, he attended several good contemporary theatre plays, and he liked them. That’s why he decided to try to express himself in this form as well. His play was about the totalitarian society, about the human lack of freedom and search for your own identity in these conditions. This play was written before those events that happened in our country, but in many senses, it kind of foresaw these events. For quite a long time this play was just unpublished. Oleg didn’t show it or give it to anybody because even I told him from the very beginning that he had to try to stage this play himself and to correct all the mistakes he would see. The case was that the play The Numbers was written without regard to the theatre realities, without an understanding of the theatre mechanisms and of the ways it worked from the inside.

[ 181 ] Later, after Oleg’s imprisonment Anastasia Patlay, a Russian director from the ‘doc.’ Theatre decided to stage Oleg’s play. This theatre actively supports Oleg and even lost its premises due to its position. She conducted the reading. It’s a format when the actors read the play’s text on the stage. Then The Numbers were staged in Kyiv, in the ‘Dakh (‘Roof’) Theatre, and Anastasia Patlay was the production director again. As far as I know, Oleg is not really so much happy with all of this, and he is generally not happy with all that fuss that is being created around the story of his imprisonment. Of course, it is understandable that this is necessary, so that his case doesn’t stay in the shadow, but anyway, he doesn’t really like the fact that his texts, for example, were published after his imprisonment, and that people are talking about his films as the films created by a political prisoner. In other words, these are some expressions of sympathy, which Oleg doesn’t need. In this sense, he is a very hard person”.

Oleg’s reaction on his popularity after his imprisonment is a quite logical reaction of a person, who strives to create and not to work on his fame and status. One could recall again one situation from the school times when Oleg refused to accept the gold medal he was offered. The school administration was ready to turn a blind eye to a couple of ‘B’ marks, but that didn’t work for Oleg. He took just what he deserved. The same applies to the current situation he is actually in. There is a very big danger that lots of people would really follow this idea and decide that the entire creative legacy of Oleg is acknowledged and appreciated just because he is a famous political prisoner now. However, he created so many talented things that could get credit under totally different circumstances.

[ 182 ] Yes, Sentsov is an author of the creative works of very different quality. Some of them have really gone awry. But there are those that definitely demonstrates his great talent. But a total praising for everything is harmful to the author, as due to the lack of an adequate critique he could easily lose the landmarks that should point to his creative improvement. It’s good that Oleg Sentsov understands it good and doesn’t fall to the temptation of a “made-up genius”. Nobody can be a perfect person.

Zoya Svetova: “His morals changed several times during the year of our meetings. It seems to me that he realized right away that they put him behind the bars for quite a long time. The investigator told him during the arrest that the judge would sentence him for twenty years if he wouldn’t admit his guilt. Any person would hardly believe that something like this could be possible. And during our meetings, Oleg often said: ‘Of course, I won’t be in jail for so long. I would be out sooner. This regime in Russia will not stay forever’. But there were also the times when he had the moments of depression and despair. For example, when he didn’t receive any letters from home, from his daughter, from his cousin Natalya. During the entire year of the preliminary investigation process, the crime investigator never allowed Oleg to call home and never granted him a meeting with his relatives. A total isolation, absence of any connection with his family, constant delays with delivering of the letters from his relatives and friends — that’s also the working methods of Russian investigative machine and the prison administration. All of it is being made for the only one purpose: to keep the detainees totally isolated and to literally drive them crazy due to the absence of any information from the outside.

[ 183 ] It is very difficult for the lawyers to arrange a meeting with their clients in the ‘Lefortovo’ remand prison. There are too little cabinets there intended for the meetings of the lawyers with the detainees. I think that Oleg never thought of proving himself guilty. He didn’t give any testimonies during the investigation process. During the court trial, he was trying to prove his innocence and behave very brave. Support of his beloved people and of such a big number of people he didn’t even know was very important. He kept the striped bag with the letters under the bed in his cell and read these letters over and over again. He was planning to start working on a new screenplay while in the remand prison. I don’t know whether he’s written it. He told me that the play was supposed to be not about the prisons. There are various types of prisoners in ‘Lefortovo’ now, including the governors, the businessman, the de­ puty of the minister of culture, police and prosecution com­mittee generals of Russian Federation accused of bribing, the former head of the federal agency of the National Guard of Russian Federation, who was accused of corruption, residents of Tajikistan, Chechnya and other Caucasian republics convicted of engaging in the terrorist activities, and also those accused of the murder of Boris Nemtsov”.

So that is the company Oleg Sentsov joined. Being an artist, he definitely stands out against the background of the Russian corrupted officials and murderers. One could even say that in some sense he even repeated the fate of many of the Russian dissidents, who have been also held in this prison when the KGB of the USSR was still in charge of it. According to Dmytro Dinze, his client was even prohibited from giving any notes. When the lawyer wanted

[ 184 ] to take the application from Oleg, the regime official of the ‘Lefortovo’ prison didn’t allow him to do that, explaining it that all the hand-written notes are to be sent through the officials of the prison, the same as all the rest of the documents in the pre-trial detention facility. It is true that Russian prisons haven’t really changed a lot since the Soviet times. It is unknown, whether Oleg tried to send some of his creative works and writings to the outside world (and whether he has such a wish at all), but we are still not familiar with the screenplays he has written while in detention. It is highly unlikely that they would go through the censorship of the prison official machine. In this sense, he somehow reminds of Vasyl Stus, who also wrote a lot while he was held in prison, but he never sent anything to the outside world. Ukrainian dissidents, who were imprisoned in the Soviet jails, used in their time various methods of sharing the information and sending it to the outside world, but there were no developed channels for this. Everything was done individually, and even in their memoirs, they don’t really like to share this information a lot. Some of them used to give their texts during their meetings with the lawyers or relatives, the others tried to send them through the prison guards and other detainees, who weren’t watched so closely, some of them even bribed the post offices.

Dmytro Dinze: “The people who are being held in ‘Lefortovo’ remand prison are always being watched closely. They don’t allow any violations of the rules and regime. As the phrase goes, everything is very strict and according to the law in this prison. There are no beatings, there are no tortures. If there are any conflicts happening in the cells, then the conflicting

[ 185 ] sides are just transferred to the other cells. The only one real problem Oleg was facing there was the so-called ‘passengers’, who sat there with him. He had a chance to see very different people as his cellmates and to make his own impressions and conclusions. The worst thing was to deal with the radical Islamists, as there were lots of difficulties in the communication with them. To deal with the daily issues and routine was the hardest thing for Oleg Sentsov there. His family wasn’t in the best condition financially. He didn’t know how his children would be taken care of, how they would be able to buy the food and the necessary goods, how they would exist. These problems interested him much more than the criminal case against him. I regularly gave him the information about his family, while Oleg’s cousin, Natalya, took the responsibility to write him the letters about that on a regular basis. In a couple of months, he calmed down a little, once he knew that his family was doing okay”.

Even on the stage of the pre-trial investigation, the FSB press-services used to refer to Oleg Sentsov and other persons in the case of the “Crimean terrorists” in their press releases as to the criminals and associated their activities with the “Right Sector”. Of course, these unethical and blatant accusations didn’t have any pieces of evidence and facts. It seemed that nobody was really interested in the results of the investigation and the trial, which didn’t even start yet. Under these difficult circumstances, many influential politicians and intellectuals stepped up for Oleg Sentsov. Dozens of collective letters and pleas were made with the demands to stop the political persecution and to release the Ukrainian film director, but it brought no results.

[ 186 ] The Russian government turned deaf ear not only to the calls of the international community but to the pleas of its own fellow citizenships as well.

Ivan Kozlenko: Director of Dovzhenko Centre “Despite the fact that it happened at one of the most dramatic moments of Ukrainian contemporary history, during the Russian aggression, we really hoped that Oleg’s arrest, no matter how odd and terrible it seemed to be, would be no more than a grotesque FSB play. Nobody could even imagine back then that Oleg could be really detained and forcefully taken away from Ukraine, that he would stand before the puppets court trial and could be sentenced to the long imprisonment. We hoped for quite a long time that a fast and massive mobilization of the international community that stood to support Oleg would force the Russian authorities to release him. However, the time passed by, and all our illusions regarding the intents of Moscow gradually disappeared. Oleg’s detention was another dramatic detail of the apocalyptic picture in Ukraine. Against the background of the military conflict, the annexation of Crimea, pro-Russian massive rallies, paralysis of the state and is on the verge of an economic collapse, Oleg’s case became another bitter example of vulnerability and helplessness of our country and our people. Oleg’s trial started in the summer when all the attention was given to the military conflict in Donbas and shutting down of a Netherlands passenger jet. Thus, Oleg’s trial didn’t become a central topic in Ukrainian news. Russians attacked us on all the possible frontlines, that’s why the issue of Ukrainian political prisoners being held in Russia was also pushed on the background”.

[ 187 ] In July 2015 Oleg Sentsov was transferred to the pre- trial detention centre in Rostov-on-Don. From that moment on the story of an absurd and grotesque rigged trial in Northern-Caucasian district military court started. This court would result for the Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov in twenty years behind the bars and exile in Yakutia.

[ 188 ] About the trial

[ ■ ]

On 21 July 2015 in the Northern-Caucasian district military court in Rostov-on-Don began the proceedings in the criminal case of Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko. The Public Prosecutor Oleg Tkachenko announced that in March 2014, following the orders of the representatives of the “Right Sector”, Oleg Sentsov has formed the regional branch of the organization on the territory of Crimea and was preparing several terrorist attacks with the aim of destabilizing of the situation in the region and influencing the local authorities in order to persuade them to take a decision to remove Crimea from Russian Federation. According to the prosecutor’s version, in order to carry out this plan, Oleg made friends with and later recruited Zuykov, Afanasiev, Chyrniy, Asanov and other persons, who were expected to help him prepare the terrorist attacks. Their group used to gather in the house that belonged to Asanov and was located in Simferopol, on Petrovska Balka Street, where there was allegedly also storage of weapons and explosives. Sentsov allegedly declared that the protest initiatives didn’t bring any significant results, so that was necessary to form a group of active people with the aim of organizing the rallies and actions to influence Crimean authorities.

[ 189 ] Public Prosecutor Oleg Tkachenko in the courtroom

At that point in time, these were already the Russian Fede­ ration authorities that replaced the Ukrainian administra­ tion. Zuykov, Asanov, and Afanasyev supported this idea and decided to help Oleg in all the possible ways, becoming his accomplices. In particular, the decision was taken to blow off Lenin monument in Simferopol. As Tkachenko said, Chyrniy agreed to carry out the explosion. Actually, there was no surprise that Russian investigators paid so much attention to the alleged bombing of Lenin monument. It was totally in line with the theme of “Lenin Fall” popular in Ukraine in those days when the monuments to Lenin were being removed all over the country. In fact, this process has started after the “public taking down” of Lenin monument in Kyiv on 8 December 2013. The most active phase of this process came to the first days after the violent confrontations on Maidan of 18-22 February 2014.

[ 190 ] Many people in Russia received this process with hor­ ror, calling it vandalism. But for Ukrainian, it was rather a wave of liberation. The presence of Lenin monument in the city or in the town was like a symbol of the Soviet occu­ pation and the totalitarian past, that’s why dismantling and taking down of these sculptures had a symbolic meaning as well. As of January 2017, over 1320 monuments to Lenin have been taken down all over Ukraine. 700 of the remaining 900 monuments are on the territories currently controlled by Ukraine. With the help of Chyrniy Oleg Sentsov allegedly contacted a student named Pyrogov, who was quite strong in chemistry and agreed to produce a home-made explosive device for the group. As it would become evident later, almost immediately after agreeing to help with the explosive device, Pyrogov would inform the Federal Security Service of Crimea about that and started to actively cooperate with the Crimean officials. Later he would give the “terrorists” the mock explosives. Then, but not later than 18 April 2014, the new mem­ bers joined the “terrorist organization” — Borkin and Kol­ chenko. But Kolchenko actually shared radically opposite views to those of Oleg Sentsov, so it was highly unlikely that he could cooperate with Sentsov then. But the investigators don’t explain this issue. Before 14 April Sentsov allegedly ordered Zuykov, Borkin, Afanasyev, Kolchenko, and Chyrniy to set on fire the office of the “Russian Community of Crimea”. The prosecutor states that Sentsov was the head of the organization and the one behind the planning of this fire, and he also gave his accomplices the contrivance consisting of the gauze gloves and the masks with the slits for eyes.

[ 191 ] During the next meeting held in Asanov’s house Sentsov was talking about his dissatisfaction with the fact that the “Russian Community of Crimea” office fire didn’t gain enough attention, so he hurried Chyrniy to carry out the bombing of the monument to Lenin in Simferopol and to make it as soon as possible. In addition to that, he showed Chyrniy that he had a Makarov gun and the bullets for it. According to the public prosecutor, before 18 April Oleg Sentsov worked out another plan of setting on fire the office of the “United Russia” party, located on 7 Aksakov Street, and on 24 April thanks to Chyrniy he became assured that Pyrogov was capable of producing a home-made explosive device, so he gave him a task to also design the timing mechanism. In addition to that, according to the investigators, Sentsov introduced Afanasyev to the “Right Sector” activist Stepan Tsyryl, who gave his recommendations regarding the explosive device and its operation. Then he gave Pyrogov the necessary amount of money through Chyrniy. On 4 May Chyrniy and Afanasyev allegedly received another order from Oleg Sentsov to produce another explosive device for the terrible bombing of the “Eternal Fire” Memorial. These explosives were given to Chyrniy and were stored in his house. Chyrniy was arrested, when he was trying to transfer the second half of the explosives he was responsible for. Based on this information, Public Prosecutor Oleg Tkachenko charged Oleg Sentsov with the “forming of a terrorist group” according to the Part 1 of the Article 205.4 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation, of “committing two terrorist attacks” according to the Paragraph “a” of the Part 2 of the Article 205 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation and of “preparation for carrying out of two terrorist attacks”

[ 192 ] according to the Part 1 of the Article 30 and the Paragraph “a” of the Part 2 of the Article 205 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation. In addition to that, Sentsov was also accused of two episodes of the illegal circulation and distribution of weapons and explosives (Part 3 of the Article 222 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation). For establishing of such a terrorist organization the legislation of Russian Federation provides for the punishment of deprivation of liberty for at least fifteen years, but the Public Prosecutor Oleg Tkachenko during the trial insisted on extending this term for twenty-three years. A lawyer Dmytro Dinze became Oleg Sentsov’s defense. He was delegated by the human rights organization “Agora” and had an impressive experience in this kind of cases. In 1998 Dinze graduated with excellent marks from the Sankt-Petersburg Law Institute of the Ministry of Interior of Russia earning a degree in “Jurisprudence” with the title of Justice Lieutenant. He worked in the investigative department of the Admiralty District Directorate of Internal Affairs on the position of the police investigator assistant and of the assistant of the head of the personnel department. Then he worked as in investigative officer in the prosecutor office of the Admiralty District of Sankt-Petersburg for two years. During his service, he was awardedwith the “Expert Policeman” sign and with the gratitude of the Prosecutor of Sankt-Petersburg for the excellent service. Dinze left his service in the law enforcement bodies on his free will, due to his disagreement with the policies of his administration. On 1 September 2000, he received a status of a lawyer. In 2011 he received a prestigious award of the contest in Hague. It was an international competition of the projects in the field of protection of rights and freedoms of citizens called “Innovative Justice”.

[ 193 ] Lawyer Dmytro Dinze, Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko in the courtroom

Dmytro succeeded in acquitment of the anti-fascist Oleksiy Gaskarov, who was accused of attacking the city council in Khimki, and he also succeeded in the termination of a criminal case against the activists of an art-group “The Wa r ”. The visiting card of Dmytro Dinze is using the services of a linguist, physiognomic and other experts, often neglected by the other lawyers. Dmytro also represented the interests of a famous artist Petr Pavlensky, of one of the defendants on the so- called “Bolotna case” Ivan Nepomnyashchich and of the ex-policeman Petr Stachovtsev, who was sentenced to life in prison. According to Dmytro Dinze, “Agora” defends the rights and freedoms of various individuals, who are actively

[ 194 ] engaged in civilian or human rights activities. As the lawyers, they aren’t the members of any formal organization, but they can be only engaged by this organization for the participation in different projects. As of 10 February 2016 “Agora” was dissolved as a result of the court decision, what demonstrates again the attitude of the Russian government to the independent justice.

Dmytro Dinze: Lawyer of Oleg Sentsov “When Crimea was annexed by the Russian Federation, nobody understood, what was really happening there. There were no human rights organizations at that moment. Nobody also knew, what was happening with the people, who appeared to be living under the new authorities. We could operate only with the information provided by the official Russian media. In other words, the situation looked the way that it became necessary to organize human rights activities on the peninsula. Many organizations tried to work there, but due to the fact that the region was quite specific, isolated and closed, not many of them were successful in their activities there. It was never a secret that those who thought different and disagreed with the regime have been usually captured and arrested there. The rumors had it that there were even several murder cases when people got killed for their human rights activities. There were several criminal cases opened. The most interesting was that some of the Ukrainian security service officers who used to work for Ukraine defected to the Russian side quite quickly, turning into the FSB officials controlled from the centre. Together with that, the inquisition-style

[ 195 ] criminal cases started being opened there against those who disagreed with Russian presence in Crimea or with some social politics etc. Oleg also fell into that category. He took upon himself a role of a human rights activist in Crimea, helping Ukrainian servicemen and civilians alike, helping to gather finances for purchasing some products, clothes etc. These issues have been discussed during the public gatherings that took place regularly in Crimea. Many people said that Oleg really helped people a lot, that’s why his name was quite known in Sevastopol. Due to this fact, the FSB officials started examining him narrowly, as they didn’t really like this activity. They started searching for particular information about Oleg that would prove the fact that he was engaged in some illegal activities. Later they started to investigate his social circle as well. They’ve been studying closely the people, who used to attend these public gatherings to discuss current issues and the political situation in the country, and then they separated from them those, who could possibly have any contacts with the ‘Right Sector’. That was the foundation of Oleg’s accusations of terrorism. In accordance with the law of Russian Federation, a person can be accused of engaging in the terrorist activities, when the accused person commits unlawful acts and manifests his or her demands, and when these acts are aimed at the destabilizing of the various state institutions. The main motive of Oleg’s accusation was that he didn’t accept that Crimea became a subject of Russian Federation and, consequently, he acted so that the peninsula would not be a part of Russia.

[ 196 ] Generally Oleg is a person who is always ready to fight. He never loses his spirits. There are no unachievable goals for him. He is very confident and determined and he knows what he needs to get from the certain circumstances or the certain people. Thus, when he was already brought to Moscow, and when I first met him there, Oleg immediately swung into action. He determined his position and decided how he would be communicating and dealing with the FSB officials and with the prison employees. In light of this, we’ve built our future strategy and our defense tactic”.

A fragment from Oleg Sentsov’s interrogation file: “I don’t admit guilt in committing the crimes I am charged with. I was never and I am not a member of any terrorist organization, and I never tried to persuade someone to engage in any terrorist activities. I’ve never bought an explosive device. Investigator’s question: Do you know Churniy Oleksiy Volodymyrovich and Afanasyev Gennadiy Ser­giyo­ vich? Defendant’s answer: I don’t know Chirniy O.V. I met Afanasyev G.S. at the end of February 2014 at the art-centre ‘The Pocket’, located on the intersection of Lermontov Street and Peremohy (Victory) Avenue in Simferopol. There was some kind of an artistic performance happening at the art-centre that evening. <…> I knew from Afanasyev that he was a photographer. On the day we met, I talked with him about the topics of the future referendum in Crimea and the Euromaidan events happening in Kyiv. We also discussed the possibility of the Russian military

[ 197 ] presence on the territory of Ukraine. All the people who were at the art-centre ‘The Pocket’ shared pro-Ukrainian views and didn’t wish for Crimea to leave Ukraine. After the performance of a music band from Tver, a girl I never knew before has delivered a lecture for the entire audience, and the topic was delivery of the primary medical aid for the wounded people, in case they would appear during the upcoming rallies to be held in Simferopol. This meeting was also attended by one of the organizers of various protest initiatives and rallies held on the territory of Simferopol. His name was Ismail (I don’t remember his family name). He announced that at the beginning of March 2014 a demonstration would be held, and he invited all of us to participate. The meeting was to be held near T.G. Shevchenko monument in the city of Simferopol, was dedicated to preserving the territorial integrity of Ukraine and was attended by nearly 1000 participants. Together with me, Afanasyev was also present on this rally. Until 09 May 2014, I kept in touch with Gennadiy, both on the phone and through the personal meetings. On 09 May 2014 an unknown young man called me and introduced himself as ‘Tundra’, whom I met during the rally, and he told me that the FSB officers have arrested G.Afanasyev and that it was very possible that the other pro- Ukrainian activists would be detained in the closest future. About thirty minutes later Afanasyev called me on the phone and offered me to meet. But judging by the manner of his speaking, I suspected that he was calling me not from his own initiative. As a result, I refused to meet him. I also switched off my cell phone, as I was worried that I could be detained by the FSB officers.

[ 198 ] I would like to stress that I never entrusted Afanasyev with any tasks. I have nothing more to say regarding his person during this interrogation”. Dmytro Dinze tried to explain to the court that on the basis of the given information it was unclear, how by means of the actions, presented by the court, Oleg Sentsov could really “influence the decisions of the regional authorities regarding the state and administrative status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea”. It was also unclear, where did he get the financing from, and what state institutions could be harmed as a result of carrying out of the terrorist attacks on the territory of the city of Simferopol. It was obvious straight away that there were noticeable differences in the charges against Oleg, and they don’t allow us to believe them totally. The witnesses testimonies also failed to give a clear picture. The farther the process went, the more it became clear that the case of Oleg Sentsov and of his “terrorist group” was fabricated, while the pieces of evidence, gathered by the investigative bodies and by the Russian intelligence agents, were either fraudulent or had nothing to do with Sentsov. Till 10 August the trial sessions have been held almost daily. Some of the Crimean “injured persons” and “witnesses” failed to attend the court hearings, so they participated through video-connection. Among them were the following persons: a representative of the “Russian Community of Crimea” Andriy Kozenko and a former activist of the Crimean self-defense Oleksandr Bochkaryov, who was also a representative of the regional department of the “United Russia” party.

[ 199 ] Bochkaryov claimed that as a result of the fire at their party office there were huge material losses amounting to over 200 thousand Russian roubles, but during the entire process, he was unable to present the documents, which would somehow prove this claim. In addition to that, as it was pointed out by the defense team, in April 2014 the “United Russia” party wasn’t still officially registered on the territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, while the premises, in their turn, were registered with another judicial person. It was also confirmed by the firemen, who gave their testimonies through video-conference. The witness Konoval told the court that at the moment of fire the premises belonged to the regional department of the “Party of Regions”. There is a certain irony in turning off the “Party of Regions” into the “United Russia”, as lots of Ukrainians often referred to the “Party of Regions” as to the “local branch of the “United Russia”. Seizure of Crimean peninsula and registration of the former “Party of Regions” members as the new members of the “United Russia” only made the things more clear. “The party of separatists” was how Ukrainian media used to call Yanukovich’s party during those days. The list of the Crimean branch of the “United Russia” during the so-called “elections” in the republic looked like a mix of the former “Party of Regions” members and the people from the inner circle of the head of the occupational administration Sergiy Aksyonov, who was known in the criminal circles under the nickname of “Goblin”. Thus, we can say that the people who were in power in Crimea for over 10 years, had the absolute electoral majority on the peninsula and robbed of the economy remain in power till now.

[ 200 ] The question of what country’s flags would be in their cabinets is not that important for them, it seems.

A fragment from Bochkaryov’s interrogation file: “Since autumn 2013 till 16 March 2014, I was a member of the ‘Party of Regions’ of the Central District in the city of Simferopol. There was a party apparatus that was located since January 2012 in one of the office premises at the address: the city of Simferopol, 7 Aksakov Street. After the referendum on the affiliation of Crimea with Russian Federation, which was held on 16 March 2014, the ‘Party of Regions’ ceased to exist on the territory of the Republic of Crimea. At the beginning of April 2014, we had the constituent assembly of the Crimean regional department of the All- Russian political party ‘United Russia’, where the decision was taken to establish the new regional branches of the party in the city of Simferopol. Due to this, it was decided that the office, which was previously occupied by the regional branch of the Ukrainian ‘Party of Regions’, located at the address 7 Aksakov Street, the city of Simferopol, would be given to the Simferopol regional department of the All-Russian ‘United Russia’ party. On 22 February 2014, I left the ‘Party of Regions’ and joined the ‘People’s Militia of Crimea’. In March 2014 I submitted an application to join the ‘United Russia’ party. At the end of April - beginning of May 2014 I was elected as a member of the Political Council of the regional branch of the All-Russian Party ‘United Russia’ in the city of Simferopol.

[ 201 ] On 18 April 2014, I received a phone call from O.I. Mokshin, who was the head of the Executive Committee of the local Simferopol department of the All-Russian Party ‘United Russia’, and he informed me that there was a fire at the office located at the address 7 Aksakov Street, the city of Simferopol. He also reported that the arson was committed by the unknown persons, who left on the scene a gasoline can with the rests of the incendiary mixture and a hammer intended for breaking the windows. At the moment financial damages caused by this arson figure up to 200 thousand Russian roubles. Investigator’s question: ‘Do you know Sentsov Oleg Gennadiyovich, Afanasyev Gennadiy Sergiyovich, Chyrniy Oleksiy Volodymyrovich, Borkin Mykyta Sergiyo­ vich, and Kolchenko Oleksandr Oleksandrovich?’ Witness’ answer: ‘No, I don’t know the above mentioned persons”.

In addition to that, the court also questioned the wit­ nes­ses, who were presented during the public assembly in Simferopol in the spring of 2014. They confirmed the “investigation’s version” that Oleg Sentsov was the leader of the terrorist group and that it was him who gave the orders regarding the arsons and that he also called on the pro- Ukrainian activists to switch to more radical actions. Among those witnesses was also Yaroslav Burakovsky, who was pre­ viously convicted for five times and even at the moment of his questioning he was on remand, that’s why his questioning happened through the video conference from the remand prison.

[ 202 ] Surely, honesty and unbiased nature of the testimonies of a person with such a biography cause doubts. But it couldn’t stop Russian justice that from the very beginning of the process intended to give Oleg a particular sentence, that’s why it considered any “testimonies”, even from the witnesses who were on remand and definitely were under the influence of various Russian intelligence and security forces. Burakovsky also told about another witness, a girl called Angelina, who also attended the public assembly in Simferopol. But the girl refused to testify in court. In her conversation with the lawyer Dmytro Dinze, she said that there were never any discussions regarding any radical actions during the Crimean public assemblies. “We didn’t belong to any political movements,” she said. “There were the rallies planned to be held in the city. Nobody knew what the outcomes would be. We’ve been gathering to help the people who needed medical help, and we created a group of the volunteer doctors”.

A fragment from Burakovsky’s interrogation file: “It was probably in February 2014, when I met Afana­ syev Gennadiy, Chyrniy Oleksiy and Asanov Enver in the group ‘Crimea Right Sector’ on the social network ‘VKontakte’. After a short written conversation, we decided to meet. <…> During our meeting, we discussed the situation in Kyiv, where the supporters of the European integration of Ukraine engaged in the violent confrontation with the government in place.

[ 203 ] Later we used to meet several times with the above mentioned persons in various locations in the city of Simfe­ ropol, we also participated together in several civilian ini­ tiatives held in support of the European integration of Ukraine. After it became evident that in the closest future the question of Crimea joining Russian Federation will arise, the initiatives we’ve been taking part in started to gain more pro- Ukrainian character and were aimed at promoting the idea that Crimea was a part of Ukraine. In our conversations, Afanasyev G. constantly men­ tioned a person named Oleg, and he kept telling me that he wanted me to meet him. He referred to him as to the former head of the ‘Automaidan’ movement and said that now he was a leader of a group of people operating on the territory of the Republic of Crimea and supporting and sharing the ideas of Ukrainian radical ‘Right Sector’ movement. Sometime later Afanasyev G. made me meet Oleg, and it was Oleg Sentsov. During our conversation, Oleg asked me where I worked and what I was doing. I told him I worked as a welder, and he asked me to make the little steel hedgehogs. He said that he needed them to be left on the road if there would be a need to escape from the law enforcement agents. I agreed to do this for him, however, I never took any steps to produce these items. <…> Later I found out that Sentsov’s group included also Asanov E., Afanasyev G., Chyrniy O., a guy with the nickname ‘Lekan’ and also young men named Mykyta and Oleksandr. All the mentioned persons attended the assemblies and the group gathering on a regular basis and took part in the initiatives organized by Oleg. <…>

[ 204 ] At the beginning of April 2014, Asanov E. offered me to rent a room in his house, located at the address 192, Petrovska Balka Street, Simferopol. It is worth mentioning that during my tenure there I witnessed multiple times, how Oleg Sentsov organized the meetings of his group in this place. I didn’t participate in these meetings, but it was clear to me that during these meet-ups they’ve been working on a plan of their further actions. On 10-11 April 2014, I participated in the meeting organized by O. Sentsov close to the ‘Frigate’ club, located on Kirov Avenue in the city of Simferopol. There were seven-ten persons present during this meeting, including Afanasyev G., a guy with the nickname ‘Lekan’ and a girl, whose name I cannot recall at the moment. During this meeting, O. Sentsov was calling to switch to more radical actions and measures aimed at pressuring the Russian government to force it to take a decision about the secession of the Republic of Crimea from Russian Federation. But I don’t really know, what actions exactly Sentsov O. was calling for, as I left the meeting soon after its start because I felt very tired after work. It is worth mentioning that in the course of commu­ nication with Afanasyev G. I understood that their group was responsible for the arson of the offices belonging to the ‘Party of Regions’ and to the ‘Russian Community of Crimea’ in the city of Simferopol in April 2014. Most probably, it was done with the aim of influencing Russian authorities regarding secession of Crimea from Russian Federation. I also want to explain that I didn’t give these testimonies during the investigation because I was very scared that the

[ 205 ] law enforcement officials would come to my home with the aim of carrying out the searching”.

There were several witnesses like Burakovsky in Oleg’s case, who gave obviously false testimonies working in accordance with the previously worked-out scenario. Some of them have been questioned remotely, but some of them were even totally anonymous or had obviously made-up names, such as Ivan Ivanov. In other words, hiding behind the “secrecy of the investigation”, Russian authorities could create any witness they needed, and nothing could stop them but their own imagination. In addition to that, lack of transparency of Russian justice and the “shadow” status of the residents of the occupied Crimean territories allow FSB to use various instruments of influence for those who wouldn’t agree to “cooperate with the investigative bodies”. That’s why there’s no wonder that Russian intelligence agents have managed to find such “characters” quite fast. But there were also those who were ready to testify against Oleg Sentsov on their own motion. People who were somehow related to the organizations like “Russian Community of Crimea” or “People’s Militia of Crimea” didn’t need any additional motivation from the Russian intelligence services. People like Oleg Sentsov were their ideological enemies and “fascists”. It was a great opportunity to pander to the new administration and to also get rid of a civilian activist, who was damaging with his activities the picture of “totally Russian Crimea”. But the main witnesses in the case of the “Crimean terrorists” were still the detained “accomplices” of Oleg

[ 206 ] Sentsov: Oleksiy Chyrniy and Gennadiy Afanasyev, who confessed at that moment that they were the members of the “terrorist group” and were sentenced to seven years in prison. According to the text of the court sentence, Chyrniy was responsible for the terrorist activities within the group established by Oleg Sentsov and tried to “influence the decisions of the government of Russian Federation regarding secession of the Republic of Crimea from Russia”. He was accused in participation in two arsons: of the office of the “Russian Community of Crimea” (14 April 2014) and of the office of the Crimean department of “United Russia” party (18 April 2014). In addition to that, he was also accused of two terrorist attacks attempts. The prosecution states that Chyrniy together with Afanasyev were purchasing the home-made explosive devices with the aim of planting them in Lenin monument and in the “Eternal Fire” Memorial, both in the city of Simferopol. Both of the terrorist attacks have been led by the “leader of the terrorist organization”, Oleg Sentsov. According to Afanasyev’s interrogation file, he was responsible for distributing the “roles” among those who participated in the arson of the office of the “Russian Community of Crimea”. He also said that he met Kolchenko in March 2014 and stressed that he (Kolchenko) shared the views that Crimea was Ukrainian territory. He also told the investigation about Sentsov’s meeting with the representatives of the “Right Sector”. Afanasyev and Churniy were arrested on 9 May 2014. After their arrest, the new accomplices and members of the “terrorist organization” led by Oleg Sentsov agreed with the

[ 207 ] investigation’s version and started giving their testimonies in the case. Afanasyev heard his sentence on 17 December 2014 in Moscow municipal court and was sentenced to seven years in the high-security prison. Chyrniy received the same sentence on 21 April.

Dmytro Dinze: “Oleg’s guilt was being proved exclusively based on the testimonies of Afanasyev and Chyrniy as if they were his accomplices, who were in collusion with him and committed the crimes directly. Everything was made to look like Oleg had some plans, and that he shared these plans with these people, and they later tried to bring his ideas to life. Then Afanasyev and Chyrniy were connected with Oleg with the help of some people who later gave the anonymous testimonies in the case. It was the so-called ‘secret witnesses’. In addition to that, there was also another person who lived together with another person, who rented an apartment, where there was a hiding place for storing the explosive elements, weapon and other items. And it was also a place where the members of the group used to gather. Probably, these persons, who gave these testimonies, were also under pressure. They used to tall that Oleg had radical views and that he allegedly shared them during these meetings, in an attempt to gather a group of people, who would support him in engaging in various illegal activities. Yet there were no shreds of evidence to prove the testimonies given by Chyrniy and Afanasyev. It was totally unclear how Oleg could be possible to cooperate with them and control their activities. Later, during the trial, Afanasyev would suddenly reject his previous testimonies, claiming

[ 208 ] that they were given because he was tortured during the interrogation and that he was also threatened that his family would suffer if he would refuse to give these testimonies. In other words, the version that the story about the ‘terrorist Sentsov’ was a farce from the very beginning was confirmed”.

A fragment from Afanasyev’s interrogation file: “I would like to testify about the circumstances of the arson of two offices, one of them belonging to the ‘Russian Community of Crimea’ and located at the address 11/2 Dovgorukivska Street, Simferopol, Republic of Crimea; and another one belonging to the ‘Party of Regions’ and located at the address 7 Aksakov Street, Simferopol, Republic of Crimea. A couple of days after the referendum about the affiliation of the Republic of Crimea with Russian Federation was held, Oleg called me. During the preliminary investigation, I confessed that it was Sentsov Oleg Gennadiyovich, who invited me to attend the meeting that was held on the premises, at the address Petrovska Balka Street. I would like to clarify that the house where the meeting was held belonged to Enver Asanov, who actively participated in all our meetings. Apart from me, this meeting was also attended by Enver Asanov, by Illya with the nickname ‘Lekan’ and by Oleg Sentsov, who brought with his car nearly thirty sets of gloves, black masks, two hammers, several long wooden sticks, and a gas can with oil, nearly 20 liters of it. He also brought a plastic gas can, filled with fuel, also nearly 20 liters. All the items Sentsov brought with him were taken to the little barn, which was later locked by Enver Asanov. A little

[ 209 ] bit later the above mentioned items were taken to the hidden place, which was in one of the bridge arms, in the vicinity of Kyiv District Court of the city of Simferopol. After that Sentsov O.G. announced in the house that he brought everything necessary for carrying out of the rallies, demonstrations and other types of actions aimed at scaring the population and influencing the decisions of the governmental bodies of Russian Federation regarding secession of the Republic of Crimea from Russia. Meanwhile, he gave us instructions to find out about the places in Simferopol that had something to do with Russian Federation. As for me, he gave me the personal instructions to examine the neighborhood near the office of the ‘Russian Unity’, located on Dovgorukivska Street, the office of the ‘Party of Regions’, located on Aksakov Street, and the premises of the ‘Russian Culture Centre’, located close to Kyivska Street. During our communication, Sentsov O.G. also pointed that we had to also set on fire the cars with the St. George ribbons, but we refused to do that. During several days I carried out instructions given by Sentsov O.G. and examined the above mentioned objects in terms of security measures, surveillance cameras, number of windows and the possible ways for the group to approach the buildings. I shared the information I gathered with Oleg Sentsov, in verbal form, and sometime later he told me that he has chosen a target and that it had to be the office of the ‘Russian Unity’. He also told me who would be in the group that would carry out arson of the office premises. By order of Sentsov O.G., this group consisted of me,

[ 210 ] Chyrniy O., Illya with the nickname ‘Lekan’, Mykyta and ‘Tundra’. <…> Sentsov O.G. commanded that the premises of the offices were to be set on fire on 14 April 2014. Carrying out Sentsov’s order, I called Illya, nicknamed ‘Lekan’, and Chyrniy O.V., who, in his turn, had to call Mykyta and ‘Tundra’. We agreed to meet near the hidden place, and I mentioned it and its location earlier. When I met there Chyrniy O.V. and Illya nicknamed ‘Lekan’, I found out that Mykyta and ‘Tundra’ couldn’t take part in this action. During our conversation, I told them that there were orders from Oleg Sentsov to carry out the arson of the office of the ‘Russian Community of Crimea’, located at the address 11/2 Dovgorukivska Street, Simferopol, Republic Crimea. The aim of this deed was to scare the people and to influence the Russian government’s decision regarding secession of Crimea from Russian Federation. After that, I gave the guys black gloves and masks, which I received from Sentsov O.G., and took the six-litre canister with the gas, which was hidden by us earlier. Then I divided the roles for each of us within the group. According to the plan worked out by Sentsov O.G., Chyrniy O.V. had to set fire on the doors of the office and to also try to set afire the property inside of the building. Illya nicknamed ‘Lekan’ was responsible for dousing the doors of the office and the properties inside with the petrol. As for me, I had to stand outside and watch the operation course from the street and to secure a safe retreat for our group. After receiving the instructions, we walked towards the office.

[ 211 ] When I came to the office of ‘Russian Unity’, I took my position and started the watch, while Chyrniy O.V. and Illya nicknamed ‘Lekan’ went to set the office afire. I cannot tell who exactly was responsible for the arson, as I took the position that prevented me from seeing it. After it was clear that the arson was successful, I immediately retreated. A couple of days later, upon an initiative of Oleg Sentsov, we met again in the same private house, where we were met by our mutual friend named Enver. This meeting was attended by me, Mykyta, Chyrniy O.V., Illya nicknamed ‘Lekan’ and Sentsov Oleg. During the meeting, Sentsov O. was utterly disappointed with our actions during the office arson. He said that we’ve been acting disorganized, that’s why the arson didn’t have an expected effect and was limited to the burnt doors. Sentsov O. was also very angry that we didn’t manage to burn the properties inside of the office. On 17-18 April 2014 I met Sentsov O.G., and during our meeting, he said that our next target would be the office of the ‘Party of Regions’, located on Aksakov Street. In addition to that, he emphasized that he took the ‘Party of Regions’ for the worst enemy of his civilian activity during Maidan protests. After that Sentsov O.G. worked out our new action plan, as he didn’t want the situation with the previous arson to repeat again. In accordance with the plan created by Sentsov O.G., ‘Tundra’ and I had to watch the action, while Chyrniy and Mykyta were responsible for carrying out of the arson of the office and the properties inside it. <…> Following instructions given by Sentsov O.G., on 18 April 2014, at about 00:00 in the night, I called the guys

[ 212 ] and also arranged a meeting with them near our hidden place. When I came to that place, I met there with Chyrniy O.V., Mykyta and ‘Tundra’. I gave them all the gloves and the masks, and then I took the six-liter plastic gas can with gasoline and a massive hammer to break the windows. After that, we walked towards the office, and we approached it, I took my watch position. I don’t know how the arson happened, because again I took the position, from where it was impossible for me to see the process of setting the building on fire. And again, after I understood that the arson took place, I left the scene. Several days after the arson I met with Sentsov O.G., who was quite satisfied with the outcomes of the action this time and said that now we were feared”.

A fragment of Chyrniy’s interrogation file: “I totally admit my guilt in committing the crimes I am charged with. I wish to cooperate with the investigation and to give the honest testimonies. In the period of time between 28 January and 3 Feb­ruary 2014, I decided to visit Maidan in Kyiv, as I wanted to see what the situation there was and wanted to meet new people, who shared my anti-Russian views. When I was in Kyiv, I lived in the apartment of my Kyiv friend Shelov Maksim. When I came back to Simferopol, I just spent a couple of days at home, doing nothing. On 23 February 2014, there was the funeral ceremony for the ‘Berkut’ servicemen killed in the confrontation. During this event, I met Stanislav Yermakov, who actively promoted anti-Russian views. <…>

[ 213 ] Together with Stanislav, we attended an event, which was held on 8 March 2014 and was about marching with Ukrainian flags along Rosa Luxembourg Boulevard in the city. During this event, I met Gennadiy, and unfortunately I cannot recall his surname at the moment. He also shared and promoted anti-Russian views and ideas and tried to participate in various rallies. <…> We exchanged our cell phone numbers and met several times afterward. During one of our meetings he gave me three light gas masks and little canisters with the chemical substance, unknown to me. After the referendum on Republic Crimea becoming a part of Russian Federation, which was held on 16 March 2014, Gennadiy called me on my cell phone and we made an appointment on the Big Salgir River, close to the ‘Simferopol’ cinema theatre. This meeting was attended by the people, who actively protested against affiliation of the Republic of Crimea with Russian Federation. During this meeting, Gennadiy called on us to not give up on the fight and to continue to use any possible measures to pressure the authorities of Russian Federation so that they would take a decision about secession of Crimea. In all the conversations during the event, Gennadiy kept asking everybody whether someone knew a fireworks expert. I just recalled that I knew someone, Oleksandr Pirogov, nicknamed ‘Penguin’, and I told Gena about it. When Gena heard it, he told us that they needed someone to help make the homemade explosives to plant in Lenin monument. Then he gave me 200 Hryvnyas so that I could buy the required components.

[ 214 ] I also met Oleg during this event, and he also expressed his concern regarding the affiliation of the Republic of Crimea with Russian Federation. <…> After I received the instructions from Oleg, I contacted Pirogov O. and asked him to make a homemade explosive device to plant it in Lenin monument. All the time, when Pirogov O. was working on the explosive, Gennadiy and Oleg constantly kept in touch with me, as they were interested in the process and the timing too. On 5 May 2014 I received a phone call, and Oleg and Gennadiy gave us a task to make another homemade explosive device to plant it in the ‘Eternal Fire’ Memorial. It was planned by them that both explosions should have happened on the eve of the Victory Day. I contacted Pirogov O. and told him that he had to make another explosive device and that he had to do it as soon as possible. A little bit later we tested the mechanisms produced by Pirogov O., and then we agreed that he would hide both explosive devices in the niche of the bridge, located not far from my house. On 9 May 2014, at the moment when I was taking the explosive out from the hiding-place, I was approached by the FSB officers. I am ready to continue giving my testimonies during the further interrogations”. On 30 July, during the questioning in the courtroom, Chyrniy suddenly announced that he refused to give testi­ monies, referring to the Article 55 of the Constitution of Russian Federation, but he would deny his previous words either. Afanasyev had to be questioned on the next day, yet he also refused to talk to the court representatives.

[ 215 ] “Sentsov is known in entire Ukraine, he is a famous film director! I don’t know anything else. All the testimonies I gave previously were given by me under pressure. I refuse to testify against myself,” Gennadiy declared during the court session on 31 July 2015. In response to these words both Sentsov and Kol­ chenko applauded such a brace act and chanted: “Glory to Ukraine!”. Afanasyev chanted “Glory to Heroes!” in response. The prosecutor had nothing to do but to ask the judges to read the previous testimonies given by Gennadiy. The investigation decided not to pay attention to their falseness, as it somehow disrupted the scenario of the totally staged court process. A couple of days later, during the meeting with his lawyer Oleksandr Popkov, Afanasyev would tell that, when he was in the detainee-holding cell in the courtroom, one of the FSB agents paid him a visit, who demanded that during the court hearings Afanasyev referred to the Article 51 of the Constitution of Russian Federation and refused to answer the questions asked by the defense team. It was told that everything was arranged with the judge. In addition to that, Gennadiy was threatened that if he would refuse the cooperation offered to him, then he would “go North, to join the polar bears”, while his mother could “become a victim of a car accident”. Additionally, Afanasyev also gave his lawyer a note with the detailed description of all the tortures he experienced after his detention, including connecting of electric wires to his genitals, brutal beatings, suffocation in the gas mask and threats to rape him with the copper-bit. All of it was done

[ 216 ] in order to persuade him to cooperate with the investigation officers in the case against Oleg Sentsov.

Dmytro Dinze: “As for Chyrniy, I personally don’t think of him as of a clever person. Probably, he even had some quite radical views, so the FSB officers decided to use it: they presented him his friend, who provoked Chyrniy to commit some illegal actions. He tried to arrange to purchase of some explosives and also wanted to buy a party of some other illegal items. But the case is that it all applied to Chyrniy only, and if they wanted to present Oleg as a real terrorist, then that was the reason why they tried to connect him with Churniy, despite the fact that these people didn’t even know each other in the reality”.

Chemist Oleksandr Popov nicknamed “Penguin” was the person Chyrniy addressed with the proposal of making a homemade explosive device. Earlier he was charged with theft and drug possession. Chyrniy knew him well, and Pirogov decided to accept this offer, but afterward, he contacted FSB officials almost immediately and told them about the preparation for the terrorist attack to be carried out in the night of 21-22 April 2014. He made a bargain with the special security forces agents and attended all the further meetings with Churniy with the hidden camera with him. Later these video-recordings would be used as the investigation materials.

A fragment of Pirogov’s interrogation file: “On 11 April 2014 I received a call on my cell phone <…> from Chyrniy Oleksiy Volodymyrovych <…>, who

[ 217 ] offered to meet and discuss the possibilities of producing of the homemade explosive device. According to the previous agreement, on 16 April 2014, I met with Chyrniy O.V. in Gagarin Park in the city of Simferopol, where he came together with a man I haven’t seen before. He didn’t introduce this man. During our conversation, Chyrniy O.V. informed me that on the orders of some persons he was preparing an explosion of Lenin Monument in Simferopol on 21-22 April 2014. The aim of this act would be scary for the residents of the Republic of Crimea and also influencing the authorities of Russian Federation to take a decision about secession of the Republic of Crimea from Russian Federat­ ion. Herewith Chyrniy O.V. explained that the choice of this object was made due to its importance and its location so that the explosion there would draw the attention of the authorities, of the international community and also of the mass media. Due to this, Chyrniy stated that he needed me to use my knowledge gained during my study in V.I. Vernadsky Tavrida National University, where I studied chemistry and biology, and he wanted me to make a homemade explosive device for him. In order to check my abilities, Chyrniy O.V. asked me to make a test explosive device with the low power. He also gave me 100 Hryvnyas for purchasing of the required components. At the end of our conversation we agreed that as soon as I would make only the test explosive device, I would need to call him immediately so that we could discuss the place we could test it and coordinate our further actions.

[ 218 ] When I knew about the intentions of Chyrniy O.V., I decided to inform the law enforcement officials about them, in order to prevent the grave consequences of a deed he and his accomplices were going to commit, organizing this explosion. On 17 April 2014, I came to the Regional Department of the Federal Security Service of Russia in the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, where I filed my application and also told about everything with the details during the questioning. On 21 April 2014, with the aim of stopping the unlawful actions of Chyrniy O.V., the Russian FSB agents offered me to participate in the intelligence-gathering event named ‘sting operation’. I agreed to participate and was instructed regarding my actions. All my further actions happened under surveillance of the intelligence agents of the FSB of Russia. On 24 April 2014 Chyrniy O.V. called me on my cell phone and offered me to meet near the restaurant ‘Maria’s Park’, located in Simferopol, and I agreed to meet him there. I informed the FSB agents about the scheduled meeting. Afterward, I was called to the Regional Department of the FSB of Russian in the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol, wherein the presence of two persons I was given a portable camera, with the help of which I was supposed to record my meeting and conversation with Chyrniy O.V. In addition to that, under control of the FSB operatives, I made a pyrotechnical device, using the elements and chemicals that weren’t forbidden on the territory of Russian Federation, in order to demonstrate Chyrniy O.V. my knowledge and my skills.

[ 219 ] I was instructed about the camera operation, so I went to the meeting with Chyrniy O.V. The meeting took place where we planned it. During the meeting, which happened in Gagarin Park in Simferopol, Chyrniy O.V. informed me that he created a plan of carrying out of the terrorist attack, with the aim of damaging and total destruction of Lenin monument in the city of Simferopol, located near the railway station. He said that for carrying out this plan he needed me to make an explosive device with the explosion delay of up to five minutes. In the meantime Chyrniy O.V. also told me about certain persons, who controlled and financed them, and he also voiced his dissatisfaction with their lack of professionalism and their wish to carry out headline-making actions weekly, without thinking over their plan, with the only purpose to boost their position among the so-called ‘Ukrainian patriots’ in Kyiv. In addition to that, Chyrniy O.V. also told that their group carried out in April 2014 several arsons of the offices of the ‘Russian Community in Crimea’ and the ‘Party of Regions’ in the city of Simferopol, and as evidence, he demonstrated me the burns left on his neck. Chyrniy O.V. also explained that in the future he was also planning to plant a bomb at the railway station in the city of Simferopol with the aim of scaring the Crimea residents and disrupting of the holiday season in the Republic of Crimea. During our meeting I demonstrated Chyrniy O.V. the operation of the explosive device I made earlier, presenting it as a ‘test version’ of the homemade explosive device of the small power.

[ 220 ] Chyrniy O.V. was satisfied with the test results and stated that he never doubted my skills and abilities. He also added that it was necessary to produce a bigger and more powerful explosive device with the remote control. After this meeting, I came again to the office of the Regional Department of FSB of Russian in the Republic Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, wherein the presence of the same agents the portable camera I was carrying with me to the meeting was taken away. On 28 April 2014, at around midnight, Chyrniy O.V. called me again and asked to urgently come to his home, to the hostel where he lived, located in Kyiv District of Simferopol, in the neighborhood of Titov hospital. Our meeting happened at about 1 o’clock in the night, on 29 April 2014, in his room. There were no other people there. I was there when Chyrniy called somebody on the cell phone, calling that person Gena, and said that he needed to contact somebody from Kyiv. Several minutes later I heard there was a Skype call on the personal computer of Chyrniy O.V., and he took the call. As a result, I saw a man’s face on the monitor, and Oleksiy called this man Grisha. I’ve never seen this person before. <…> During their conversation, Grisha gave instructions regarding the process of producing of the engaging mecha­ nism for the explosive device, which was expected to be made by me. Then he explained Chyrniy O.V. that he would try to send a ready engaging mechanism from Kyiv to Simferopol through the post. As far as I understood, Grisha was wholly familiar with the intentions of Chyrniy O.V. to plant a bomb in Lenin monument and was ready to cooperate in it.

[ 221 ] After the conversation was over, Chyrniy O.V. de­ manded that I made a homemade explosive device without this engaging mechanism for now. The filler of the bomb had to be strong enough to blow up the monument to V.I. Lenin. Afterward, following instructions of Chyr­niy O.V., I had to choose a place to hide the bomb, and this place had to be somewhere close to his home. Then I had to leave the bomb there so that Chyrniy O.V. could come and take it from there. Chyrniy O.V. also gave me additional 100 Hryvnya for purchasing of the components for making an explosive device and four pamphlets with the anti-Russian pictures, which I had to paste up in the public places. Then we parted our ways. On 29 April 2014, between 6 and 8 o’clock in the evening, Chyrniy O.V. called me again and offered me to join him and to go hiking somewhere outside of Simferopol, in the period of time between 30 April and 2 May 2014. I refused to join him, as I was very busy. On 4 May 2014, at about 11 o’clock in the night, Chyrniy O.V. called me and asked me to come to his home. During our conversation, Chyrniy O.V. told me that he really needed the homemade explosive device, as the things he planned to do was very important, not only for him but for the common cause and for Ukrainian nationalism. He explained to me that bombing of the monument to V.I. Lenin on the railway station of Simferopol he was preparing to carry out would be a pilot project, and that it will be followed by the bigger and more significant object located on the territory of the Republic of Crimea. The aim would be destabilizing of the situation in the republic and disruption of the summer holiday season in the region.

[ 222 ] Chyrniy O.V. also informed me that the explosive device had to be equipped with the delayed-action mechanism, and he was expecting to receive it from some people in Kyiv. But, according to Chyrniy O.V., he still hasn’t received the engaging mechanism from Kyiv, so he started to demand that I found the possibility to make it using an electronic watch and a detonating device, making myself familiar with the information on this topic, available on the Internet. In the course of our conversation, Chyrniy O.V. let me know that he was planning to carry out the explosion in the night of 8 and 9 May 2014, right on the eve of the celebration of the Victory Day. Due to this reason, Chyrniy O.V. demanded that I made an explosive device for him not later than on 8 May 2014 and gave it to him through the hiding place, which I had to choose myself. On the same day, at about 3 o’clock in the afternoon, Chyrniy O.V. called me on the phone again and arranged another meeting In Gagarin Park in Simferopol, at 5 o’clock in the evening. He also told me that he would come with some people who wanted to meet me and to talk with me about the explosive device I was working on. I arrived at the park on time, I was waiting there for nearly three hours, but nobody showed up. On 6 May 2014 Chyrniy O.V. called me late in the night and arranged another meeting, and I informed the FSB officers about this meeting. Later, following their instructions, I came to the office of the Regional Department of the FSB of Russia in the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, where, in the presence of the FSB officials I was given a portable camera again, so that I could record everything during the upcoming meeting with Chyrniy O.V.

[ 223 ] During another meeting that happened in the night of 6-7 May 2014 on the street in Kyiv district of the city of Simferopol, Chyrniy O.V. told me about the necessity to make another explosive device, which he wanted to plant in the “Eternal Fire” Memorial in Simferopol. Then Chyrniy O.V. gave me 200 Hryvyas so that I could buy all the necessary ingredients. Chyrniy O.V. also let me know that he was planning to carry out an explosion by mutual consent with some persons he knew and that it had to happen on 8 May 2014, disrupting celebration of the Victory Day, as it would cause the maximum effect. After the meeting was over, I came back to the office of the Regional Department of FSB of Russia in the Republic of Crimea and in the city of Sevastopol, where, in the presence of the same officers I gave them a portable camera I was carrying to the meeting. On 7 April 2014 Chyrniy O.V. fixed the meeting with me closer to the night, and again I informed the FSB officers about it. Following their instructions, I showed up again at the office of the Regional Department of the FSB of Russia in the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, where on the presence of the FSB officials I was given a portable camera to record the meeting with Chyrniy O.V. The FSB agents also gave me an item that imitated an engaging mechanism for the bomb. It was made by the FSB Russia specialist, as far as I understood. I had to demonstrate this item to Chyrniy O.V. During our meeting, I showed Chyrniy O.V. this item imitating the engaging mechanism, afterward Chyrniy O.V. learned the steps of operation of the mechanism. During

[ 224 ] our conversation, he expressed his readiness to carry out both explosions at about 2-3 o’clock in the night, on 9 May 2014. Then we went together to the bridge and crossed the Small Salgir River. In one of this bridge’s bases, I had to make a hiding place for the explosive devices. Chyrniy O.V. made an appointment with me on 8 May 2014, and during this meeting, I was expected to give him two engaging mechanisms for the homemade bombs and to also explain him the operation process again. After our meeting came to its end, I went to the office of the Regional Department of the FSB of Russia in the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol and gave them back the portable camera. On the eve of the meeting with Chyrniy O.V., on 8 May 2014, the FSB agents gave me two items imitating the engaging mechanisms for the explosive devices. Chyrniy O.V. learned about the operation process with them and took them with him. Following the instructions of the Russian FSB officers, on 8 May 2014, at about 11 o’clock in the night, I placed the items received from the FSB officers into the hiding place showed by Chyrniy O.V.”

At the beginning explanations of the conversations have been read during the court hearings, and then the videos were also demonstrated. These videos captured Chyrniy telling about his political views, about his future plans and even shared his idea of planting the bombs inside of Lenin Monument and the “Eternal Fire” Memorial in Simferopol. But any of the recorded conversations mentioned the name

[ 225 ] of Oleg Sentsov. Everything looked just like the investigation officers simply decided to connect everything Chyrniy said with Sentsov, making him a mastermind of the group and an author of all these ideas. And this is something common to all the testimonies in this case. Of course, they are not totally made-up, from the beginning and till the end. As the lawyer of Oleg Dmytro Dinze told, Oleksiy Chyrniy had some “inclinations” towards the sabotage activity on the peninsula, and one can assert that his interrogation files could be documenting some real facts. But if to remove from there a “character” Oleg Sentsov, it becomes evident that all these “stories” exist perfectly well without Oleg’s participation, so that even their logic does not suffer. Oleg was simply added there, inside of this story, making him a leader of the “terrorist group”.

It can be seen with the naked eye that the prosecution is trying to accuse Oleg Sentsov without any reason, just as if they would use the theory of “six handshakes”1. Thus, the Russian judicial system is actually able to accuse any person of anything, the most important is to have a political will for that.

Dmytro Dinze: “Many of the witnesses in Oleg’s case, who testified about his alleged radical views, had the story of the previous court

1 The theory of six handshakes (or six degrees of separation) was introduced in 1969 by the American psychologists Stanley Milgram and Geoffrey Travers. The hypothesis they offered said that every -per son on Earth indirectly knows any other person on Earth through the quite short chain of mutual friends and connections. Usually this chain consists of six people.

[ 226 ] sentences. It’s important levers of Influence for the Russian FSB, as they could provide them with the better, more comfortable living conditions on the territory of Crimea or to even remove their convictions from the official records. When I contacted the persons, who also attended the public assemblies, but who refused to testify in court, I received the information that Chyrniy and Afanasyev attended these meetings only once. It means that they probably talked with Oleg also only once. Nobody saw them there again, despite the fact that these assemblies used to happen for a quite a long time. The witnesses testified falsely both against Oleg and against themselves too. Kolchenko was the only one who didn’t break. He said that he actually never knew Oleg Sentsov close and that he has seen him only once. They had radically opposite political and social views, and they had different worldview as well. They belonged to the different social layers too, so it was hard to imagine that they could resolve some public issues together or have a common cause and some mutual activities. He told the investigation officials only what he was doing in Crimea, about his civilian and social activities and about some humanitarian issues”.

A fragment of Kolchenko’s interrogation file: “The charge was delivered and explained to me. I don’t confess myself guilty of the alleged conduct, as I disagree with the qualification of my actions. At the beginning of January 2014 I started to be interes­ ted in the current situation on the Independence Square in Kyiv, where the massive demonstrations of people who protested against the decision of Ukrainian government to

[ 227 ] suspend the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union, and of people who wanted to overthrow the current regime. These rallies continued for months already. At the end of January — the beginning of February I found out from my friend Sergiy Yablunovsky that he was planning to go to Kyiv together with our mutual friend Anastasia Chorna, and that they were planning to go there with the car of Oleg Sentsov. I’ve heard about him from Anastasia Chorna. I’ve heard he was a film director, and Anastasia worked as his assistant. In our conversation, Yablunovsky S. offered me to visit the Independence Square in Kyiv and to see with our own eyes what was happening there.

The lawyers Dmytro Dinze and Volodymyr Samokhin. On the background: Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko

[ 228 ] I shared the idea of the necessity of changing the power in Ukraine at that time, so I agreed to go to Kyiv, as I wanted to know what kind of people participate in the protests and how their activities are organized. On 7 February 2014 I met with S. Yablunovsky, A. Chorna, and O.G. Sentsov, and we went to Kyiv with his car. I took a spare sweater and warm pants with me. I also gathered some food, as I wanted to give it to one of the commandants of Maidan. During our trip, we talked about various daily topics. Sometimes we discussed what was happening in the capital of Ukraine. From our talk, I understood that Sentsov O.G. had some business to do in Kyiv, but he never told us the details. After we arrived in Kyiv, we went together to the building where the ‘Ukrainian House’ was located. At the moment of our arrival, the building was already occupied by the Euromaidan supporters. Sentsov O.G. spent some time together with us, but later he left to take care of his business. I didn’t have his cell phone number, because I thought that Yablunovsky S. had his contacts, so we could call Sentsov O.G. in case it was necessary. Together with Yablunovsky S. and Chorna A. we walked around the Independence Square for some time, and then we went to spend the night at our mutual friend’s place. I gave the food I brought with me to the people at one of the reception points. On 9 February 2014, I went together with Yablunov­ sky S. and Chorna A. back to Simferopol. We went with the train.

[ 229 ] I think it was at the beginning of March when I started noticing that the streets of Simferopol started to be patrolled by the people dressed in camouflage. Later I found out that these people were the representatives of the recently formed so-called ‘Crimea Self-Defence’. It was the time when media actively discussed the matter of the possibility of deployment of the Armed Forces of Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine. As I’ve seen the political system in Russia as an autho­ ritarian one, I was opposing the idea of Russian military presence in my country, as I was absolutely sure that it would be followed with the significant restrictions of freedoms and rights. With the aim of expressing my views and my position, I took part in various civilian initiatives and rallies being held near the military unit on Karl Marx Street, near Culture Park and Entertainment Park, and also in Shevchenko Park. The purpose of these rallies was to demonstrate our negative perception of the idea of the possibility of the deployment of Russian military on the territory of Ukraine. Thus, at the beginning of March 2014, when I was attending the courses for the first medical aid being held in the local art-club ‘The Pocket’, I met Afanasyev G.S., but I honestly can’t’ remember now the circumstances of our meeting. After our first encounter, Afanasyev G.S. often called me on my cell-phone and invited me to attend the new rally of those protesting against the deployment of Russian Armed Forces on the territory of Ukraine. This rally was planned to be held on Naberezhna Street, near Radyanska (Soviet) Square.

[ 230 ] When I attended several of these meetings, I saw that Oleg Sentsov was also present there. He delivered some speeches and theses in front of the audience from time to time. At the end of March 2014, I received a phone call from Borkin M.S., who explained to me that he had my number from Afanasyev G.S. and that we had to meet with him. We met near the monument to Suvorov in Simferopol, and I knew from Borkin M.S. that Sentsov O.G. and Afanasyev G.S. also were expected to come to this meeting for some serious talk. We’ve been waiting for them for about an hour, but they didn’t show up, so we went home. On 17 April 2017 Borkin M.S. called me again and we agreed to meet in the park near the campus in Simferopol. During this meeting, he told me that he was planning to carry out arson of the office of the ‘United Russia’ party in the night, but he didn’t explain to me what the purpose of these actions would be. After that Borkin M.S. offered me to carry out that arson together with him. I knew for myself that I had no other way of expressing my negative position regarding deployment of the Armed Forces of Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine and against the restrictions of freedoms and rights of the people in the Republic of Crimea, I accepted the offer of Borkin and agreed to participate in the act of arson, as I associated the political party ‘United Russia’ with the ruling party of Russian Federation, which gave its approval to the President of Russia to deploy Russian military forces on the territory of Ukraine. But I actually wasn’t interested in the location of the party office, nor in the means of carrying out arson. At that moment my aim was to cause symbolic damage to the

[ 231 ] property of the abovementioned political party of Russia, but I cannot tell you at the moment what exactly this damage was supposed to be. During our conversation, Borkin M.S. explained to me that that office was a one-storeyed non-residential building. I didn’t ask Borkin M.S. about the property that was inside of the building and also about the means and methods of the planned arson. On 18 April 2014, at around 1 o’clock in the night, I met with Borkin M.S., and we’ve been walking down Kirov Avenue for about forty minutes when someone called Borkin on his cell phone. After a short phone conversation, Borkin M.S. pointed out that we had to go in the direction of the school No. 24 of the city of Simferopol. A little bit later we met there with Afanasyev G.S., and in about 10-15 minutes Chyrniy O.V. also joined us. I knew him since the times when we both participated in the archeological excavations carried out on the territory of the Republic of Crimea. After that Afanasyev V.G. delivered a short speech in front of us and explained that we had to set on fire the office of the ‘United Russia’ party, located on Aksakov Street. He didn’t tell us though who the organizer of arson was. That was the first time when I knew about the location of the ‘United Russia’ party office. Afanasyev G.S. also made us aware about the instruc­ tions, according to which Afanasyev G.S. and I had to stand our watch on Aksakov Street, while Borkin M.S. and Chyr­- niy O.V. had to set on fire the office. Then Chyrniy O.V. offered me to take from his backpack a mask with the slits for eyes and the gloves, but I refused

[ 232 ] to get them, as, according to the plan, which was shared by Afanasyev G.S., I had to only stand on watch.

After receiving the instruction, Afanasyev G.S. and I went in the direction of Aksakov Street, while Borkin M.S. and Chyrniy O.V. stayed at the place of our meeting. Probably, they wanted to take the incendiary mixture from our hiding place. I took my place of a watch and sometime later I saw Borkin M.S. and Chyrniy O.V., who walked past me. A little bit later I heard some thumps, then it became louder, and finally, I heard the sound of breaking windows glass. A moment later I saw a bright flash in one of the buildings. Several seconds later I was approached by Borkin M.S. and Chyrniy O.V., who complained that as a result of arson he burnt his eyebrows, so he had to take off the mask. He was also very dissatisfied that he had also to leave a hammer near the office. He broke the office window with the help of this hammer. We walked together for some time, and then our ways parted, and we all went home. I’ve never met these people again. At the beginning of May 2014, Afanasyev G.S. called me again and offered me to damage together with him the posters of some Russian political parties, using the paint. These posters were installed in Simferopol. I agreed to join him. Together with Afanasyev G.S., expressing my disagreement with and negative attitude towards the political parties of Russian Federation that gave the Russian President an approval to deploy Russian Armed Forces on the territory of Ukraine, damaged with the paint

[ 233 ] several posters of the political party “A Just Russia”, installed throughout the city. Investigator’s question: “Did you make sure there was no one inside of the office before setting it on fire?” Defendant’s answer: “At the moment of carrying out arson, personally I didn’t think about the possible presence of people inside of the office of the political party “United Russia”. I also have no information, whether Afanasyev G.S., Borkin M.S., and Chyrniy O.V. checked these circumstances”. Investigator’s question: “Were you aware that you’ve been carrying out dangerous actions as a part of an organized group, and did you realize that some people could possibly die as a result of arson?” Defendant’s answer: “I understood that my actions were considered being of criminal nature. But I didn’t understand that people could die as a result of that our actions could possibly cause some other serious and grave consequences. Moreover, I knew it only from the words of Borkin M.S. and Chyrniy O.V. that we set on fire the building of the political party “United Russia”, and not some other building, as I didn’t make sure of it personally”. Investigator’s question: “What was the purpose of your phone call to Sentsov O.G. on 10 May 2014?” Defendant’s answer: “On 9 May 2014 I found out from my friend Oleksandr, whose surname is not known to me, that the law enforcement officials have arrested Afana­syev G.S. in the city of Simferopol. Taking into consideration the fact that Afanasyev G.S. took part in all of the meetings being held on Naberezhna

[ 234 ] Street near Radyanska (Soviet) Square together with Sentsov O.G., I decided that their illegal activities could have had something in common. Thus, with the aim of giving Sentsov O.G. a chance to escape the law enforcement bodies, I decided to warn him with my phone call”. Lawyer’s question to the defendant: “Do you have any connections with the organization “Right Sector”?” Defendant’s answer: “No, I have absolutely no connections with this organization. Furthermore, I would like to emphasize that the ideology of this organization contradicts my anarchist views”. Lawyer’s question to the defendant: “Does arson of the office of the political party “United Russia” comply with your anarchist views?” Defendant’s answer: “This arson complies with my anarchist views, as political party “United Russia” is a ruling party on the territory of Russian Federation and initiates the adoption of the laws restricting freedoms and rights of the citizens”. Lawyer’s question to the defendant: “Why do you refuse to admit your guilt in the crimes you are charged with?” Defendant’s answer: “I refuse to admit my guilt in the crimes I am charged with because I disagree with the qualification of my actions. I don’t consider myself being a terrorist and I never intended to scare the population and to destabilize the authorities”. Lawyer’s question to the defendant: “Did you take Sentsov O.G. for the organizer of some events and measures?” Defendant’s answer: “No, I didn’t”.

[ 235 ] Testimonies made by Oleksandr Kolchenko were pro­ bably the most truthful and fair among all the testimonies presented to the investigation and court. Yes, he admitted that he participated in the office’s arsons to some extent. Yes, he said that he knew Sentsov. But while answering the question, whether he took Oleg for an organizer of some measures and actions (which was actually a quite ephe­ meral description, which could be used by the investigation both as “organization of meetings and rallies” and “terrorist activities”), Oleksandr gave a direct and unambiguous answer. It seems that he paid for this honest position, standing next to Sentsov as another “main” defendant in the case. He was reclassified from the witness into the defendant quite fast and easy.

A fragment from the indictment: “<…> Criminal activities of Kolchenko O.O. continued until his arrest by the law enforcement bodies on 16 May 2014, at 21:35 local time, that happened in his residence <…> Kolchenko O.O. took part in the activities of the terrorist organization, in other words, of the organized group of persons, who gather together with the conscious intention of carrying out terrorist activities, which is the crime, according to the Part 2 of the Article 504.4 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation <…> Kolchenko O.O., being one of the members of the organized group, carried out a terrorist attack, which was the arson that scares the people and endangers their lives and causes material damages, with the main aim of influencing the decisions of the ruling authorities. It is a crime set in the Paragraph ‘a’ of Part 2

[ 236 ] of the Article 205 of the Criminal Code <…>. Based on the foregoing and in accordance with the Articles 171 and 172 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation, the Court ordered the following: to charge Kolchenko Oleksandr Oleksandrovich, born on 26 November 1989, native of the city of Simferopol of Crimean district of Ukrainian SSR, and to prove him guilty in this criminal case for the crime he committed <…>”

Among the items presented to the court as evidence were the following: Makarov revolver, bullets for it, pyrotech­ nical elements, RGD-5 (hand grenade remote), inflamma­ ble mixtures, helmets, and medicine. Most of these so-called pieces of evidence have been found during the searching conducted in the homes of the so-called “accomplices” of Oleg Sentsov, Ivan Zuykov, and Enver Asanov. After carrying out the expert examination it was found that the gun, found in Asanov’s house, contained biological material that belonged to Oleg Sentsov. Oleg himself explained that this “biological material” appeared there on this gun later after he was violently beaten with this gun during the interrogation. After searching in the residence of Sentsov’s sister, other pieces of evidence have been found, including a mat with the smell of oil, a stick, and handcuffs. With the help of these items, which would be classified as the items of “sadomasochistic nature”, the investigation and security forces would explain later the traumas and marks found and documented on Sentsov’s body, refusing to open a criminal case regarding torturing of the defendant.

[ 237 ] Oleg Sentsov in Lefortovo court: “The investigation officer didn’t say anything new. The investigation is actually coming to its end. I was made familiar with the expert examination, and, as previously, the main evidence of my guilt are two plastic cans filled with salt and metal chip, which Chyrniy and Afanasyev allegedly wanted to plant in Lenin monument, allegedly following my instructions. In addition to that they also found lots of rusty bullets, bayonets and hand grenades from the times of the Second World War, and they also found the traces of my DNA on Makarov gun, despite the fact that I stated multiple times that I was beaten with this same gun during the tortures I experienced in the process of interrogation. I haven’t heard anything new here, and I am also familiar with the materials of the expert examination. They haven’t found anything new. Everything is based on the works of the student Afanasyev. Here I was made familiar with the fourth variant of his novel. And it is quite fantastic. As for the investigation of the torture case, the in­ves­ tigation in the case against me somehow continues, and Artem Oleksiyovich, who seems to be an adequate person, knows perfectly well that I was arrested on 10 May, not on 11 May, and during the entire day they tried to force me to testify against myself at the office of SBU, in Simferopol. But after that FSB answered my application with the statement that there were no tortures. Later, after my lawyers presented the court with the reports from the pre-trial detention facility in Simferopol and from the remand prison ‘Lefortovo’ that state that after three weeks since the time of my arrest there were still marks of beatings and tortures left on my body, the Investigative Committee has made a ‘genius’ conclusion

[ 238 ] Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko in the courtroom that I received these beating marks as a result of my sadomasochistic sexual activities with my sexual partners. When they’ve been ridiculed because of this, there was a court in the city of Sevastopol, some people gathered there without my presence, and they simply made a conclusion that the traumas I received were the result of pressing me against the wall during one minute. And generally: if Sentsov will not admit his guilt, then it means he wasn’t tortured. Because if he would be tortured, then he would definitely admit his guilt. It is written in black and white in this court’s finding. In other words, I don’t really know what to say about it. It is not an investigation, it is a spiritualistic séance in the mental ward cell, because normal, adequate people cannot come to this kind of conclusions, and every time it’s different conclusions.

[ 239 ] Afanasyev changed his testimonies for the fourth time, just to please the investigation, but it didn’t help him, he was sentenced to seven years in prison. Thus, there is no point in commenting any deeds and actions of this investigation. It’s like knocking your head against the brick wall, it doesn’t make any sense. That’s why to take your decision, do your job. I can only congratulate you on the New Year and to wish that this year would be the last year of your lying regime. Glory to Ukraine!”

It was quite strange that a person who possessed, for instance, hand grenades, needed help people he barely knew in order to make some homemade explosive devices. What is also strange is that nothing was found in Sentsov’s house too, although he is considered being the “mastermind” of the terrorist activities in the region. In the reality, the case with the shreds of evidence is even easier than the case with the ever-changing and false testimonies. It is always possible to toss up any needed item, and it is possible to make it even during the searching itself and to immediately document the finding in the searching protocol. This technique is as old as the hills.

Dmytro Dinze: “The material side of the evidence is only one imprint on the gun handle, found at one of the addresses, where Oleg allegedly was seen. Oleg himself said that when he was arrested, they put a plastic bag on his head and made him hold various items, with the aim to get his fingerprints on them. He has never been at that address, and he has never touched that gun before. And rightly so, during the searching

[ 240 ] they didn’t find any items, which would indicate that Oleg was involved in some kind of terrorist activities: there were no wires, no gunpowder, no fragments of explosives, there was absolutely nothing of that sort. When the FSB agents came to his home, they’ve been confused and saddened. During the second searching, they’ve finally managed to find and pull out some cans, canisters, mats smeared with oil. In other words, they tried to find anything that could be related to the alleged terrorist activities. It is obvious that we don’t consider these items to be the evidence”.

In addition to that, one of the very important motives of Sentsov’s case was his alleged connection to the organization “Right Sector”, which turned into a real horror story for the Russian citizens, thanks to the efforts of Russian mass media. The underground cells and branches of the “Right Sector” have been found anywhere, even in Kaliningrad and in the Far East of Russia. Right after the end of Maidan and annexation of Crimea, the “Right Sector” became the most favourite topic for the Russian propaganda, which was telling the stories about some “friendship columns” coming to the Crimean peninsula with the aim of “Ukrainization” of the local population. As of 2015, the population of Crimean peninsula con­ sisted of 65% of ethnic Russians, 16% of ethnic Ukrai­nians and 12% of the Crimean Tatars. Thus, Russians make an absolute majority in Crimea, while during all the years of Ukrainian independence Russian language played a role of the interethnic communication and developed freely on these territories. At the same time, if to speak about the language issue, it is worth mentioning that they had to do exclusively

[ 241 ] with the decline and narrowing of the sphere of usage of Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar languages. Russian languages were never threatened or endangered here, itwas being actively used by 84% of the Republic population, which means that not only ethnic Russians actually used it. As a comparison, the part of the Ukrainian language, which is the state language of Ukraine, is only 3,6% (in 2001 it was 9,5%). But the situation didn’t always look like that. Crimea always found itself in the centre of massive historical events and has a very diverse dynamic of the national changes and, consequently, language changes as well. Russian cultural dominant idea, which prevails on the peninsula now, was strengthening its positions, not in a very natural and peaceful way, so to say. It was a deliberate policy that started in the times of Russian Empire when even the original Crimean place names started to be renamed in Russian fashion, and it continued even in times of Ukrainian independence. One could recall at least the permanent military base of the Russian fleet in the city of Sevastopol. Before Crimea was conquered by Russia, part of Crimean Tatars on the peninsula made 90%. Stalin’s violent and brutal deportation of the Crimean Tatars in 1944 literally finished the process of the expulsion of the indigenous people. Their places were taken by Russians, who gladly replaced them and started living in the abandoned homes of Crimean Tatars. It is unknown and quite strange why these angry and aggressive “Ukrainian nationalists”, who had lots of means and opportunities, have never really tried to “make Crimean Ukrainian” during all these years of independence. What were they waiting for? Maybe, they’ve been waiting for

[ 242 ] the strong and powerful Kremlin propaganda that would decide for them, what they wanted to achieve and what they hated. As is known, on 17 November 2014 the Supreme Court of Russian Federation complied with the suit of the General Prosecution of Russian Federation and declared the “Right Sector” an extremist organization and banned its activities on the whole territory of Russian Federation. In December 2014 the Crimean branch of the “Right Sector” was declared a terrorist organization in Russia. According to the investigation’s version, connection and contact between “Sentsov’s terrorist group” and the “Right Sector” were established through an employee of one of the private hospitals in Crimea, Stepan Tsyryl. He was very fond of the nationalist ideas and even attended the militarized assemblies of the “Trident” organization n.a. Stepan Bandera. Gennadiy Afanasyev was the one, who told the investigating officers about it. But later he would confess that he gave these testimonies under the investigators’ and FSB pressure. Meanwhile, a “secret witness” called Kirill Kirillov confirmed to the court that Tsyryl positioned himself as a member of the “Right Sector”. As we can see, when Russian intelligence forces need certain “right testimonies”, the “right” secret witness always appears in the case.

A fragment of Afanasyev’s interrogation file: “Sometime later I met with Sentsov O.G. again, and while I sat in his car, I became a witness of his meeting with a man. He met talked to him outside of the car. When he got back in the car, he said that this man’s name was Stepan and that he was a member and a representative of the Ukrainian

[ 243 ] nationalist and radical movement ‘Right Sector’ on the territory of the Republic of Crimea. He also said that I would need to contact him. Then he gave me the cell phone number of this Stepan. I called Stepan on Skype and during our conversation, I found out that he was a representative of ‘Right Sector’ and that he needed to know about the upcoming initiatives and activities in Simferopol. Stepan also expressed his disappointment with the fact that our rallies and activities didn’t cause any casualties. In his opinion, only terrorist attacks with the serious casualties could result in intimidation of citizens and in the influencing of the decision-making the process of the authorities of Russian Federation regarding secession of the Republic of Crimea. During our conversations, he also said that he had a small signal flare pistol filled with the radioactive substance,

Oleg Sentsov in the courtroom

[ 244 ] that he had it back in Kyiv. He said I would need to spray this substance from the pistol towards the building of Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) of the Republic of Crimea. Stepan asked me to find a channel to send me this signal flare pistol through. I would like to clarify that this offer was unacceptable for me, thus I never did anything for the search of such a channel. In addition to that Stepan told me that near the ‘ATB’ supermarket, located close to the railway station of the city of Simferopol, there is often a black ‘Mazda’ vehicle parked in the area. This car belonged to the FSB of Russia officials, and it would be necessary to set this car fire. Our communication with him limited to a couple of phone conversations”.

The Russian intelligence forces’ logic was quite simple: if Sentsov was on Maidan, it means he shares radical nationalistic views and would easily qualify to become a “leader” of the “Right Sector” in Crimea. The fact that there were people on Maidan sharing very different ideologies and political views, and the fact that during all his life Oleg was a Russian-speaking resident of Crimea and that he made his films also in Russian language, closely cooperating with his Russian colleagues, all these facts haven’t been taken into consideration by those who fabricated the case against Sentsov. He doesn’t even look like a nationalist. Oleg doesn’t really look like a person who has found his national identity through nationalism. I even have doubts that he had any strong roots in Ukrainian national culture, which is so typical for the real nationalists. His position is actually a position of

[ 245 ] every normal citizen of his own country, who understands his responsibility for that part of the land, defined with the borders, and who also wants a better future for his family and beloved people. There is the same logical gap that could be seen in Kolchenko’s case as well, who was a left-wing activist, which means, that he would definitely oppose any forms of the right-wing ideology and ring-wing political forces and would decline all the possible forms of nationalism. When it comes to the left-wing political movements in Ukraine, one could only think of some reactionary, neo- Stalinist parties and organizations, which could be called “left-wing” only nominally. Usually, these are various pro- Russian forces sponsored by the Kremlin, which never had any wide support among Ukrainians, but which nevertheless continued promoting their revanchist ideas in the region. In this sense, Oleksandr Kolchenko with his pro-Ukrainian position is actually out of the picture of this context, which is already traditional for Ukrainian political discourse. He was a “person of an idea”. But when the propaganda starts playing the theme of the “Right Sector”, Russian society and everybody who feel irritated about anything that has to do with Ukraine simply start losing logic. They react in these words like a bull reacts on a piece of red cloth.

Dmytro Dinze: “There was the time when some kind of a trend of ‘the terrorists of the ‘Right Sector’ appeared in the society, which has totally disappeared as of today. The trends like this one usually emerge, when the authorities need to demonstrate

[ 246 ] the people their active fight against the terrorism. The case of Oleg Sentsov also emerged within the framework of this trend, same as ‘Sentsov’s terrorist group’, consisting of people, who have never engaged in any terrorist activities, but cared exclusively about the social issues and problems related to the people, who stayed on the territory of Crimea: of the fellow Ukrainians, Crimean Tatars and military servicemen, who didn’t have the possibility to leave the peninsula. The keynote of the entire case against Oleg Sentsov is his alleged affiliation with the ‘Right Sector’, as he allegedly shared their views and followed a certain nationalist ideology, and that he carried out his terrorist activities within the frameworks on these nationalist ideas. But there was no evidence that he had any contacts with the representatives of the ‘Right Sector’ or with Yarosh himself. The only one thing they pointed out was that Sentsov allegedly communicated with somebody from the ‘Right Sector’, but they couldn’t detain and question these people. I think that the court violated the law while pronouncing the sentence, as the court’s decision was based exclusively on the operative information, which was not checked in the course of the investigation, although this procedure is mandatory. We, as Sentsov’s defense team, addressed the ‘Right Sec­ tor’ with the lawyer’s requests in order to find out whether the defendants were the members of this organization, whether they had any responsibilities and positions within this structure and whether they communicated and interacted somehow with its representatives etc. We received an answer signed by Yarosh and the Press-Secretary of the ‘Right Sector’ that stated that neither Sentsov, nor Kolchenko,

[ 247 ] nor Afanasyev was the activists of this organization and that they have never interacted or cooperated with this organization as well. We tried to present all these pieces of evidence during the court hearings, but the court refused to accept them, but has chosen to take into consideration only the operative materials of the investigation. We were even threatened with the possibility of opening of the criminal case against us for our attempts to present the court with these documents, explaining these threats by the fact that the organization ‘Right Sector’ was banned on the territory of Russian Federation, and that’s why these papers were illegal. It’s clear that this information wasn’t taking into consideration and wasn’t even checked by the court. Thus, they just ‘easily’ discovered ‘the motives’ of Sentsov and Kolchenko and sentenced these people to prison based on them”. <…> The military court that has sentenced Oleg was just the one following the orders. It is embedded into the military law enforcement system, that’s why if they received a certain order, they would definitely obey it. They aren’t civilians. They wear the uniform, they obey the Statute and other regulations. But what is least logical is that the judicial system laws apply to them as well. In other words, they have a dual position: on one hand, they obey the law directly, but on the other hand, they have the top officials above them, controlling them and giving them orders. I think that it is simply impossible to render justice objectively and unbiased under these circumstances. Additionally, in Russian Federation, all the terrorism- related cases are removed from the jurisdiction of the trial

[ 248 ] jury. The trial was conducted by three judges, among them Sergiy Mykhaylyuk, Vyacheslav Korsakov, and Eduard Korobenko. Journalists, ambassadors, and consuls of different countries and human rights activists also attended the court sessions. There were also people from Crimea, but many of them couldn’t come due to one reason: their movements were closely followed, so they were scared that they could experience repressions later”.

Natalya Kaplan: A cousin of Oleg Sentsov “People, who watch the TV and listen to the Russian propaganda, don’t attend such sessions. These sessions are being attended by those, who understand everything perfectly well. They are journalists, human rights activists etc. For example, when there were hearings in Rostov court, some people even laughed in the courtroom. It was simply impossible to take that seriously. Prosecutors, with so serious faces, demand some unrealistic sentences, having no base and no evidence. They don’t bring forward any arguments, why it had to be like this. It was generally obvious that they didn’t really take care of it, that they didn’t even prepare properly for the court sessions. All of it was made in a so negligent manner. The judge was trying to follow some rules and even tried asking some questions, trying to demonstrate some sort of interest. Oleg once even told me: ‘But he seems to be a normal judge, why are you being in such a mood?’ But that was the scariest thing that he seemed to be adequate, but later he just showed his real face. And it happened just like that”.

[ 249 ] Askold Kurov: Director of the documentary film about Oleg Sentsov “I was filming the court sessions. I started doing it back in Moscow. I just wanted to somehow support Oleg. I felt some kind of solidarity with him, it felt like he was someone I knew, that he was my friend, moreover, he was also a film director. I wanted to see him, to be present in the courtroom. There was where I also met his cousin Natalya. I remember that a moment has come when I felt that it was really hard for me to be there. It was terribly hard because I knew that I couldn’t do anything, that I couldn’t help. The only one thing I could do for Oleg was to keep filming it like it was a movie about him. I was only once at the court session before, so I didn’t really know, how all of it was organized there. From the very beginning, I had an impression that there was a certain decision in Oleg’s case, and that everything that was happening in the courtroom was just a play and couldn’t really change anything or influence the final decision of the judge. It looked like the theatre scene. It was a theatre play intended to give it all a look of ‘justice’. During the year these feelings only intensified, while the moment of the court sentence became the culmination that was really hard to accept. It felt like a lump in throat. Oleg himself said at the beginning that the investigative officer told him the sentence he would be given from the beginning. The lawyers also didn’t have any illusions regarding this case, but the hope still remained. The law enforcement officials were very much irritated with Oleg’s behaviour, but they couldn’t do anything with it. The ability of the defendant to express his position

[ 250 ] during the court session cannot be restricted. Oleg shows us with his example that it is possible to keep standing straight and not to break. He remained free, maybe, even more, free than I was, and I wasn’t arrested like him. The words he said in the court were filled with the feeling of this freedom and inspired the others, those who came to support Oleg”.

Despite the absurdity of the trial process, Oleg stood his ground in his position and in his estimations of what was happening. He declared during the first court session: “The federal service of chaos and injustice in your country has quite good skills of fabricating the cases… And I am not scared of this twenty years sentence, because I know that the rule of the bloody dwarf in your country will come to its end s o on e r…”

Dmytro Dinze: “For FSB Oleg was quite a difficult personality. He refused to participate in any negotiations with them. Once one of the investigators said that ‘no matter how long a person remains in remand prison, sooner or later everybody starts talking. And you will start talking too’. But, as the practice demonstrated, Oleg stayed in the prison till the beginning of the court proceedings, but he didn’t tell anything and refused to cooperate with the investigation. Of course, it disappointed them a lot, so they tried to somehow persuade him to engage with them, but Oleg wasn’t interested in it. He kept repeating that he wasn’t guilty, that he didn’t do anything illegal, that he never gave any orders and that he would talk only in the courtroom.

[ 251 ] At the beginning, he had hope that the trial would be objective considering his case, but when it became evident how the court took its decisions, Oleg decided to keep silent there too. He understood that there was no point in waiting for justice, so he’s chosen the position of a simple declaration of his social, political and life position within the framework of this criminal case”.

On 18 August 2015 Oleg Sentsov trial was already coming to its end. During the debates in the courtroom Prosecutor, Oleg Tkachenko declared: “Every person has the right to have a unique opinion about the ongoing events. However, the methods of achieving the goals are restricted by the law. The history of our criminal case started on 14 April 2014, when the office of the “Russian Community of Crimea” was set on fire. Due to the high professionalism of Filippenko, the fire was extinguished in several minutes. He told in the court that the consequences of the fire could be tragic, as there was a family residing in the neighboring building”. Tkachenko started to demand the court to sentence Oleg Sentsov to 23 years in high-security prison and to sentence Oleksandr Kolchenko to 12 years in prison. “I am sure that there is no need to be naïve to really believe that arsons of the political parties’ offices in a big city would go unnoticed. As for the destabilizing of the authorities in the process of making decisions, it depends on the personal qualities of the people who take these decisions, on their bravery, courage, and devotion,” added Tkachenko at the end of his speech.

[ 252 ] Oleg Sentsov was accused in establishing of the terrorist organization (Part 1 of the Article 205.4 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation), of the preparation of two terrorist attacks (Part 1 of the Article 30 and Paragraph “a” of the Part 2 of the Article 205 of the Criminal Code) and of carrying out of two terrorist attacks (Paragraph “a” of the Part 2 of the Article 205 of the Criminal Code). In addition to that, Oleg was also charged with the illegal possession of the weapon and explosive substances (Part 3 of the Article 222 of the Criminal Code). Oleksandr Kolchenko was accused of participation in the activities of the terrorist group (Part 2 of the Article 205.4 of the Criminal Code) and of carrying out of a terrorist attack (Paragraph “a” of Part 2 of the Article 205 of the Criminal Code). Despite the fact that the Prosecutor stated that the defendants’ guilt was proven, the defense team representatives pointed out on the absence of evidence of the existence of this “terrorist group” allegedly led by Oleg Sentsov. They also pointed out the bias of some persons who testified as witnesses in this case and also the physical and psycholo­ gical pressure of them, with the aim of influencing them to give the “correct” testimonies. Kolchenko’s lawyer Svetlana Si­dor­­kina assumed that considering such a huge number of falsifications, the “Ukrainian terrorists’ case” could become one of the most shameful pages in the history of Russian justice.

Although Oleg Sentsov refused to take part in the debates with the prosecuting attorney, at the end of the session he said his final word, declaring his stable and

[ 253 ] unbreakable position regarding this trial and the situation in general.

The last word of Oleg Sentsov before the pronouncement of a verdict: “I also, like Sasha, don’t ask you for anything. Everything is clear here. The occupants’ court can’t be just, by definition. Don’t take it personally, Your Honour. When Pontius Pilate walks with Jesus from Nazareth along the moon path, after he spent so many years on the Moon, thinking over what he has done, and when he was finally forgiven, Pontius Pilate told Jesus: ‘You know, you were right. The worst sin on Earth is cowardice’. A great Russian writer Mikhail Bulgakov wrote this, and I couldn’t agree more with him. Cowardice is the worst and the most terrible sin on Earth. A betrayal is a personal form of cowardice. Sometimes betrayal starts from such a little act of cowardice, like, for instance, with Chyrniy, when they put a bag on your head, then beat you, and then in half an hour you are ready to betray your views and your ideas, to incriminate yourself anything possible, to incriminate other people, just so that they stop would stop beating you. I don’t know what your ideas are worth if you are not ready to suffer or to even die for them. I am very glad that Gena Afanasyev was able to go against his heart at some point and that he finally understood that it was a chance, and he made a brave deed. And I am very happy for him. Not because it would definitely cause a big scandal, there would be some problems and we would be excused by the court. I know it won’t happen. I am happy that he would continue living his life, knowing that he didn’t become a coward. They continue threatening him, they kick

[ 254 ] and beat him there. But that’s the end. He made a step to the side, where there’s no way back anymore. And I am very happy for him. I spent over a year in your beautiful country already, and I watch TV here. The programmes ‘Vesti’ (‘News’) and ‘Vremya’ (‘Time’) are very good programmes. Your propaganda works exceptionally well. And I am sure that the majority of people in Russian really believe in what they are being told. They believe that Putin is a good guy, they believe that there are fascists in Ukraine and that Russia does everything right. Yes, it’s a very good propaganda. But I also understand that there are people, who understand that there are no fascists in Ukraine, that Crimea was annexed illegally, that your armed forces are presented in Donbas. The entire infirmary in our prison is filled with the ‘rebels’, who are being sent there to Donbas like heroes, on your tanks, with your weapons, they fight there and think that somebody waits for them here, they come back, bringing some weapons back, but what they receive is arrests on the border and a prison sentence. And they can’t understand, why, what for, they sent us there like heroes. They didn’t understand back then that it was a one- way ticket. Even here in the prison, everybody knows it. I met one former Main Intelligence Directorate agent here in the prison, who is being charged now in another case. He took part in taking of Crimea. On 24 March they arrived on the ships to Sevastopol. He was among those blocking that part on the peninsula, near the city of Yevpatoria, which I supported and helped the people to evacuate from. His brigade also took part in Illovaysk battles. These are the facts laying on the surface. If you don’t close your eyes, you see them. Here are your heralds of regime, and they aren’t

[ 255 ] stupid too, they know how it is, but they continue to lie, they continue doing their job, finding some lame excuses for themselves, such as ‘somebody has to do it’, ‘I have to earn for my family and my children’… But what is the purpose of raising another generation of slaves? But there is also the third part of the Russian popula­ tion, who understand perfectly well what is happening, who don’t believe your propaganda, who understand what is going on Earth and in the world, who knows about terrible atrocities your authorities are responsible for, but these people are somehow scared. They think that it’s impossible to change something, that it is impossible to break the system, that you are alone, there’s too little of us, we all will end up in prison, become killed, destroyed. That’s why these people keep silent. We also had a criminal government. But we stood up against it. They didn’t want to hear us, so we knocked the trash cans loudly. They didn’t want to see us, so we burnt the tires. And finally, we won. The same will happen in your country. I don’t know in what form it will be, I don’t want any­­ body to be harmed. I just want that you don’t have the criminal rulers anymore. That’s why the only one thing I can wish this third, informed part of Russia is to learn not to be scared”.

Many people considered this speech quite naive. But any honest and inspired words would seem to be naive in our time. Despite everything that happened to him and to his country, Oleg still believes that Russians would “open their

[ 256 ] eyes” one day, that they really would learn not to be scared. I know many Ukrainians, who thought in a similar way, but they changed their position drastically during the latest years, and there were serious reasons for that. It is easier for Russians to distance themselves from the war and to pretend that nothing is happening, as there is no military activity on their territory, and their cities don’t lie in ruins. Even for the sympathetic “Russian liberals”, this war exists rather in the news headlines. They never leave their warm and cozy comfort zone, as they are very scared of the possibility to lose it and to never have a chance to go back there. Opportunism and timeserving are among the most typical character traits of a modern Russian citizen. Such a psychology doesn’t allow change the country, but rather the opposite, it forces you to comply with the existing circumstances and to hope for some ephemeral stability. There is that fear Oleg is talking about. All of it is combined with the nostalgic imperial senti­ ments and traditional Russian chauvinism that are socially and culturally tied together. It is very difficult to imagine what should happen there in Russia, so that Russians would change themselves and turn the situation to move in the better direction, for both the residents of Russian Federation and for its neighbors as well. Of course, we all want to hope for better, and Oleg also continues to believe and hope. He offers no mechanisms, as they are not known to anybody, but the concepts of “faith” and “belief” don’t really stipulate any rational explanations. He only sees the point where everything will come to the end and where the freedom would start.

[ 257 ] On 25 August Judge Sergiy Mykhaylyuk pronounced a final sentence for Ukrainian citizens. Oleg Sentsov was sentenced to twenty years in prison, while Oleksandr Kolchenko received ten years. After the sentence was pronounced in the courtroom, Oleksandr and Oleg started to sing Ukrainian national anthem, finishing it with the patriotic chant “Glory to Ukraine!”, what caused the outrage of the Judge Mykhaylyuk, while Consul of Ukraine Oleksandr Kovtun and General Consul of Ukraine in the city of Rostov-on-Don Vitaliy Moskalenko, who was presented in the courtroom, stood up from their seats. Later, on 17 March 2016, Oleg Sentsov would be conveyed through the city of Chelyabinsk to the pretrial detention centre No.1 in the city of Yakutsk, and then he would be transferred to the local correctional colony. Sentsov wrote a letter from Chelyabinsk remand prison, which had it: “Everything is okay with me, I’m fine, under g u a r d ”.

112.ua, 15 March 2016: “Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, arbitrarily detained in Russia, in Chelyabinsk remand prison, wrote a letter to a Russian activist Yana Goncharova, where he reported that he was feeling well and remained under guard. Goncharova published this letter on her Facebook page. ‘From Chelyabinsk remand prison Oleg Sentsov sent me a short letter, just a note that everything was okay. But anyway, Oleg always says that he is okay, his unbelievable optimism always wonders and inspires me, and his inner

[ 258 ] power and his spirit are something unimaginable,’ an activist wrote. In this letter, Sentsov says that he is doing well. ‘However, this letter would most probably remain without an answer, as I have no idea, how long I will stay here in Chelyabinsk, but I doubt that it will be for a long time, so don’t even try to catch me here with your letter. I don’t know what to write to you, I just wanted to share a short message that I am doing well, everything is okay, I am under guard,’ he wrote. In addition to that, the film director said that he was reading a Bible, with the purpose of getting more information. Goncharova also reported on ‘112 Ukraine’ TV chan­ nel that Oleg was already conveyed to another prison. It was not known at that moment where exactly he was.

Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko in the courtroom

[ 259 ] ‘As of now, he is conveyed to another detention facility. But it is hard to say, where exactly he is at the moment. I just know that he still didn’t reach Novosibirsk. There is no connection whatsoever till now. During the transfer, when they are transporting him to his final destination, all the meetings are impossible. The detention conditions are also different. In Samara, they were relatively normal, in Chelyabinsk everything was significantly worse, as his cell was in the basement. In the convoy trains conditions also differ. In Chelyabinsk he got sick. But after the chief enlistment officers interfered, he was transferred to a better cell and started receiving medical treatment, he felt better. When we’ve seen him last time, he was better,’ she reported. She also said whether the appeal procedure was finished. ‘The appeal was accepted, but back in November, the Supreme Court declared the sentence just and legitimate. There will be also a constitutional appeal, later, after he will arrive,’ Goncharova added. As it was reported earlier, at the end of February Oleg Sentsov assumed that most probably he would be conveyed to Yakutia, however, he emphasized that he had neither the exact information nor the ticket”.

Sentsov was put to the probationary ward of the Yakutsk remand prison: www.svoboda.org, 31 March 2016, 18:07 Film director Oleg Sentsov, sentenced to twenty years in prison, was conveyed to the remand prison 1 in the city of Yakutsk, where he was put in the probationary ward, according to “Radio Liberty”.

[ 260 ] Sentsov was visited by the members of the Public moni­ toring committee of the republic. According to the words of the committee head Valentina Kirillina, the conditions in the penal establishment are quite satisfactory. “At the moment of my visit, there were seven people in the sleeping dorm. The beds were in order, the linen was clean. There is a fridge in the dining room, there were clean drinking water and a radio,” Kirillina emphasized. She also said that Sentsov is in a good mood. “He said that the conditions here were much better than in the central facilities,” the committee head added.

Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko considered the political prisoners by the human rights organization “Memorial”, were conveyed to the remand prison in Rostov- on-Don at the beginning of February. Kolchenko was sent to the city of Chelyabinsk to serve his sentence, while Sentsov was brought to the remand prison 1 in the city of Yakutsk. Kolchenko’s and Sentsov’s lawyers intend to apply to court with the pledge to transfer the defendants to the prison, which is closer to their home. In May 2014, in occupied Crimea, representatives of the Russian government arrested Ukrainian movie director Oleg Sentsov together with the twenty-five-year-old Oleksandr Kolchenko, Gennadiy Afanasyev, and several other Ukrainian citizens. On 25 August 2015 Sentsov and Kolchenko were con­ victed by the Russian court. Sentsov was sentenced for twenty years in high-security prison, charged with establishing of the terrorist group and with the organizing of arsons of the

[ 261 ] offices of the local department of the political party “United Russia” and organization “Russian Community of Crimea”. Kolchenko received ten years in prison and was charged with “complicity in the terrorist attack”. International human rights organizations made state­ ments about the biased and unjust nature of the process and demanded to release Ukrainians”.

Askold Kurov: “Probably they knew about the filmmaking activities of Oleg Sentsov and assumed that he could be well-known and quite popular in certain circles. The ‘case of Ukrainian terrorists’ helped them achieve several goals and fulfill several tasks at once. Oleg Sentsov was not only a movie director, he was also a quite known civil activist. He organized help for Ukrainian servicemen, coordinated work of journalists and definitely had the say-so. People trusted him. That’s why Oleg was quite an easy and good victim for Russian authorities. First of all, it helped to scare all the rest of active citizens, as it became evident after his arrest, what methods this regime would use to get rid of all the dissenters. It’s just like in a street fight: if one wants to win, one needs to beat the strongest of the gang, so the rest of them would scatter. And the second thing, all of it contributed a lot for the Russian propaganda that has been trying to persuade people even before it that there were ‘fascists’ in Ukraine and that they were a ‘threat’ for the Russian-speaking residents. Sentsov’s case was for them like a graphic example of all these false stories.

[ 262 ] We lived for some time with the illusions that the Soviet stage was already over, that there was a revolution in minds, so we found ourselves in new democratic Russia. Several years ago it became evident that this transition didn’t really happen. Technically, this transition took place, but the system still continued to exist somewhere inside, and now this system gains momentum. Such a revolution requires serious actions and re­ appraisal of values. It is necessary to admit the mistakes of the past. But it didn’t happen in Russia. Those changes were on the surface only, that’s why none of Stalin’s headsmen, those who tortured, executed people and informed on others, were not held accountable for their actions. They receive their retirement payment and live calm and cozy lives. That’s why this genesis wasn’t torn. Oleg was sentenced almost by the same people, who used to detain the people in the 30s, based on false and made-up accusations. One can change the names as many times as one wants, renaming NKVD (People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs) in KGB (Committee for State security), and then renaming KGB in FSB (Federal Security Service of Russia), yet the essence, the meaning will remain the same. In other words, there were no actual changes. What we have today is a logical continuation and development of that old system. Another thing is that the times are different now, and there are other people in power nowadays. Putin is not Stalin. The scale and stature of people have changed, and together with it, the level of bloodlust, violence and large-scale participation changed a little”.

[ 263 ] Andrii Khalpakhchi: Director of Kyiv International Film Festival “Molodist” “If one wants to understand the current policies of Russian Federation, then it’s possible only on the level of Franz Kafka, I guess. By the way, Oleg could definitely relate to Kafka at the moment. It’s just like Kafka’s ‘The Process’. That’s why it is almost impossible to understand what is happening there. It seems to me that the point is that this county doesn’t really know how to apologize. They refuse to admit even their most evident mistakes. One would think, it could be possible to just apologize, to forget, to release those prisoners, as their detention anyway doesn’t help to resolve the country’s problems, but rather deepens them even more. I think that it all is being used on the level of general propaganda, when there is an idea ‘Russia is always right’, and this idea is being planted and constantly nourished. For the majority of people in Russia, and I don’t really have lots of contacts with them at the moment, everything said on the TV is perceived as truth. The government there enjoys absolute trust and support. That’s why to admit their own mistakes and their wrongfulness in this court process would mean to plant doubts among the citizens regarding the absolute rightness of the current authorities. They simply cannot afford it themselves. That’s why everything that is happening there now eludes any normal human analyzing. I’m afraid we would need to wait for the time when the ‘great don’ Putin will pardon Oleg”.

[ 264 ] Aleksey Medvedev: A film critic, organizer of the “Two in One” film festival “What happened to Oleg still remains an open wound for all of us. With every new day this person spends more time in prison, and with every new day, injustice multiplies. But it is known that evil cannot multiple all the time. Sooner or later, this abscess has to burst. I have no doubts that Oleg will be released from prison earlier than the end of his sentence. I know that he’s got a strong personality, that’s why I am sure that prison won’t break him, but will make him harder and stronger. I don’t know though what kind of price Russia would pay for it, but I can assume that this price could turn up to be way too high. We exchanged letters for some time, while Oleg was already in prison. He wrote me that he was working on the new screenplays and asked me to send him some books on Sevastopol history. I sent him some of them, but to be honest, there were not so many good books available on the website I could order from and send them to ‘Lefortovo’ prison. Last time when I was in Yakutsk, I visited the high- security prison, where Oleg is currently detained, but the regime there is really very strict. I was told that I wasn’t permitted to even pass a parcel for him. The only one means of communication was the post. All of it made a very hard and depressive impression o n m e”.

[ 265 ] The officials in Yakutia assure that Sentsov has no complaints: www.pravda.com.ua, 13 April 2016 “Representatives of the Public monitoring committee of Yakutia examined conditions of detention of Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, who serves his sentence in remand prison 1 in Yakutia, being falsely accused. ‘Ukrinform’ had it from the head of the Public monito­ ring committee of Yakutia Valentina Kirillina. ‘Members of our commission visited Oleg Sentsov in prison. They met him in person. They also examined condi­ tions of his detention. Everything is fine there. Ole has no complaints, including his health,’ Kirillina said. But unfortunately, she refused to tell the date of the latest visit and the names of the representatives of the Public monitoring committee of Yakutia, who visited Ukrainian political prisoner there. In addition to that, Kirillina asked Ukrainian media not to bother her so often”.

Vasyl Stepanov: A movie critic “I cannot talk about all, but, taking into consideration my knowledge of Oleg, I could never even imagine that this person could be a terrorist. And the case itself is so unclear and complicated that one would definitely start to suspect that it is simply fabricated. It is enough to just read the court hearings’ notes of proceedings or to look how they were happening. All of it looks quite strange. When the situation gets simplified, when it gets schematic and becomes the headlines of the main state mass media, people start to believe it. There is a very Russian in

[ 266 ] nature point of view that they would never ever put in prison someone innocent. The idea of assumption of innocence isn’t culturally close or relatable to Russian mentality. And it’s quite an old story”.

Olga Zhurzhenko: A movie producer “I am sure that he will be back. It is unclear though when it will happen and in what condition Oleg will be after his release. Most probably, something of importance will happen, and ‘kingling Putin’ will pardon him. But I’m sure he will not spend twenty years in prison. The most important thing is that the less he will spend there the more is the possibility that he will come back to us the same person. Imprisonment changes human personality a lot. Probably, they would retreat, but when everything went that far, when there was such a strong public response, they understood that they need to go all the way. Now such a demonstration of weakness would draw too much attention and would cause unneeded discussions. As for Putin, he doesn’t care. He has other concerns. He has to somehow continue holding such an enormous, gigantic territory in the information vacuum, where it stays now. He would not care about the fate of several people. Russians, who are constantly scared, are much more interesting for Putin. They are used to be scared all the time. That period of freedom that was fifteen years ago is remembered by the majority of Russians with horror. They had to take decisions themselves, they had to take responsibility. It was too much for the likes of them. It is always easier to live knowing that

[ 267 ] a ‘king’ would decide everything for you, that one cannot criticize Lenin and the party, because they will come for you… This scheme of living is quite comfortable and simple, and even if Putin will leave, and if someone else would replace him, it is highly unlikely that something would really change. It’s a problem of several generations, of their mentality and their state of mind. If the situation will remain the same, Russia has no future”.

Gennadiy Afanasyev: “I found out about Oleg Sentsov and about his difficult life path only after I came back from detention. I saw a real hero in this person, a hero who was ready to go through thick and thin till the end. When I was in prison, I had lots of time to ponder upon many things, to realize the important worldview attitudes and to determine my life stance. Oleg didn’t have time to ponder upon things like that. He knew from the very beginning what would happen with him. This school of Maidan, school of the Revolution of Dignity, which he passed, left its mark on his personality. I remember well his speeches during those Russian trials, where he was accused of some absurd things. Once there was even a story that someone was planning to bring an atomic charge for Oleg so that he could plant it in the building of Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) of the Republic of Crimea in order to murder the local members of parliament. Answering that, he said that he won’t be surprised if soon they would find his fingerprints on some nuclear bomb as well. Oleg always told people not to be scared. But it makes absolutely no sense after what happened. Of course, he addressed Russians, he called on them to change.

[ 268 ] Even when Oleg was already in detention, he often stressed that he didn’t want to be released at any cost. He said that he considered himself a weapon in the hands of Ukraine against Russian aggression and against Putin. It deserves respect. He was sentenced to twenty years in prison, for nothing. There were no terrorist attacks, no victims. That’s why we have to fight for this person with all the means available, we have to constantly remind about him”.

The absurdity of charges against Oleg Sentsov is directly connected with the absurd situation on the territory of the occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Even if in some parallel world Sentsov really wanted to set something on fire or to plant a bomb somewhere, qualification of these actions as “terrorism” would cause serious concerns even there. It would rather be closer to “sabotage, guerrilla activities on the territory occupied by the enemy” than to the “terrorism”. One should not forget that the entire trial process, despite its level of transparency and justice, is illegal per se, as, in accordance with the international law, Russian Federation has absolutely no legitimate right to convict and judge Ukrainian citizens for the activities conducted on the territory of Ukraine, especially to kidnap them and to forcibly transport them to another country. Of course, Russians often appeal to the “fact” that at that moment Crimea has already “joined” Russia, but the problem is that nobody except Russia acknowledges this annexation as a legitimate act. It is necessary to always remember about this important aspect, as the words

[ 269 ] “joining” and “occupation” aren’t the synonyms, so the legal consequences of them aren’t identical either. In other words, when we start considering Oleg Sentsov’s trial by the Russian court as a real court process, we only conduct a mysterious mental experiment, trying to look at the situation from the point of view of Russian “mirror- world”, where there are their own laws and rules and where it is possible to ignore international law and sovereignty of the neighboring countries. All of it reminds of the famous “1984” novel by George Orwell, where there was a world, where truth depended exclusively on the will of the Party and of the Big Brother. The thesis “Oceania was always at war with Eastasia” can be easily converted into “Oceania was always at war with Eurasia”. It’s almost as easy as to say something like “Crimea was always Ukrainian” or “Crimea was always R u s s i a n”. That’s why there is no wonder that Oleg immediately took a decision not to play according to their rules, in their coordinates system, but to stay in the reality.

Oleg Sentsov in Lefortovo court: “I don’t know, has the Russian State Duma adopted a law that forbids laughing in the circus? It can definitely do that. But I cannot understand why you take everything happening here so serious, with such serious faces. This is a show. I don’t want to repeat myself and state my innocence, I will not say now that all of it is fabricated and falsified, that all of it is politically motivated, and I will not tell now that various influence methods and pressure have been used on

[ 270 ] me. I have already told about it many times, so there’s no need to repeat it again. The investigation goes well, they’ve written eighteen volumes already. The investigators work good, I am very glad for them. From the latest stories that could be found there in my case is that I wanted to launch a rocket with radioactive filling at Verkhovna Rada of Crimea. I am waiting with no patience when they will find this rocket with the pictures of me with this rocket on the background and with my fingerprints on it. Just so it would look nice. Investigative bodies, law enforcement officials are busy doing so insane and ridiculous things, yet for four months already they cannot satisfy my request and find the operative officers who were beating and torturing me. The investigators present here know these people’s faces, they know them personally, but it’s impossible to find and catch them. It’s like trying to catch yourself, it’s simply unreal. One can simply look into the flush toilet and ask a question: “Who tortured Sentsov?”, and it will be with the same luck. Because there will be no answer. There’s no point in wasting our time for these questions. Same as there’s no point in wasting time on the questions like what the Pskov paratroopers were doing near Donetsk and what did they die for. And now your country is trying to hide them as far as possible. I don’t know, I just want to ask you. What about you, the governmental officials? Do you really think that the system built on total lies would stand forever? Even your chiefs, running along the sinking ship’s deck and blowing smoke and pretending that nothing is happening and that

[ 271 ] everything is fine, even they don’t understand that this ship is sinking, maybe slowly, but still, it is sinking. That’s why I would like to wish Russia to leave this nightmare as soon as possible and to finally become a free country. As for those, who don’t have a quiet conscience, they can start learning how to write the words ‘purging’ and ‘lustration’ correct. I’m done”.

Danylo Vradiy: A close friend of Oleg Sentsov “It seems to me that it is kind of beneficial for both Russia and Ukraine to promote this story. Ukraine uses Oleg to demonstrate how unjust and unlawful Russian Federation acts and how it oppresses Ukrainian heroes. At the same time, Russia is trying to prove that there were Ukrainian terrorists in Crimea. Both sides actually took care to set the wheels in motion in this story and to promote it to the enormous extent. Yet the court is over, and everything looks quiet for now. Oleg is mentioned not as often as before. And it’s under­ standable, as Russian Federation has achieved its goals and put his case into cold storage. When they will need it again, they will take it out. It’s just the same with Ukraine. When we would need to show that ‘we are fighting’, then it would be okay to use his name again. Oleg turned out to be in the midst of the political games. Was he just an ordinary guy, his case would be closed in silence, and everybody would forget about it. But now he is such a figure that now all the statements and pleas of politicians or significant people expressing certain position would lead to nothing unless some agreements on the

[ 272 ] highest levels would be reached. What exactly we need to do to help Oleg come back, I don’t really know. All we can do now is to support him morally and to help his family. I understood from the very beginning that it will be quite a long process, and it means that we don’t have to waste our nerves and energy, but we need to prepare and to just survive it. Of course, I want that this situation with Oleg would be resolved as soon as possible. I have no idea how it could possibly happen, but I really hope that the sides would reach an agreement, and he will come back, and this page of his life would stay in the past. The sentence Oleg received is too long, and if he won’t be released earlier than his term would end, than I’m afraid Oleg will return a completely different person. Prison changes people a lot”.

Dmytro Dinze: “The investigation officials made us sign an agreement on non-disclosure of secrecy of the preliminary investigation. During a year we were unable to present the society with the adequate information so that the people could make their own opinions regarding this case. Only when the court started, we got an opportunity to show the absurdity of the entire process and discrepancy of the available evidence. The journalists, who really covered the process without any subjective estimations and opinions, also contributed a lot, same as the people who made themselves familiar with Oleg’s story and made their own conclusions. Due to the significant splash in the media, everybody could understand that this case was fabricated. The entire world was able to see another side of the Russian justice sys­

[ 273 ] tem and to understand the abilities of the Russian FSB, who create those terrorism cases. Again, due to the testi­monies, it became evident that FSB officials can use tortures, and nobody is actually immune from it. People just find themselves beyond the law, and they can experience any unjust and illegal treatment. Media splash actually didn’t affect the case itself that much, but it was addressing the international community that followed the process on many levels. European Human Rights Court has received an official complaint regarding this case, and we expect this complaint to be taken into consideration and studied in the nearest future. I really hope that the European Court would leap to a conclusion that everything that happened in this case in Russia was absolutely illegal and that the procedure itself and Oleg’s rights have been brutally violated. There is a constitutional mechanism in Russian Fede­ ra­tion that allows not taking the decisions of the European Human Rights Court into consideration. Basically, any de­ci­sion could be vetoed and blocked by the Russian Consti­­tutional Court on the order of the Ministry of Justice or General Prosecution. Usually, it applies to the cases when these decisions interfere with the official state policies, sove­reignty or any other state issues. But at the same time, if the decision would apply to a certain case, to the certain epi­sodes regarding Oleg Sentsov, and when such a decision would be blocked, then the international community will get another confirmation of the fact that Russia is not a state governed by the rule of law. But I still hope that everything will be fine.

[ 274 ] If to consider any possible ways to release Oleg that are available at the moment, then, first of all, we would need to pay attention to a diplomatic mechanism that could work with the prisoner exchange. Another possible way is to serve half of the prison term and then try to get released upon the conditions of the premature release. But the case is that it doesn’t really work anymore with the terrorist cases, so usually, they serve their terms until the end. That’s why I think that exchange is the most realistic of the variants available to us. The issues of these exchanges are being usually resolved somewhere in the inner circles of power. We are defendants only, and we usually receive no information about it, so all the activities in this direction weigh on the conscience of those responsible for the issue. Russian authorities see Ukrainian political prisoners as a collateral damage, a political currency. If Russia will need to get some political preferences, then they will use this currency. Basically, these people became the trade objects. It is evident that Russian authorities would prefer to leave these “nest cards” for the netter occasions. The question is when this time will come and what will be the situation they will decide for us this “currency” in”.

Natalya Kaplan: “At the beginning, I really believed that all of it will end quite soon. When Russians started to release some of the prisoners, I had a feeling that Oleg would be also released with this wave. Now I don’t have this feeling anymore. We’ve lost all the courts in Russia. Nothing depends on the lawyers now, sadly. Everything depends on the politicians only now, but

[ 275 ] I can’t see any movement. Probably, there are still negotiations being held, yet it is not known to me”. In March 2016 the Supreme Court of Russian Federation received an appeal on the question of law of the sentence in the case of the film director Oleg Sentsov and of the civil activist Oleksandr Kolchenko. But it was known in June that the judge took a decision to decline the appeal and case transfer for the further investigation.

Supreme Court refused to consider a case of Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov: zona.media, 1 June 2016, 12:36 “Russian Supreme Court refused to consider a court sentence in the case of the Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, sentenced to twenty years in high-security prison in the case of the ‘Crimean terrorists’, reports ‘RIA Novosti’ referring to the Supreme Court press service. ‘The judge took a decision to refuse to transfer of the case and court appeal for consideration by the court of cassations,’ they said in the court. Human rights ombudsman and the defendants Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko, sentenced to ten years in prison, addressed the court with the cassation appeals and pledges to change the court sentence. Earlier Ministry of Justice of Ukraine addressed Russian authorities with the demand to hand Ukrainian citizens Oleg Sentsov, Gennadiy Afanasyev, Oleksandr Kolchenko, and Yuriy Soloshenko to the Ukrainian side. According to the defense team of Sentsov and Kolchenko, in April they filled in all the necessary documents, yet the decision about the transfer is still not taken.

[ 276 ] In August 2015 Ukrainian movie director Oleg Sentsov was charged with the case of the ‘Crimean terrorists’ and sentenced to twenty years in high-security prison. Sentsov was accused of establishing of the terrorist group, carrying out of two terrorist attacks, preparation for launching of two other terrorist attacks and of two episodes of illegal possession of weapons and explosive substances and devices (Part 1 of the Article 205.4 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation, Part 1 of the Article 30 and Paragraph ‘a’ of the Part 2 of the Article 205 of the Criminal Code, part 3 of the Article 222 of the Criminal Code).

Another defendant in the case of the ‘Crimean terrorists’ Oleksandr Kolchenko was sentenced by the court to ten years in high-security prison”. About the support

[ ■ ]

Oleg Sentsov’s arrest immediately drew the attention of the international community. It is hard to say what Russian authorities reckoned upon when they decided to hold captive and to pass judgment upon a movie director, who is quite famous both in Ukrainian and in the international filmmaking community.

A female activist with the poster in support of Oleg near Rostov District Military Court

[ 278 ] They had to understand that such a precedent would have an international resonance and would only deteriorate an image of Russian Federation and of Russian President Vladimir Putin personally in the eyes of the entire world, and this image was already not the best. It is very hard to explain the logic of the actions of this country. Sometimes its absurdity reaches the level of unbelievable extremes, destroying the lives of dozens and hundreds of people, who were unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Various initiatives in support of Oleg Sentsov started in the first days after his arrest. The people who were close to him, Automaidan activists, mass media and just the people who cared about him and his destiny started to ring alarm: Russia dispatches people of Crimea who disagree with Russian policies. Small protests and vigils would be held near Russian embassies on a regular basis. Ukrainian state also wouldn’t stand aside. On 15 May 2014 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine published an official note of protest regarding detention of the Ukrainian movie director, “strongly condemning” actions of Russian Fede­ration and demanding to release Oleg Sentsov immediately.

A comment of the Department of the Information Policies of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine on arrest and detention of Ukrainian movies director Oleg Sentsov in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea by the Russian intelligence services: “We are deeply concerned with the information about the detention of the famous Ukrainian movie director Oleg

[ 279 ] Sentsov, carried out in the city of Sevastopol by the officials of the FSB of Russian Federation. We resolutely condemn a blatant violation of Ukrainian law by the Russian security services in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, which is an integral part of Ukraine. Accusations, incriminated by the Russian FSB to the internationally known Ukrainian movie director, are absurd and lack common sense. They are yet another evidence of the fact that all the actions of Kremlin are being ruled by hysteria bordering hatred to everything Ukrainian, including Ukrainian language, history, culture, and arts. We demand that Russian government release Oleg Sentsov immediately and stop brutal violation of the rights and freedoms of the citizens of Ukraine residing on the territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, currently occupied by Russian Federation”.

An international cinematography community joined the story around Oleg Sentsov quite soon. During the 67th International Cannes Film Festival, held from 14 to 25 May 2014, all the stands were covered with the posters with the pictures of the Ukrainian film director, while numerous artists and influential figures in filmmaking industry started making statements in support of Oleg Sentsov. This campaign continued in the following years too. Within the framework of the “Directors Fortnight,” the Guild of the French filmmakers and European Film Academy would organize a ten-day solidarity effort when a photograph of Oleg Sentsov with the inscription “Freedom to Oleg Sentsov” would be shown before every one of over the fifty scheduled film screenings.

[ 280 ] On 15 September Oleg Sentsov would be invited to become an honorary and symbolic member of the jury during the 62nd International Film Festival in San- Sebastian, where a special empty chair would be allocated for the imprisoned Ukrainian film director. The same effort initiative would take place during the International Film Festival in Venice as well. On the other side, Russian filmmakers and artists would also express their outrage regarding the situation with Oleg’s detention. Apart from the numerous statements made by the film directors and artists, on 19 May Union of the Cinematographers and of the Professional Cinematographic Groups and Organizations of Russian Federation would send an open letter to the Federal Security Service of Russian Federation demanding to immediately release Oleg Sentsov.

An address to the Federal Security Service regarding the arrest of the movie director Oleg Sentsov: “We found out from the press materials about the arrest of the film director Oleg Sentsov, which took place on 11 May 2014 in Simferopol. Oleg Sentsov is famous and well- known among the Ukrainian and Russian filmmakers thanks to his debut film Gamer that participated in the official competition programme of the International Film Festival in Rotterdam in 2011. This film gained acceptance and was acknowledged in many countries and participated in the numerous international film festivals, including the film festivals held in Russia. In 2012 a new project of Oleg Sentsov Rhino has won a prize for the best pitching during the International Film Festival in

[ 281 ] Odessa. It was planned that Russian actors and filmmakers from other fields would also take part in filming. Arrest and detention of Oleg Sentsov without lodging of charges during an entire week has already caused serious damage to the image of our country on the international arena. Letters demanding the release of Oleg Sentsov are being signed and published by the prominent cinematography figures of the world in the biggest international and business publications and issues. We consider it necessary to make you familiar with the point of view of the Union of the Cinematographers and of the Professional Cinematographic Groups and Organizations of Russian Federation about the inadmissibility of such actions and about the damage these actions cause to the image of our country. We demand an immediate release of the film director Oleg Sentsov. Head of the Cinema Union, Andrey Proshkin”.

This is not the first time when Russian Cinema Union supports Ukraine and Ukrainians. In March 2014 169 members of the Union have signed a letter in support of their colleagues in Ukraine against the military intervention of Russian Federation in Ukraine. Kremlin and Russian state authorities have less influence on this organization than on the “Union of the Cinematographers of Russia” led by Nikita Mikhalkov. That’s why they can allow themselves from time to time to make statements like this and to express their true position of solidarity. There are still people in the Russian filmmaking community, who value principles more than the imperial ambitions.

[ 282 ] Vitaly Mansky: A documentary film director “I don’t really understand why they continue holding Oleg in detention. I generally don’t understand anything about the Russian authorities. It’s like a question without an answer. Why are these people still in power? Why do they still torture Russia with their presence? There are really no answers to these questions. Madness is madness. It’s an anomaly. It is beyond the frameworks of the common sense that allows to logically explain the things and the actions. Maybe there is some logic there. I don’t know. Maybe, they are trying to show this way, who is the master here. However, as for me, they aren’t the masters there for quite a long time already. I really don’t think that somewhere in the Presidential Administration, in its inner circles, the people walk and discuss destiny of Oleg Sentsov. Unfortunately, but it is what it is. All of them are convinced that they are making ‘big politics’, they compete with the size and number of territories, islands and peninsulas. They are trying to leave their names in history. Of course, these people do have chances to remain in history, yet the question is: how would they be remembered? If only they would really think about what they are doing with the life and destiny of a certain person, then maybe this situation could be resolved somehow. But one person is not a matter for discussions for them if they are making out various insane projects, such as ‘Novorossia’, with enlargement and widening of borders up to Moldova. The destiny of one filmmaker is a too tiny and insigni­ ficant matter for them.

[ 283 ] Putin is absolutely detached from the reality. He is like in an open space. His communication sessions with the reality are so short that nobody even has time to inform him properly on the real state of affairs. As for the Union of the Russian cinematographers, there is even no internal solidarity there. We have two unions of cinematographers and two national cinematographic prizes. Some fake festivals in our country receive huge funding from the state budget, while the rest either leave the country and immigrate somewhere or stay here, but it feels like ‘state of emergency’. Of course, it is worth mentioning that there were, there are there always will be honest and open people in Russia, despite the political regimes existing on the territory of this country. Numbers of these honest people could fall during the hardest and darkest times, but there are definitely those who feel ashamed now because of what is happening to Oleg Sentsov. On another hand though, I remember, when they proclaimed Oleg’s sentence in Rostov, there was another film festival happening at the same time in the city. Filmmakers, who attended that festival, walked on the red carpets there, and none of them came to the neighboring building to support their colleague, and they also didn’t declare their position during the festival. Everything is very different from Russia. I wouldn’t like to see some kind of an ‘ideological movie’ from Oleg after all he went through, as movies like this rarely feel real and natural. For sure, ‘Battleship Potemkin’ is an absolute genius and prominent film, but as a result films like that never lead to something good. The real cinema enriches our lives, making us wiser and stronger.

[ 284 ] I wouldn’t like to see it happening if Oleg would be­­come ahead of the Union of the cinematographers of Ukraine and finally turned into Ukrainian Nikita Mikhalkov. God forbid! I really want that he would simply continue creating good movies”.

Sentsov received a National Shevchenko Prize: ua.krymr.com, 3 March 2016 “President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko awarded Ukrai­nian film director Oleg Sentsov, illegally detained and charged in Russia, with the National Taras Shevchenko Prize in the field of cinematography. Setsov’s candidacy was promoted by the Union of the Journalists of Ukraine with his filmsGamer and Rhino. ‘The National Prize is a state award. And it is important to modernize it into a procedure that would allow strengthening trust to the competition so that the entire society would pay attention to the creative works nominated for the National Prize competition. On the basis thereof, I formed a working group with my instructions, and this group offered the ideas about the new transparent and democratic way of the competitive selection of the candidates for the most important and prestigious Prize in the country,’ President Petro Poroshenko said in his greeting speech”.

The National Taras Shevchenko Prize is being awarded in several categories, including “Literature”, “Literary and Arts Studies”, “Journalism and Opinion Journalism”, “Cinematography”, “Music Art”, “Theatre Art”, “Performance

[ 285 ] and Entertainment Art”, “Folk and Decorative Applied Arts” and “Visual Arts”. However, not more than five national prizes are being awarded every year (not more than one prize in each of the categories). Awarding Oleg Sentsov with the National Taras Shev­ chenko Prize at the moment, when he is detained in the Russian prison, was probably one of the least understandable and most discrediting steps that could be made by the Ukrainian officials regarding Crimean film director. The political motivation for such a decision is obvious to anybody, who followed Oleg’s case during the recent years. Even if to distance ourselves from the doubtful and quite controversial status of this award in the artistic circles, even if to forget about the yearly scandals following the decisions of the Shevchenko Prize Committee, this award really looks like a strange favour with the retrospective effort. It is interesting, where the National Shevchenko Prize was when Oleg was receiving awards during the international festivals and pitching events a couple of years before. It turns out that one should at least get convicted and imprisoned in this country in order to receive at least a little bit of attention from the main artistic award of the country. The only one positive aspect of this award is a financial part of the prize. These costs would definitely help Oleg and his family. But I have doubts that the National Shevchenko Prize Committee had that in mind when it took a decision to award Oleg Sentsov with this prize.

[ 286 ] Aleksey Medvedev: A film critic, organizer of the “Two in One” film festival “One can still make some individual statements in Russia, to give an interview, to share and promote something on Facebook and to even publish the articles. I was preparing some materials for the magazine Séance. I wouldn’t like to exaggerate the meaning of these articles, but in any case, I had an opportunity to express my opinion. But at the same time, it is almost impossible to express some kind of collective solidarity here. For instance, there are some festivals taking place in Russia, and I participate in their organization as well, but I understand that if now, during the festival opening ceremony, they would hear from me a statement dedicated

[ 287 ] to Oleg Sentsov, this festival would be not just closed, but it would never receive state financing the next year. That’s why it’s a dilemma that needs to be resolved somehow. It seems that we managed to somehow resolve it during the Sakhalin Film Festival. It was being held right in the time when Oleg received his sentence. We told this story to all the jury members. Thanks to that the statements and publications appeared in Guardian and in other Western media. The head of the jury Mohsen Makhmalbaf dedicated to Oleg the prize he was awarded at the Venice Film Festival. Of course, all of it is just little things. There were quite a lot of these protests, but they didn’t bring any particular results, to be honest. But from another had, we never know which factor would play a crucial role here. If Oleg would be released, there would be definitely a reason, so these protests and initiatives could become that drop of water wearing away a stone. We tried to make everything we could, but it is clear that one should never overestimate these things”.

Iranian movie director Mohsen Makhmalbaf dedicated his Robert Bresson Award to the detained Ukrainian filmmaker Oleg Sentsov: www.screendaily.com, 7 September 2015 “The prize was awarded today in the morning (on 7 September) during the Venice Film Festival by the fund Fondazione ente dello Spettacolo (FedS) and by the cinema theatre Rivista del Cinematografo in recognition of the ‘film director, who gave a testimony about a difficult path to the spiritual search for the sense of life’.” This award was established in 1999 and since that time it was received by many prominent filmmakers, among them

[ 288 ] Manoel de Oliveira, Aleksandr Sokurov, Ken Loach, and Wim Wenders. Makhmalbaf’s latest film “The President” was demon­ strated during the last year Venice Film Festival. Giving a speech during the ScreenDaily on the eve of the award ceremony, Mr. Makhmalbaf stated that he heard about Oleg Sentsov’s story from Aleksey Medvedev, a director of the film festival held in Far Eastern Sakhalin, where he was a jury head last month. “In the latest years we’ve heard many statements from the Russian leaders that Russia has finally found its independent voice and is ready to play an important role on the international arena,” Makhmalbaf said in his statement. “Of course, one can only support these claims, but it is also very important to remember that national renaissance is impossible to have on the foundation of lies and p r o p a g a n d a”. “Even one destroyed life and twenty-year prison term for a thirty-nine-year-old filmmaker probably means one of the most violent and wicked individual punishments, yet it could result in a bigger punishment and revenge that could affect the entire country”.

“Path to the better future could start only from the act of forgiveness and benevolence, from mercifulness and understanding. Oleg Sentsov has to create the new films instead of counting years in prison”.

“The agreements were broken” Director of the festival Medvedev, who was familiar with Sentsov after the debut screening of his first film

[ 289 ] Gamer during the International Film Festival “One in Two”, held in Moscow in 2011, visited Oleg in Crimea in March 2014, when the final decision about the annexation of the peninsula was already taken in Russia. “No matter what you think about the annexation of Crimea, you have no other choice except admitting that numerous international laws, regulations, norms, and agreements were violated by this act, “ Medvedev said. “In this situation, a wish of Ukrainian (and not only Ukrainian) citizens to protest is quite understandable and totally justifiable”. “Against the background of such atrocious crimes, ac­ cusations of these young men of terrorism, their torturing, putting them in prison and destroying their lives for the alleged setting on fire of some doors with the damages of about 500 dollars is the most cynical act of lie of Putin’s regime”. “If it won’t be repaired and changed, Russia would eventually lose a chance to come back to the peaceful way, to the path of the normal democratic development”.

Political persecutions Oleg Sentsov is also supported by his Armenian colleague Aram Shahbazyan, whose film “Muscovite, my love” has won the Audience Award during the Sakhalin Film Festival this year. Shahbazyan said: “A film director cannot stay at home when there are a military conflict and tension in his country. He must go to the streets and be with his people. Oleg Sentsov is not a criminal, he is an honest artist and a citizen, and, in my opinion, he is being persecuted due to the political reasons.

[ 290 ] Political repressions against an artist signal a crisis of democracy in the country. If Russia really wants to overcome this crisis, it should give the freedom of expression to the young filmmakers,” Shahbazyan stated. Grand Prix of the Sakhalin Film Festival was awarded to the Turkish film “Mustang”, which was screened in Venice within the framework of the festival programme “Lux Film Prize 2015”.

Protest of the European filmmakers Makhmalbaf’s solidarity act happened a day after Fede­ ration of European Filmmakers (FERA), consisting of twenty thousand of movies directors from twenty-nine countries, sent a protest letter to the Ambassador of Russian Federation in the European Union demanding to “immediately free Oleg Sentsov”. FERA Executive Committee, led by Dan Klifton, wrote in its letter that it was clear that “the entire court process was politically motivated and aimed against the Ukrainian artist, who was determined to exercise his legal right against Russian actions and illegal occupation of Crimea”. On 10 June 2014 Russian President Vladimir Putin and other high state officials of Russian Federation received an open letter from the European Film Academy containing very clear demands, among them the following: — To ensure Oleg Sentsov’s safety; — To reveal his whereabouts; — To present Oleg with the clear charges or to release him, after his innocence will be proven; — To initiate a full and unbiased investigation regar­ ding the FSB officers involved in the atrocities against Oleg

[ 291 ] Sentsov and to hold accountable those responsible for such an outrageous conduct. Many famous European filmmakers, film producers, and artists have signed this open letter, among them Pedro Almodovar, Aki Kaurismäki, Daniel Olbruchski, Volker Schlöndorff, Bela Tarr, Bertrand Tavernier, Andrzej Wajda, Wim Wenders, and Krzysztof Zanussi. On 29 June 2014, during the closing ceremony of the 36th Moscow International Film Festival head of the Filmmakers Union of Ukraine Sergiy Trymbach would read a similar statement, supported even by Nikita Mikhalkov: “I really hope that Sergiy Trymbach was heard today, and I also hope that I will be heard too. I would like to join to the statement of the representative of the Filmmakers Union of Ukraine and ask to release Oleg Sentsov”. It became a big surprise for many, as Mikhalkov’s relation­ ­ ship with the current Russian government is very well known, same as the status he enjoys in the Kremlin environment. Head of the Filmmakers Union of Russian Federation, President of Russian Culture Fund, Full member of the Academy of the humanitarian sciences and President of the Moscow International Film Festival – Mikhalkov is technically an “emperor” of Russian cinematography and a “Putin’s man” in this field. He is known for his radical imperial views and devoted service to the current Russian authorities. In 2011 he even attempted to engage in the “big politics” and declared his wish to run for the President of Russia, but he changed his mind quite quickly back then. During the election, he was present as an official representative of the presidential candidate Vladimir Putin and even took part in the debates instead of Mr. Putin.

[ 292 ] On 31 August 2015 Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) has banned Nikita Mikhalkov from visiting Ukraine for five years, qualifying him as an artist who poses threat to Ukrainian national security.

Request of the National Filmmakers Union of Ukraine to the Federal Security Service of Russia Regarding detention of the filmmaker Oleg Sentsov “13 may 2014, No. 119 Federal Security Service Of Russian Federation FSB of Russia in the city of Simferopol

We are addressing you to inquire about the reasons of detention of Ukrainian filmmaker Oleg Sentsov happened in the city of Simferopol in the evening of 11 May 2014 and carried out by the Federal Security Services representatives. Oleg Sentsov is a talented filmmaker, whose creative work was appreciated and acknowledged by both the audience and the specialists in the field during the prestigio­ us international film festivals held in Germany, the Nether­lands, Ukraine and also in Russia, including the 10th International Film Festival “Spirit of Fire” in Khanty-Mansiysk, where his film Gamer was awarded an honorary prize. Ukrainian filmmakers are deeply concerned with the detention of Oleg Sentsov and ask to explain the reasons for his arrest and holding him in custody. We hope that our colleague will be released as soon and as quick as possible. Head of the National Filmmakers Union of Ukraine Sergiy Trymbach”.

[ 293 ] Vasyl Stepanov: A movie critic “All the publications made about Oleg Sentsov in Séance magazine are rather an attempt to talk about him as an artist, as a movie director, as after the beginning of the trial lots of people were trying to say that Sentsov wasn’t a filmmaker and that he didn’t make a single good movie. People even kept forgetting about the assumption of innocence. One can say that there is quite a strong feeling of solidarity regarding Oleg’s case formed within the Russian filmmaking community because even I can’t remember something like that. There were campaigns to support the Museum of Cinema, there were lots of various events, but it has never happened before when the people having diametrically opposed views would step up for the mutual cause together and would do that so meaningfully and expressively. The story of Oleg Sentsov touched and affected everybody, from Nikita Mikhalkov to his opponents. On one hand, it was very pleasant to follow it, but on another hand, it proved yet again that people’s voices decide and mean nothing in this country. One simply couldn’t care less. When Mikhalkov goes on the stage and tells that he hopes Oleg Sentsov will be released soon, it’s a very significant event. I don’t even talk about professional issues and magazines, such as Séance or “Art of Movies”, as it is probably easier not to pay attention to their publications. Yet there are still certain central powers and figures in Russian culture too, and they voiced their position. And again, as I said before, it is another evidence that any civilian and

[ 294 ] human rights activities in Russia make absolutely no sense if it interferes with the interests of people in power”.

Solidarity experience. Russian filmmakers supporting Oleg Sentsov: seance.ru, 21 May 2014 “Editors’ office, Konstantin Shavlovsky: On 11 May I’ve read on the social media that Oleg Sentsov was arrested by the FSB officials in Simferopol. At about four o’clock in the morning he called one of his friends, journalist Katerina Sergatskova, and informed her about his detention, and after that, any connection with him was cut. I’ve read the post about it just like anybody, who would have an account on the social media and would check out the newsfeed from time to time. Then I’ve seen it once again. And then again. And that was the moment when it actually dawned on me what it was about. The Russian FSB officers have arrested Ukrainian film director in the night, and for over twenty-four hours there is no connection with him. I made a search request “Oleg Sentsov” on Google, and then I saw that news portals didn’t have any news yet. I wrote to Katerina Sergatskova. I didn’t know her back then. I just wanted to know from her what was happening there. But nobody knew anything. Katya sent me to Oleg’s wife and to the second film director working together with Oleg Sentsov. Before these unfortunate Crimean events, they’ve been working on preparing the new project called Rhino, telling a story of the children from the 90s generation. I haven’t read the script, but at that point of

[ 295 ] time, I’ve already seen the first feature-length film of Oleg Sentsov, Gamer, which was a good quality debut movie created by Oleg without any preparation and previous filmmaking background and with his own financing. In Simferopol, Oleg had his own computer club, and this club actually became an investor and, in some sense, a co-author of the screenplay of his first film. It’s a film-promise with the new characters living in the new times. The film of Ukrainian debut director was chosen for screening during the International Film Festival in Rotterdam, then Oleg traveled to Khanty-Mansiysk with this movie, in order to attend the International Film Debuts Festival there. He received a critics’ award. All of it was just the news from his previous life. From his pre-war life. As for the news from the current reality, they are the following: one day laters state-appointed lawyer contacted Oleg’s family. Oleg’s family and friends knew from this lawyer that Oleg Sentsov was facing terrible “terrorism charges”, while he himself was expected to be conveyed to Moscow “Lefortovo” prison. Recalling a timeless and always relevant song by Vladimir Vysotsky, I opened the Criminal Code of Russian Federation. From five to ten years in prison. From eight to ten years in prison. Oleg Sentsov is thirty-six-year old2. He has two kids. A nine-year-old autistic son and a thirteen-year-old daughter. He was raising them alone lately. Preparations to the filming are currently suspended. There were several subsidies allocated for the film production.

2 At that point of time.

[ 296 ] Oleg attended many international pitching sessions and events and has won them. And now everybody probably thought: what if this Oleg Sentsov is really a terrorist? It doesn’t matter that he is a movie director! It doesn’t really contradict each other! Well, maybe it doesn’t. But! While we live here according to the time of peace laws, while we write and read texts and articles, while we produce the movies, while we ponder upon the politics and discuss it, there, where Sentsov was taken from and brought to Moscow, the events unfold with different speed and according to a different logic. Everybody can suddenly become a hostage and a victim of that different, not peaceful logic, be that a civilian activist, an intellectual, a human rights activist, a film director and any other person who lives and has feelings. Oleg Sentsov has to live in a peaceful environment and to make movies. Actually, there are not so many film directors nowadays, who make the movies in the Russian language. And who make the good, high-quality movies. The movies that call tell the audience a story and something new and important about each of us. I think, there are no film directors like this in Crimea. There was Oleg Sentsov there. But now he is in prison. Our primary task is to make everything possible to help him return to his work, to filmmaking, and to his family. When I say “our task”, I also mean Russian filmmaking community, regardless of their views and positions. Professional solidarity during all the major conflicts of the XX century was always higher and more important than the political one. Mykhaylo Trofimenkov, for example, has written a wonderful material about the French “left-wing” filmmakers and intellectuals,

[ 297 ] who helped their ideological opponents and supported them after the liberation of Paris. This article is available in our “French” issue of the magazine. I really recommend reading it. And it’s worth mentioning that the situation in post-war France was worse and scarier than Russian-Ukrainian reality in the spring of 2014. In all the senses. Our Russian filmmaking community, unfortunately, has rich experience of separation and confrontation. It’s an issue with quite a long history: there are two filmmakers unions, there are also two film academies. We even have two official bodies for the allocation and distribution of state funds. What we really lack is some solidarity experience. Solidarity is a scarcity in our creative environment. What exactly can we do to help? First of all, we have to demand that the investigation and the trial for Oleg were as transparent and unbiased as possible. We have to know what is happening to him, what are his detention conditions, what are the charges he is facing. Now Sentsov’s friends also need help in gathering money to pay for the lawyer’s work. Payment details and all the necessary information for those who would like to help could be found here”.

Séance magazine publishes quotes and statements of Russian filmmakers about Oleg Sentsov:

Aleksandr Sokurov: “Oleg Sentsov is a modern person, he’s a man of today. He is a film director with the hypersensitive, very sharp social sensitivity. And his films prove it. That’s why it’s no wonder that he became so interested in this complicated and controversial social situation. His only guilt is that he turned out to be somehow involved in some quite radical events, and

[ 298 ] it is unusual that a person of his age and his social status could be involved in this kind of events. But maybe he just didn’t have the right to stand aside. Our task is to protect the artists and the intellectuals with the powers and means available to us, as these artists always could find themselves dealing with difficult circumstances, and a person who is involved in these events is not always capable of understanding it. Is it his fault that the radical political parties and movements in his country flourished right during his artistic development? The cinematography in the entire world demonstrates the righteousness of the position and behaviour of the film directors and artists, who choose to become actively engaged in this controversial modern life. I would like to see the next film by this director. I am really waiting for this film. And I want him to have an opportunity to create his films in Crimea, in Kyiv, in Lviv, in Donbas, in Petersburg, in Warsaw… Everywhere, where an artistic approach to the understanding of the complicated and often controversial contemporary events could be in demand”.

Andriy Plakhov: “Those who accuse Oleg Sentsov of anti-Russian extre­­mism have to watch his filmGamer , created in the international, predominantly Russian-speaking Simferopol. Its events unfold in the world of the young computer games fans and show the feeling of delusiveness and ephemerality of existence in a small provincial city. A young min charac­ter in this film is dreaming about leaving this city, and he even succeeds in it. He travels to Los Angeles and he wins the second prize during the International Gamers Championship. But neither this trip nor the virtual world he lives in can save him from the feeling of loneliness and solitude. As a result, the film, which is allegedly oriented on the iconic youth values,

[ 299 ] turns out to be universal and common to all mankind. What is also interesting is that the budget is that the budget of this film is just $ 20 thousand. When Oleg Sentsov was awarded the prize of the Guild of Russian cinema critics during the Film Festival ‘Spirit of Fire’ held in Khanty-Mansiysk, Sentsov demonstrated some kind of a low-budget movies manifesto: when Ukrainian filmmaker attended the award ceremony, he was wearing a t-shirt with the inscription that read ‘I strongly disagree with the creative heritage of Timur Bekmambetov’. Judging from my observations and conversation I had with Oleg, I can say with certainty that Oleg is a person with a wide cultural horizon and an adequate mind, and he would never ever engage in any inhumane in its nature terrorist activities. As for his position regarding Crimean and Ukrainian issues, that’s a different case. As a citizen of his country, Oleg simply couldn’t ignore these events and stand aside, and he is paying a high price for it today”.

Boris Khlebnikov: “I recently found out who the film director Oleg Sentsov is. I’ve watched his film Gamer, and it impressed me a lot. Almost always a quiet, modest and small statement about the movie could somehow harm it, but in the case, with Sentsov’s movie, it’s one of the film’s biggest merits. I think, Japanese filmmakers usually succeeded in creating movies like this. I cannot understand, how he created the characters of all of these people in his film, but what I can say for sure is that I haven’t seen a person with such a strong personality and charisma as the main character of the movies possesses since the times of Antoine Duanel. It is obvious that Oleg Sentsov is a real, serious and talented filmmaker and a person, who can observe reality around him like no one else. And being an artist, he simply cannot refrain from looking in the direction

[ 300 ] where it is scary and terrifying, where it is dangerous, and where the future and the destiny of his country is on the table. It’s not participating in the events of such a scale, but rather indifference to them would be considered a sign of unprofessionalism for an artist”.

Kirill Serebrennikov: “The first thing. A serious danger and a real threat to the existence of the entire society is the situation, when the power, and especially the power to control people’s minds, becomes concentrated in hands of the intelligence and security forces. It’s when gradually logic of war wins, a logic that implies that one group of the citizens is enemies to another group, traitors and the so-called ‘fifth column’, when any disagreement with the current state of affairs is being rhetorically transformed into an attempt to seize the power in the country, a terrorist threat or something like that. This situation would not lead to anything good. It would cause only a big bloodshed and a terrible grief and misfortune. The second thing. Even in the case of the military conduct, doctors, poets, artists, and other intellectuals were the last group to be taken captive by the parties at war. Because these people are talented and thus quite vulnerable due to their sensory perception of the situation, and these people always enjoyed the unofficial protection of the society, no matter how critical the phase of the battle against either the internal or the external enemy would be. These people, and especially artists, poets, directors, and musicians are like the messengers, who are the first to inform about the approaching dangers. They are like the little canary birds in the mines. And if somebody would decide to slaughter all the canary birds in the mines, he simply signs his own death sentence with such an action, as there will be no one anymore

[ 301 ] to warn about the dangerous gas leak and the possibility of an explosion”.

Pavlo Bardin: “It is simply impossible to talk about cinema now when the author is imprisoned. It’s like a printing machine working constantly in my head, typing one and the same message all the time: ‘a film director detained by FSB’, ‘organizing of the terrorist attack’ and ‘conveyed to Lefortovo prison’. During the screenwriting lessons, Valeriy Frid used to smile telling students the story about him and his friend ‘Yulik’ both of them young filmmakers at that time, and how they were accused of the preparation of Joseph Stalin assassination attempt. They were sentenced to ten years in camps. What causes a smile on Frid’s face was that the room they have been allegedly trying to shoot Stalin from when his convoy moved along Arbat Street in Moscow, actually had no window facing Arbat… Frid always wrote and spoke about the camp with humour and self-irony. I wish Oleg Sentsov to also save both, humour and self-irony when this story will be finally over. It makes no sense to write pathetic letters, to ask politely, to beg with tears, to try finding a noble definition for the criminals, who deprived Oleg of his freedom. Let us better really help him”.

Bakur Bakuradze: “It is really extremely difficult to suddenly become a resident of a completely different country without even changing one’s place of residence, without leaving one’s own house and one’s motherland. It is especially difficult when one is a public person. One can easily become a victim of circumstances.

[ 302 ] I know how emotional filmmakers can be. They cannot refrain from reacting. Cinematography always tells its word regarding the social issues. How was Oleg Sentsov reacting? Where is the place of his deed, on the scale between an ordinary mistake, a genuine love for his native country and a serious and terrible crime? Why would a film director, who speaks exclusively Russian, prepare the terrorist attacks against Russia? There are so many questions. I wish him, a father of two, the fastest release and retur­ ning home, to his family and to his profession as a film director”.

Maria Rozbezhkina: “I have never met Oleg Sentsov in person, but I’ve seen his debut film. It’s a film of a grown-up person you want to talk about so many things with. There are no youthful hormonal releases and hysterics. It’s a calm and intelligent movie. You can sense a strong personality of a movie director there, who is responsible for his words, his actions and his decisions. Somehow I am totally sure that he is not guilty of any terrible crimes. He is just different. He was just destined to live in Ukraine and to love this country. It’s his motherland, and, as the phrase goes, he has the right for it… Today I was traveling by train, and my neighbor was a naval officer of the Russian Southern Fleet. His brother is also a serviceman, but he serves in Ukraine. They made an agreement: when they call each other on the phone, they never talk about the politics, only about the cucumbers growing in Ukrainian and in Russian gardens. But it doesn’t always work. There are people who were not created to obey the orders. There are people who cannot really live in the big cities. And there are also people, who

[ 303 ] cannot accept the fact that some magic wand suddenly carried them over from one country to another one. So should they go to prison for that?”

Aleksandr Rastorguyev: “The movie is like a gesture. It is filled with the texts of contemporary of Pryazhko, where nothing happens. It’s like the first film John Cassavetes’ film, like from the archives, where the context is more important than the sense. It’s like reading in the ‘doc.’ Theatre. A calm and quiet film about a teenage gamer is more important than ‘Shultes’ or ‘The Hunter’. As for its language, I think it’s even bolder than the legendary “Hard to be a God’. It’s like a people’s relative of ‘Olena’. In other words, this guy will be released from prison, from the zone, in something like twenty years maybe, and with the deepest meaning and feelings, he would probably give us, the fat and lazy citizens, if we’ll still live till that moment, of course, another masterpiece like ‘One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich’ of the XXI century. Thank you, Putin, for the future people. People’s destinies are quite mysterious. Two million of nameless people voted for affiliation of Crimea with Russian Federation so that one citizen named Oleg Sentsov would become a victim of a political terror. The source of this tragedy is that the person doesn’t actually realize his real state. Sentsov has met his personal tragedy, but we haven’t, it seems. The more painful, bitter and sad it will be. But we deserve it”.

Vitaliy Manskiy: “The movie Gamer is calm and ponderous, just like the life itself is. There are no bright episodes, no emotions, no joy and happiness from living in this world during an hour

[ 304 ] and half of the screen time. And there is also no author’s influence on dramaturgy, in other words, on the plot development. There is an eternal absence of the subject. And even when the intrigue is knocking on the doors, the authors shut the doors for it. It is definitely a conscious and well-considered decision of a young film director. And that’s his professional power too. As for his freedom from temptations both in life and in his creative works, it is probably one of his best merits. Sentsov is a filmmaker with dignity. And, judging by the fact that the author never really tries to be liked by his audience and never tries to comply with the audience’s wishes, in his own life he also chooses a difficult path of freedom from compromises for the sake of preserving dignity and respect, first of all, of the self-respect”.

Aleksandra Strilyana: “I met Oleg during the festival in Khanty-Mansiysk. The festival jury acknowledged and awarded his debut film Gamer. What impressed me the most in this movie was the way Oleg worked with children. With the teenagers. Then we talked a lot with him. We had different topics and issues to discuss. Mostly, we were reminiscing on the 1990s. Children of the 1990s were the new characters of Oleg’s new script of the upcoming film Rhino. Everything was very honest, and everything came from his own life experience. It is very hard for a movie director to hide during his personal qualities during the conversation about his future film and how it has to be. Oleg is very focused and ironic, he pursues his goals with his own efforts. He is also a very kind person. I really hope that Oleg will be released from prison soon and that he will finally come back to his family and to his beloved ones. I also hope that he will still make us excited and happy about

[ 305 ] his new film. From heart to heart. And let it be like this. Let it be no war”.

Natalya Meshchaninova: “I have absolutely no idea, what to say. I’ve watched the filmGamer . Oleg makes really beautiful movies. It’s calm, balanced and mature. There is no director’s immaturity there. And it is absolutely clear that here we have to do with a very special and independent director’s vision. I cannot even imagine that this person could possibly engage in something like terrorist activities. All of it is outrageous and cruel. It is very wicked. I cannot say about myself that I’m an expert and that I understand all the events and developments happening in Ukraine. Maybe, I understand too little. But there are some universal human issues and values. And there is also a clear understanding that each of us, each of us who can and want to feel alive, who reacts like a living human being, each of us could be in Sentsov’s situation. When you start pondering on it, it’s so intense that it feels it’s killing you”.

Oleksiy Fedorchenko: “I still haven’t watched the movies of Oleg Sentsov. But I will definitely watch them. Everybody says they are really good. But today it is not so important what kind of a film director Oleg is. It is not even that important now that he is a film director. What is important is that Oleg is arrested and that any person in Russia today can be on his place. When the NKVD officers didn’t find a person they needed at home, they could take the neighbor. The terror plan should have been carried out under any circumstances. And each of us could suddenly become an informer tomorrow, a national traitor or a terrorist. It is hard to breathe in our country again”.

[ 306 ] Oleksandr Kott: “Oleg Sentsov is a film director, and a film director is always an observer. He is often in the epicenter of the events. It can’t be helped. It is difficult to somehow react to it. We know so little though. His accusations are outrageous. I refuse to believe it all. I just want to wish him to have strength and endurance. And I also want to wish prudence and common sense to those who started all of it”.

Mikhail Yampolsky: “Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov has made a talented film telling us a story about game and illusions are still unable to come to the reality and to alter it. However, the illusions ruling in the heads of Russian security forces somehow managed to come to the reality. Sentsov was arrested and charged with the terrorism. Most probably, it happened, because he was an activist and participated in Maidan events. I refuse to believe in the reality of accusations he is currently facing. The blood runs cold when one hears such accusations. We must never ever allow that an innocent artist became a victim of these fabricated accusations. We must do everything possible to prevent it from happening”.

Angelina Nikonova: “I met Oleg during the Film Festival in Sofia, where Oleg has won a pitching in search of co-production for his next film. The filming process was suspended now. I want to believe that they were just ‘suspended’, not ‘stopped’. I want to believe that absurd situation our colleague found himself in will be resolved in the nearest future, and everything will become clear. I want to believe that the accusations will be lifted and that Oleg will be released and will come back to

[ 307 ] his family and to his work. Oleg is a wonderful, sensitive and very bright and warm person. God, give him strength, and give the prosecutors wisdom and common sense”.

Krzysztof Zanussi: A movie director “Knowing what happened with our Ukrainian colleague Oleg Sentsov, I, as a member of the Secretariat of the European Film Academy, took part in all our decisions regarding Oleg’s support. This trial is absolutely unconvincing, and we don’t have any reason to trust it. Even without paying attention to the smallest details of this case, there was a strong feeling that this case was politically motivated from the very beginning, and this is unacceptable. Oleg is being actively supported in Poland. It happened twice already when during the award ceremony of our National Film Academy we all held the cards and posters, where it was written ‘Free Oleg Sentsov’. This address to the Russian President Vladimir Putin was supported by hundreds of our colleagues. Putin has resolved this case personally, as suspicions regarding political motives of Oleg’s arrest and his persecution are very strong. Even Nikita Mikhalkov has joined our campaign. Unfortunately, nothing serious happened till this time. Putin still hasn’t interfered in the situation, but we still hope that it will happen, because it really looks like a person is in prison for nothing, he hasn’t done anything. I don’t understand, why Russian authorities continue holding Oleg Sentsov. There are many unknown people in many countries, who serve their terms in prisons and who have no public opinion support. And they are very lonely. That’s why what we can do is to stand against this loneliness. If Oleg knows that thousands of his colleagues from Europe and from all over

[ 308 ] the world remember about him, support him, try to help him and collect money for the lawyers, then he probably won’t feel so lonely anymore. We must not allow the government to ignore public opinion. Memory about his works will always stay with us. But the most important is not to forget about the person who created it all and who stays current in so harsh conditions”.

As a developing country, Ukraine is concentrated mostly on its internal and regional problems and issues, and it’s quite natural. It is especially relevant in the light of the latest turbulent events. An average Ukrainian citizen rarely remembers (and sometimes rarely even knows) about the “prisoners of conscience” in other countries, who experience unjust sentences and serve unjust prison terms right now, at this moment. But it’s not surprising. Ukraine has a too long and complicated history of relations with various repressive political regimes. This history is so rich that during the latest sixty or seventy years the list of Ukrainian “prisoners of conscience” runs to over a thousand of names. There’s not enough attention for all of them. The latest story of non-Ukrainian “prisoners of con­ science”, which was being followed closely by our fellow Ukrainians, was probably one of the Pussy Riot girls, who stood trial in neighboring Russia for their art-performance in the church. Actually, entire Europe followed that process back then. But again, for Ukraine it was a very close event, you could literally stretch your hand and reach it. If something similar would happen to a resident of, let’s say, Bolivia, most of Ukrainians probably wouldn’t take it personally and have strong feelings on this event. European Film Academy continues to show its support and solidarity with Oleg Sentsov’s cause till the end of the

[ 309 ] trial. On 19 August 2015 European Film Academy would send another open letter to Russian ruling structures demanding to release the detained filmmaker.

Free Oleg Sentsov immediately! “In the light of the latest events related to Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov and of the fact that the Public Prosecutor requested to sentence him to twenty-three years in high-security prison, we would like to support the initiative of the European Film Academy. To whom: To Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin — President of Russia To Sergey Ivanovich Naryshkin — Head of the State Duma of Russian Federation To Aleksandr Vasilievich Bortnikov — Director of FSB To Vladimir Aleksandrovich Kolokoltsev — Minister of Interior of Russian Federation To Yuriy Yakovlevich Chayka — Prosecutor General of Russian Federation

Since the moment when it became known that Ukrai­ nian movie director Oleg Sentsov was arrested by the Federal Security Service of Russian Federation in his home in Simferopol on 11 May 2014, we’ve been following the sad developments with worries and concern. The trial was being postponed multiple times, and finally, after more than a year, a trial is expected to start in Rostov-on-Don. We made ourselves familiar with how the court process went and we paid special attention to the fact that the main witness in the case recalled his testimonies as those ‘given under pressure’. The fact that after this Oleg Sentsov is still

[ 310 ] being accused of engaging in terrorist activities is truly shocking. In the light of the abovementioned events, with all due respect, we call on you to: — Ensure safety and security for Oleg Sentsov; — Dismiss Oleg Sentsov’s charges due to the lack of sufficient evidence; — Immediately release Oleg Sentsov, who is being detained without any reasons; — Ensure restoration of a good name of detained Oleg Sentsov; — Start the full, transparent and unbiased investigation of the illegal detention of Oleg Sentsov carried out by the Federal Security Service of Russian Federation and of Oleg’s reports about the tortures he experienced, with holding accountable those responsible for these actions as a result of the investigation”.

European Film Academy repeats its demand to free Oleg Sentsov: iffr.com, 23 January 2015 “On the eve of the Film Festival [in Rotterdam], European Film Academy repeated its demand to the Russian court to free Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, who is currently under arrest in Moscow pretrial detention facility since 10 May 2014. Sentsov supported Euromaidan in Kyiv, demonstrated his position against Russian annexation of Crimea and was arrested by the Russian Federal Security Service in his house in the city of Simferopol in Crimea. He is still waiting for the trial”.

Campaign “Free Oleg Sentsov” initiated by European Film Academy was presented in the European Court for

[ 311 ] Human Rights, while online-petition with the demand to immediately free him was signed by over thirty-six thousand people. European Film Academy organized a fund to support the family of the detained film director. British movie director and deputy head of the European Film Academy Mike Downey declared: “European Film Academy has launched campaign for Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, who is still suffering in the Russian prison, waiting for the trial. It means that he remains in the prison for over eight months without the trial and without the court decision. European Film Academy and many representatives of the European filmmaking community think that we have to try to give our mobilization a new dimension, joining our voices with the voices of all the cinematographers from all over the world”. “I work on several projects together with Oleg’s producer Olga Zhurzhenko, including the adaptation of “The Porcupine” by Julian Barnes, which along with the success of Gamer on the International Film Festival in Rotterdam (2012) played a crucial role for involving financing for the next projectRhino . We carry out events and various initiatives to support Oleg in Venice, Toronto, San-Sebastian, Berlin, in Croatia, in Warsaw and in Ukraine, we fight to draw as much attention to Oleg’s destiny as possible. We had an empty chair of European Film Academy especially for him during the Film Festival in Riga, while his sister and his producer both attended our General Assembly event and gave their speeches there”. “I also organized a Film Week in London for him, as Ukrainian film weeks or a season, I was trying to draw attention to his terrible situation. It is not good for a person like Oleg, and we all feel that we have to continue pressuring Russian authorities in Moscow, in order to finally release him or to at least give him a fair and just trial”.

[ 312 ] Director of the International Film Festival in Rotterdam Rutger Wolfson added: “Our Festival will continue to draw attention to Oleg’s destiny and to play a certain role in mobilizing of powers aimed at his release. The best thing is that we have such a huge audience, and the presence of our Festival on social media is also significant. That’s why our main aim would be to inform the people again and again about what is happening, and in this manner, we are hoping to create additional support for Oleg”.

Andrii Khalpakhchi: Director of Kyiv International Film Festival “Molodist” “When these events started unfolding in Crimea, it was quite difficult to get in touch with him. Of course, everybody was worried about his destiny. That’s why when we arrived at the Cannes Film Festival, we decided to raise this issue, as it was evident at that time that Oleg still didn’t have a big internationally known name. It wasn’t the same situation as it was with Polanski when the entire world immediately started talking about it. We had to do everything possible so that the world heard and knew more about Oleg, as that nonsense, which is so typical for Russia, when just like in Stalin’s times, they are scared the most of the artists and intellectuals, demands a wide international outcry. We got in touch with our friends from the European Film Academy. Their reaction was very quick, and on the next day, the relevant information was already published on their official website. It was how the international support of Oleg Sentsov started. Certainly, international pressure and the reaction of the society are among the very important factors. Oleg’s support on the international level doesn’t fade away till now. For two or even three years in a row, the ‘Directors’ Fortnight’ of the

[ 313 ] International Film Festival in Cannes opens with a shot in support of Oleg Sentsov. Remember, how Sergei Parajanov was released. If not for the efforts of the writer Louis Aragon, who helped this case to become public, Parajanov would be probably still in jail. Unfortunately, the history repeats itself. History of Russia is very much like the history of the Russian Empire or of the Soviet Empire. But we all want to hope that Oleg will be released soon, so that he will be still able to work, as, like the history shows us, creative period in Sergei Parajanov’s life after he was released from prison turned out to be quite limited and short. They say, hope helps, so, let us hope”.

On 23 May 2014 initiatives in support of Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko took place near the Russian consulates of Odessa and Lviv. The small protest in Lviv was attended by over thirty people, among them the internally displaced people and refugees from occupied Crimea and representatives of the organization “Autonomous Resistance”. The protesters expressed their solidarity with detained Oleg and Oleksandr and demonstrated posters with different slogans, such as “Freedom to Crimean defendants!” and “Give the father back to his children, give the son back to his mother” and others. The protesters also attempted to give an open letter addressed to the Russian Consul in Lviv, but they didn’t succeed in it. Nobody went out of the consulate building to talk to them. Nearly dozen of people have gathered in Odessa as well. They brought a poster with the slogan “Craving for freedom is stronger than all the prisons!” and also write an address to the Russian Consul and gave it through the consulate security. Certainly, there are serious doubts that sending open letters with certain demands through the diplomatic

[ 314 ] representatives of the countries could have any significant impact on the situation. Most probably, these consular services aren’t even capable of fulfilling the function of a messenger one could reach somebody in the Kremlin through. That’s why the initiatives like that work first of all as newsworthy information and a coverage opportunity for the media and for drawing more attention to the case. It’s a quite efficient way to provoke a public discussion about an important issue, which would be covered by the mass media. And this public energy would give more results than the open letters sent to Putin, especially considering the fact that none of these letters probably really reach the Russian President. On 30 May 2015, a globally known human rights organization “Amnesty International” published a letter where it strongly condemned Russia’s actions regarding Sentsov and Kolchenko, calling on Russian authorities to immediately release the defendants and to send them back to their home country.

Ukrainians are illegally detained in Russia: Amnesty International “Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov and a civilian activist Oleksandr Kolchenko are currently detained in ‘Lefortovo’ remand prison in Moscow centre. Both of them are the citizens of Ukraine. They were arrested by the Russian Federal Security Forces officers on the occupied territory of Crimea. Oleg Sentsov was detained by the Russian FSB agents, who came to his house in the night of 11 May 2014 with the aim of carrying out a searching. Oleksandr Kolchenko was detained on 16 May 2014 in the centre of Simferopol, the capital of Crimea. Both of them were sent on 23 May 2014 to Moscow together with other Ukrainians detained on the territory of occupied Crimea. Both men are allegedly accused

[ 315 ] of engaging in terrorist activities. However, their lawyers had to sign the documents about non-disclosure of the investigation information, and there was no official statement regarding their arrest. The both of them participated in the peaceful demonstrations against Russia’s intervention in Crimea, while Oleg Sentsov also took part in Euromaidan protest actions in Kyiv as a part of the protest group called ‘Automaidan’”.

Family and friends of the men Amnesty International has spoken to think that the accusations against both Sentsov and Kolchenko are politically motivated and have to do with their peaceful activities as Euromaidan and Crimean activists. It is known that Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko were denied the meetings with their Russian lawyers till 27 and 28 May 2014 respectively, in other words during four or five days after their arrest and transfer to Moscow, what contradicts with and violates the international norms of justice and of Russian laws and regulations too. The availability of the meeting rooms is limited in “Lefortovo” remand prison, and Ukrainian human rights activists informed us that on 26 May 2014 Ukrainian lawyers of Oleg Sentsov were forced to wait in line from nine o’clock in the morning till five o’clock in the evening, yet they still failed to meet their defendants. They’ve managed to meet them on the next day only, on 27 May 2014. Send an official letter as soon as possible, either in Russian or in your first language: — Call on Russian authorities to immediately release and send home from Moscow Oleg Sentsov, Oleksandr Kolchenko and other Ukrainian citizens, residents of Crimea, who are currently detained in Russian “Lefortovo” remand prison;

[ 316 ] — Express deep concern due to the fact that Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko are probably detained because of their participation in the peaceful rallies against the Russian occupation of Crimea; — Call on Russian authorities to dismiss the charges against Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko, based on the only one fact that the defendants exercised their right to express their opinion and position and their right of assembly; — Call on the authorities to ensure that Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko have an opportunity to meet with their lawyers on all the stages of the court trial process without delays and obstacles, in correspondence with the international standards”. Further Information

[ ■ ]

At the end of February unknown armed people without insignia have seized the governmental buildings in the capital of Crimea, the city of Simferopol, and on 6 March 2014 Crimean Parliament voted for Crimea to join Russian Federation and scheduled a referendum to be held on 16 March. According to the official results, 97% of the Crimean population supported the idea of Crimea joining Russian Federation as a new federation subject. However, most of the representatives of the Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar minorities on the peninsula have boycotted the referendum. On 18 March 2014 President Vladimir Putin has signed a decree declaring Crimea a part of Russian Federation. Later Russian laws and regulations came into force on the territory if Crimea. Ukrainian lawyers, who wanted to continue their practice in Crimea, were demanded to retrain till the end of April so that they could work according to the Russian law. In accordance with the norms of the international law, the occupation is in place, when one country actually takes under control the territory of another country, while it has no right to lay claim to it without the consent of that another country. The situation in Crimea corresponds with these criteria, and that’s why Amnesty International considers

[ 318 ] Crimea being an occupied territory. On 27 March 2014 the UN General Assembly has adopted a resolution, calling on all the states, international organizations and all the designated institutions and establishments “not to acknowledge any change of the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol based on the abovementioned illegal referendum and to refrain from any actions and steps that could be interpreted as acknowledgement of the change of this status. The Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War emphasizes that, as a rule, criminal code of the occupied territory has to remain in power (Article 64), and that abduction or deportation of the persons from the occupied territory is strictly forbidden (Article 49)”. In December 2015 a famous Russian musician Boris Grebenshchikov would sign a letter within the framework of the Amnesty International campaign, addressed to the General Prosecutor of Russian Federation, calling on him to cancel and dismiss politically motivated sentences of Oleg Sentsov, Gennadiy Afanasyev, and Oleksandr Kolchenko.

“A bright future” of Oleg Sentsov: www.europeanfilmacademy.org, Mike Downey, Deputy Head of the European Film Academy “Ukrainian movie director Oleg Sentsov drew the attention of the international cinematography world for the first time in 2012 with his debut film Gamer, which was demonstrated with a great success during the International Film Festival in Rotterdam. Inspired by the computer and video-games club established by Sentsov, Gamer was also included in the programme called ‘A bright future’, which was a special category for the talented new filmmakers.

[ 319 ] Today ‘a bright future’ Oleg Sentsov looks into is twenty years behind the bars for the accusations of terrorist activities. Oleg Sentsov was detained in his native city Simferopol, in Crimea, in May 2014. Since that time he was subjected to tortures, was falsely accused and detained in the infamous ‘Lefortovo’ remand prison in Moscow and became un­ reachable for the representatives of the Ukrainian govern­ ment. Campaign of the European Film Academy calling for the release of Oleg Sentsov, supported by many prominent European filmmakers, was not heard, same as the regular calls of the ‘Amnesty International’ with the demands to initiate an investigation regarding his torturing and detention was also unheard. Most probably, Russian authorities would continue the detention term for Oleg Sentsov soon, probably at least till April, when the trial is scheduled to start. During his detention in the Russian prison, Oleg Sentsov, 38, was refused an opportunity to meet with his children — twelve-year-old Alina and nine-year-old Vlad, who suffers from autism. Sentsov was raising his children with the help of his sister. The political observers and experts think that Russian government, firmly resolved to defend its annexation of Crimea and to expand and deepen its control over the others regions in Ukraine, is trying to ‘break’ Oleg Sentsov, forcing him to testify against the prominent Ukrainian politicians. Sentsov is one of the four Ukrainians (the others are Gennadiy Afanasyev, Oleksiy Chyrniy, and Oleksandr Kolchenko), who remains detained in Moscow charged with terrorism. According to the Deputy Head of the European Film Academy, we must continue pressuring Russian government and release Oleg Sentsov. Only information awareness of the

[ 320 ] society about Sentsov’s life and strong international political pressure could be able to put an end to his imprisonment. That’s what our friends and colleagues from Ukraine advised us to do. Arrest of Oleg Sentsov happened as a result of his noticeable and completely rightful stance opposing Russian annexation of Crimea. Sentsov was also among the prominent activists of the Euromaidan movement that helped overthrow the corrupted pro-Russian government of Viktor Yanukovich in February 2014. Sentsov was detained by the Russian intelligence services in the city of Simferopol, in May 2014, after sending provisions to the Ukrainian servicemen blocked in Ukrainian military bases in Crimea and surrounded by the Russian forces, and after helping organize an automobiles rally as a protest of the Russian annexation of Crimea. Although an official date of his arrest was 11 May 2014, Oleg Sentsov was actually detained by the Russian FSB agents at his home one day earlier. Sentsov was brutally beaten, he was being choked with the plastic bag so that he even lost consciousness several times, he was stripped naked and threatened to be raped with the baton, trying to force him to admit his guilt. Russian Federal Security Services charged the thirty- eight-year-old Ukrainian filmmaker with the organizing of the terrorist attacks at the railways and electricity transmission lines, and of an attempt of planting a bomb in the Monument dedicated to the Soviet Victory in the war against Nazi Germany on 9 May 1945. He was also accused of being a member of the so-called ‘Right Sector’, a radical Ukrainian nationalist group. ‘I am not guilty of the crimes I am charged with,’ Oleg Sentsov stated during the pre-trial hearing. ‘This case is

[ 321 ] fabricated and politically motivated, as it is actually based on the testimonies of two defendants, given under the tortures and pressure, and now they cannot take these testimonies b a c k’. ‘They have also tortured me,’ Sentsov added. ‘Before the official interrogations in the building of SBU (Ukrainian Security Service) in Simferopol, they have been tortured, beaten and humiliated me, in order to force me to testify against the leaders of Euromaidan and Ukraine, stating that my crimes were ordered by them. After I refused to testify, they told me that I would be made a mastermind of all these crimes in the court and that I would face even graver accusations’. After Oleg Sentsov was arrested, Russian government received numerous letters and requests aimed at releasing him. European Film Academy wrote an open letter to the President of Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, with the signatures of the prominent European movie directors, of the filmmakers and actors, who protested against the imprisonment of Oleg Sentsov. Among those who signed the letter were Pedro Almodovar, Roberto Benini, Stephen Daldry, me, Agnieszka Holland, Aki Kaurismäki, Mike Lee, Ken Loach, Antonio Saura, Volker Schlöndorff, Bertrand Tavernier and Andrzej Wajda. The Academy has also organized the protests and sent the letters of support during the various film festivals and also during the recently held Film Academy events in Riga. The ‘Amnesty International’ demands to open an inves­ ti­gation of Sentsov’s torturing. President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko awarded Oleg Sentsov with decoration for valor. This issue was also raised in the European Parliament and in the British House of Commons.

[ 322 ] Lawyer of Oleg Sentsov Dmytro Dinze, who has also defended Pussy Riot girls during the court hearings, prepared an address to the European Human Rights Court in Strasbourg (France). Dinze’s preparation of the effective defense was being regularly hindered, as the authorities refused to share full information regarding the ‘evidence’ against Oleg Sentsov. Despite all of this pressure, we’ve been deeply concerned with the latest news from Moscow we received in the latest days that Oleg Sentsov was also accused of other crimes as well, not only in ‘terrorist activities’. Now he was also charged with ‘illegal purchase, possession, transporting and owning of weapons, explosive substances and explosive devices’. Sentsov’s lawyer couldn’t get more details about the new accusations. Those who knew Oleg Sentsov say that they aren’t surprised that he was the one to be chosen by the Russian authorities. ‘He is a very famous person, who lives for his ideas, not for money,’ Dilyara Tasbulatova, a famous Moscow film critic, said. ‘Oleg is full of energy, he is a natural leader, and this is innate to him. And now they are going to arrest and sentence such a person’. It would be too naive to really think on this stage that Oleg Sentsov could hope for something like a transparent and just trial, but it doesn’t mean that we have to stop our efforts before one of the most perspectives in European filmmaking industry talents would disappear for many years behind the bars in Russia, spending these years in modern Russian GULAG”.

Of course, Ukrainian filmmaking community also kept busy and didn’t limit its activities to several official statements

[ 323 ] only. From 3 to 9 September 2014 the “Ukrainian Movie Week” in support of Oleg Sentsov has been held in Kyiv cinema theatre called “Kinopanorama”. Several Ukrainian films have been demonstrated during the festival, including Oleg’s debut filmGamer . Costs from the sold tickets were intended for help for the family of the detained filmmaker, to his wife Alla and to his two children, who stayed in Simferopol, occupied by Russians. This event drew the attention of the society and of Ukrainian movies fans, and “Kinopanorama” hall was filled with visitors.

Natalia Soboleva: Director of “Kinopanorama” cinema theatre “One day Anya Palenchuk laid me a visit and offered to organize a festival to support Oleg Sentsov. I think she was the one who raised this issue first. Our cinema theatre is located right in the city centre, it’s quite a good transportation hub, so it’s easy to commute, no matter what direction in Kyiv you need to go. That’s why it was really good and efficient to hold the festival here. In the beginning, we had doubts that this event would have an impact and become on everyone’s lips, but we were wrong. The hall for 400 seats was filled, there were even lots of people standing in the aisles. And it happened every night. Oleg somehow gave this event an incredible and unbelievably strong inner energy. People were interested, they’ve been watching the movies, they’ve been discussing them. The audience likes to talk, and it’s not a secret, but that was still something unusual that the people stayed after the screening for two or three hours just to discuss the movie, and then also some social, political and cultural issues as well. We’ve never had something like that before.

[ 324 ] It was really a very serious festival. Kyiv is quite a snobby city, so it is really very difficult to gather the people for some kind of a serious event. Most of them usually leave in their business after the screening or go to their own parties and gatherings, but here it turned out into a real public initiative. And that was definitely something Oleg should have taken credit for. It is very sad and painful that Oleg is in such a situation now. Now he plays a role of a pawn used in the political games, yet we all understand that he is really a significant figure. I don’t think that there’s really something we, the fellow citizens, could do in this situation. Nothing really depends on us. An issue of Oleg’s release lies in the political and judicial spheres. We need to establish some powerful organization with the good and experienced lawyers, with good financing etc. I vote for the help of professionals in this case”.

Anna Palenchuk: A movie producer at the 435 FILMS Company “When Oleg was detained, it was a huge shock for many of our colleagues. We called each other trying to understand what could be done. When we realized that we actually had no power, we started carrying out protest rallies and sending petitions. We used to gather near the Presidential Administration, we organized the screenings of Oleg’s Gamer, we tried to gather some money. We all understood that we needed a really big amount of money in order to cover our expenses on lawyers etc. At some point of time, after Odessa Film Festival, where there was a very strong support of Oleg Sentsov, in August we

[ 325 ] started noticing that there was no news about him in media and that his case is somewhere on the background now. I understood that we had to make an event, which would make the people talk about Oleg and his story again. We started organizing this event, and we couldn’t even imagine the scale it would have. Thanks to several phone calls, we received a very strong movie programme consisting of the most current films in the society. I am very grateful to my colleagues, who gave us their films for screening absolutely for free. We made an agreement with the ‘Kinopanorama’ cinema theatre and started attending various meetings in order to find and gather information sponsors. That was the time when we met so many like-minded people and managed to unite them around Oleg’s case, and they started working on organizing this event together with us. We never met the people, who would refuse us and tell us that they wouldn’t help. It was an honour for us to receive ‘The Guide’ by Oles Sanin and to organize its pre-premiere screening during the ‘Ukrainian Cinema Days’. It is worth mentioning that at that time any screening of a new Ukrainian movie meant the full- house. The tickets cost 40 Hryvnyas, and we gathered this money for Oleg’s support. I remember that even the posters, tickets and other printed information were provided to us for free. An incredible attention of the audience to the event during the screenings meant that Oleg was not forgotten and that he had support not only of his colleagues from the filmmaking industry but from the fellow citizens too, who came to know more about him and who wanted to help. Some of our colleagues from the big film studios just called

[ 326 ] us and brought us money they received from their films screenings. We managed to gather a significant amount of money at that time and sent it to Oleg’s sister so that she could continue to work on his defense process and to cover the related expenses. We also received help from the State Cinema Committee, particularly from the Head of the Committee Pylyp Illenko, who attended the screenings, negotiated with people and presented and promoted the films. We have many calls from other cities throughout Ukraine with the offers to organize something similar there too, that’s why soon we started our tour in ten cities in Ukraine. We’ve been also accompanied by the representatives of various creative groups. Pylyp Illenko also was with us on this tour. Before all the screenings we’ve been talking about Oleg, that we couldn’t agree with the fact of his detention, and the people answered our calls with their huge support. Thanks to this event, the name of Oleg Sentsov could be heard all over the country for quite a long time, and it was really very important for us. We’ve also organized a similar initiative in Tbilisi, at the beginning of 2015. Local filmmakers helped us a lot, among them Maria Moskovenko, David Vashadze and also the National Cinema Centre of Georgia. It is also worth mentioning that Georgians could stay indifferent towards Oleg and his fate, that’s why Georgian media published lots of materials about him and his case. Ukrainian and Russian language information rarely reach Georgia now, that’s why the people in that country didn’t know a lot about Oleg Sentsov and his situation before”.

[ 327 ] Pavlensky demands to open a terrorism case against him: meduza.io, 10 November 2015 “An artist and performer Petr Pavlensky demands the court to open a terrorism case against him. ‘I think it just corresponds to the logic of your system. Until my demands won’t be met, I refuse to comply with all your court rituals,’ a news portal ‘Mediazona’ quotes Pavlensky. According to Pavlensky, arson of the doors of the FSB building in Lubyanka was his reaction and answer to the ‘Crimean terrorists’ case’, a Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov was charged with. ‘FSB has been fabricating these cases,’ Pavlensky said. Among the accusations, the ‘Crimean terrorists’ were charged with was also set on fire of the doors of the office of the ‘Russian Community in Crimea’ in the city of Simferopol. Petr Pavlensky was arrested in the night of 9 November 2015, after he set on fire the doors of the FSB building on Lubyanska Square in Moscow. A vandalism criminal case was opened against him, based on that part of the Criminal Code Article that deals with the motives of ideological hatred. Investigation demands the performance artist be a r r e s t e d ”.

An initiative dedicated to Oleg Sentsov’s birthday takes place in Kyiv city centre: 112.ua, 13 July 2016 “A special initiative dedicated to the birthday of Ukrainian political prisoner in Russia Oleg Sentsov is taking place today in Kyiv city centre, according the ‘112 Ukraine’ TV channel coverage.

[ 328 ] Nearly two dozens of people attended, the beginning of the rally was a little bit postponed, so the event started just now. During the opening ceremony of the event, the organizers have been reading fragments of Oleg Sentsov’s creative work. It is also planned to quote the fragments of his speech in court delivered by him right after pronouncing of his sentence in the Russian court. The end of the first part of the celebration of Ukrainian film director’s birthday is expected to be quite symbolic. The event organizers installed an iron cage on the stage, filled with the balloons with the inscription ‘Free Oleg Sentsov’. At the end of the event, these balloons would be flying into the sky, according to the reporter. He added: ‘A former political prisoner Gennadiy Afa­ nasyev also came to the event to support Oleg Sentsov’. The second part of the event is expected to take place on Kyiv European Square, where an automobiles rally in support of Oleg Sentsov is scheduled to be held”.

It is worth mentioning that commenting this memo­ rable event dedicated to the 40th birthday of Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, Sentsov’s sister Natalya Kaplan em­ phasized that the events like this one were important and necessary so that Ukrainians don’t forget about the political prisoners. “I think that the events like this one are absolutely necessary so that people don’t forget who Oleg Sentsov is. It is really very important. It is very important for him too. He asks that people don’t forget about him. Oleg himself doesn’t know about this initiative yet,” Sentsov’s sister said.

[ 329 ] Thus, today Oleg Sentsov turns forty. President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko has already congratulated him with his birthday”.

A play in support of Pussy Riot, Oleg Sentsov and Petr Pavlensky goes on its world tour: fakty.ua, 6 October 2016 “A play ‘Burning Doors’, telling a story of an activist Maria Alyokhina from the Pussy Riot punk-band, an artist and performer Petr Pavlensky and our Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, who is currently detained in the Russian prison and is accused of terrorism, started its world tour. Music for the play was created by the famous Ukrainian band BoomBox. A British sound designer Richard Ham­ martan helped to record it. The play is supported by the cele­ brities from many countries of the world. The theatre band is on tour in Great Britain now and is planning to head to the cities of Italy and Australia next. It’s the second collaboration of the Belarusian Free Theatre, working underground in its native country and performing free abroad, and of the Ukrainian hip-hop band BoomBox. The first loud and significant initiative happened in October 2015 and was called ‘I’m with the Banned – Staging a Revolution’. It was a solidarity concert where many famous musicians performed, among them David Gilmour, Pussy Riot, Brutto, BoomBox, Kim Cattrall, Jeremy Irons, Viktoria Modesta, Neil Tennant, and others.

A famous Russian documentary filmmaker Askold Kurov made a huge contribution to the case of popularization and drawing attention to the story of Oleg Sentsov. Almost since the very beginning of the process against the “Crimean

[ 330 ] terrorists,” he started gathering materials for the documentary film dedicated to Oleg Sentsov. As Askold himself says, his film shows several pages of Oleg Sentsov’s story. First of all, it shows the course of the trial itself. Secondly, it tells about the activities of Oleg’s cousin Natalya, who helped and continues helping her brother. And the third aspect of the film is the story of Oleg’s family and its members. Askold thinks that this film has to become a universal story so that it could draw the attention of the widest audience all over the world.

Askold Kurov: An author of the documentary film about Oleg Sentsov “Ordinary people often believe everything the TV shows them. Another case is why all of it even became possible, I mean this return of state propaganda in the best Soviet traditions, and why it turned out to be so effective. But there are people, who really think, people, who are looking for various information sources and trying to independently analyze the situation. Parallel with the

[ 331 ] filming we’ve been also launching a campaign to support and defend Oleg within the filmmaking community. We’ve been launching small video addresses to support Oleg Sentsov, we’ve been meeting very different people throughout Russia, and none of them refused us. The government also didn’t really try to prevent us from working on our film about Oleg. The case is that we didn’t really try to receive any state funding for this film production. We didn’t have any plans to cooperate with the state TV or with any other governmental institutions. I am not a member of any state organization, that’s why it is actually not that easy to pressure me. I’ve never received any direct threats. But psychologically it was really very difficult, that’s true. I remember, when we’ve been filming Oleg’s sister, we’ve been obviously watched. It was also clear that our phone conversations were also monitored. It is also difficult because you simply don’t know what will happen next and what methods they would choose to use, to what extent they would they tighten the screws. Every day new laws and regulations appear, and they literally forbid everything. It is obvious that all of it is being done in order to give the voice only to those who support the government and its policies”.

Ukrainian film director spent over a year in the Russian prison and would stand the trial on accusations of terrorism scheduled for 11 July: www.hollywoodreporter.com, 18 June 2015 “The case of Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, accused by Russia of preparation of the terrorist attacks to be carried out on the territory of Crimea, would be

[ 332 ] highlighted this month during the Berlin Festival of Ukrainian cinema. The organizers of the days of Ukrainian Cinema in support of Oleg Sentsov to be held from 29 June to 2 July in the German cinema theatre Babylon in Berlin would use this event to point out to the circumstances of the arrest and detention of a talented and promising Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov by the Russian agents in May 2014, when he was sent to Moscow and put behind the bars, where he stays under guard till now. Russian authorities claim that Oleg Sentsov was a member of a terrorist organization in his native city Simfe­ ropol after the annexation of Crimean peninsula in Ukraine last year. Sentsov declines all the charges and demand to be released from custody under the written pledge not to leave the country before the beginning of the court hearings, scheduled for 11 July. On Thursday the Moscow Court has declined his latest appeal and stated that Sentsov had to stay under guard. Sentsov’s first filmGamer was acknowledged and received good reviews by the critics after its screening during the International Film Festival in Rotterdam in 2012. The fans and supporters of Oleg Sentsov hope now to use the Berlin event for raising the funds for his defense. European Film Academy also opened a special bank account for donations for Oleg Sentsov’s court expenses. The Hollywood stars, including Stellan Skasgǻrd, are among the international representatives of the filmmaking industry, who added their names to the pledges to free Oleg Sentsov. Anna Palenchuk, an organizer of the Ukrainian Cinema Days, said that the costs for maintaining of Oleg Sentsov’s

[ 333 ] defense team and his health control during his stay in the prison amount to over 2000 dollars a month. The screenings in Berlin are followed by the similar events being held in London and during the opening ceremony of the ‘Directors Fortnight’ in Cannes, where documentary films of both the modern and the classic authors would be demo­ nstrated, including the films of Ukrainian authors, among them ‘The Tribe’ by Myroslav Slaboshpytskyi, ‘Maidan’ by Sergei Loznitsa and the restored version of the iconic film ‘Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors’ by Sergei Parajanov. European Film Academy hopes that the similar events would be also held during the International Film Festivals in Venice and Toronto at the end of this year. ‘Oleg Sentsov’s case till causes deep concern of the European Film Academy council and members,’ a famous British producer and a Deputy Head of European Film Academy Mike Dawney declared. ‘Maintaining interest and attention to his case and gathering of funds to help his family and to cover his court expenses remain one of the primary goals of the Academy, as he is being detained without the trial and without the transparent and just investigation for the second year already’. Mike Downey also added: ‘The fund’s bank account stays open, and we address on all the supporters and those interested in Oleg’s case to donate and to demonstrate solidarity with this courageous and strong film director’”.

Ukrainian movie director to stand trial for the terrorism accusations in Russia: www.aljazeera.com, 21 July 2015 “Oleg Sentsov, accused of preparing of the terrorist attacks to be held in Crimea, refuses to admit his guilt before the beginning of the trial.

[ 334 ] Ukrainian movie director is to stand trial on the terrorism accusations in the South of Russia after Moscow held him in custody for over a year. Kyiv, human rights activists, and famous filmmakers made the entire world familiar with this case. Ukrainian filmmaker, together with another Ukrainian defendant Oleksandr Kolchenko, is accused of preparing and carrying out of the ‘terrorist attacks’ on the territory of the Crimean peninsula after this territory was annexed from Ukraine by Russian Federation last year in March. ‘I don’t take this court for a court at all, so feel free to review any case you want,’ Oleg Sentsov declared in the courtroom. Both defendants refuse to admit their guilt in the criminal deeds they are being charged with. Their case has already caused international outcry and condemnation of the international human rights organizations and drew the interest of the prominent international filmmakers. Oleg Sentsov is thirty-nine. He is a resident of Crimea and he is facing a sentence on over twenty years behind the bars if the court will declare him guilty. Sentsov was arrested by the Russian Federal Security Services agents in the capital of Crimea Simferopol in May 2014. Russian intelligence services claim that he was allegedly engaged in training of a sabotage team planning attacks against the pro-Moscow organizations. ‘The Court will be questioning the witnesses and the victims,’ Olena Katkalo, a Court Press Secretary, reported. The filmmaker’s lawyer says that he has almost no hope that his client would see justice during this trial, and that the best possible outcome for Oleg Sentsov would be a prisoners’ exchange and transferring of Oleg back to Ukraine.

[ 335 ] ‘I think that the result would be rather negative. Nobody would dismiss the charges, nobody would change the accusations,’ Oleg Sentsov’s lawyer Dmytro Dinze stated during his interview for AFP news agency. ‘We really hope that after all the procedures would be done, there would be a prisoners’ exchange, so Sentsov would be exchanged on some other people currently detained in Ukraine and being of importance to Russia’. Two defendants and alleged accomplices of Oleg Sentsov have been already declared guilty for participation in the ter­ rorist group activities and convicted for seven years in prison. Ukraine and Russia are at odds with each other over the annexation of Crimea. Kyiv and Western countries accuse the Kremlin of stirring up and the separatist conflict in the East of Ukraine. In the last week telephone conversation with Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel, President of France Francois Holland and Russian leader Vladimir Putin President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko called to immediately free Oleg Sentsov. Sentsov presented his first feature-length filmGamer about the teenagers obsessed with the computer and video games during the International Film Festival in Rotterdam in 2012. Many prominent European filmmakers, among them the Spanish film director Pedro Almodovar and the British filmmaker Ken Loach, expressed their deep concern regar­ ding Oleg Sentsov’s case in their open letter addressed to Vladimir Putin”.

Volodymyr Tykhyj: A Movie director “Of course, lots of public attention to this case creates certain troubles for them, but as all of it doesn’t really fit in

[ 336 ] the usual scheme of the corrupt relations, there are no parties that would be interested in solving of this conflict. The main motivation in such a system is reaping some benefits, be that money, political preferences or anything else. Oleg isn’t that important and worthy for them. They aren’t even able to estimate the scale and the possible consequences of this event. Sentsov is somewhere beyond their logic and philosophy of the world perception. It is impossible to predict anything related to Russia. We became strongly convinced about it during the latest years”.

Denis Ivanov: A film producer “I think that public attention and public outcry are the only factors still holding this situation from developing according to the worst case scenario. We have to knock on all the doors, we have to do everything possible to constantly remind about Oleg and his case on all the levels and not to allow people to forget about him. We have to form a relevant public opinion both within the country and outside of it. Of course, nobody would want to bring up some information that could possibly disturb and intervene with the negotiations, but again, if you remember, Oleg expressed himself quite clear and straightforward. He said that we have to use him as the last nail in the coffin the tyrant will be buried in. I think that we should understand it literally, as during this entire process he constantly shows us the real face of the Russian government”. Unfortunately, despite the huge international support and public attention, caused by Oleg Sentsov’s case, the Russian authorities continue to stand their ground. Oleg Sentsov was accused of terrorism and sentenced to twenty years in high-security prison. After the sentence was declared, he was conveyed to remote Yakutia.

[ 337 ] On 26 August 2015 High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Federica Mogherini would describe the sentence for the Ukrainian film director as the one that contradicts with the interna­ tional law and violates basic standards of justice. Here is the statement of the High Representative Federica Mogherini regarding the sentences Russian court declared for the citizens of Ukraine Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko: “Today the Northern-Caucasian Court of Russia has sentenced Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov to twenty years in prison, convicted of terrorism, while his alleged accomplice, Oleksandr Kolchenko, received ten years prison term <…>. Russian courts have no jurisdiction and competence to judge any deeds and activities that took place beyond the internationally acknowledged territory of Russian Fede­ra­ tion. The European Union thinks that this case is a grave violation of the international law and the elementary standards of justice. The EU continues calling on Russian Federation to immediately release Mr. Sentsov and Mr. Kolchenko and to guarantee their swift and safe return to Ukraine”.

Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov sentenced to twenty years in prison in Russia: www.nytimes.com, 25 August 2015 “MOSCOW — A Russian military court sentenced a Ukrainian filmmaker, Oleg Sentsov, to 20 years in a prison camp on Tuesday after convicting him of terrorism in the Crimean Peninsula after its annexation by Russia last year. The punishment was announced from the Northern Caucasus Military District Court in the southern Russian

[ 338 ] city of Rostov-on-Don, which hears terrorism cases. Mr. Sentsov, 39, was found guilty of creating a terrorist group, carrying out two terrorist acts and plotting another that involved blowing up a statue of Lenin in Crimea’s capital, Simferopol. Mr. Sentsov, who lived in Simferopol, was active in protests against the pro-Kremlin government of Viktor Yanu­kovych, who was toppled as president of Ukraine in February 2014. Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Penin­ sula, home to the Russian Navy’s Black Sea fleet, shortly thereafter. Other activists have described how the film director helped evacuate Ukrainian servicemen who were blockaded in Crimea after the Russian takeover. Mr. Sentsov pleaded not guilty to all charges. Pro­ secutors accused him of creating a Crimean branch of Right Sector, a Ukrainian nationalist group that is banned in Russia — he denied it, and so did the group — and of setting fire to the offices of pro-Kremlin organizations in Crimea. Aleksandr Kolchenko, an ecologist, was sentenced to 10 years as an accomplice. Two other defendants had been given seven-year senten­ ces in earlier rulings. One of them, Gennady Afanasyev, had been scheduled to testify against Mr. Sentsov last month, but retracted his testimony on July 31, saying he had given it under duress. Memorial, a Russian rights group, said last week that Mr. Afanasyev had been tortured. After the presiding judge, Sergei Mikhailyuk, read out the sentence and asked Mr. Sentsov and Mr. Kolchenko if they understood, the two men, standing in a glass defen­ dants’ cage, smiled and started singing Ukraine’s national anthem, a fixture of protests against Mr. Yanukovych.

[ 339 ] The courtroom footage was shown on Ukrainian television and circulated on YouTube and the Facebook pages of Russian opposition activists and liberal intelli­ gentsia. President Petro O. Poroshenko of Ukraine expressed his support for Mr. Sentsov in a Twitter post. ‘Stick it, Oleg,’ he wrote. ‘The time will come and those who organized the judgment against you will themselves end up in the prisoners’ dock.’ Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry, in a statement on its website, called the trial ‘a judicial farce.’ Christoph Strasser, the German government’s special envoy for human rights and humanitarian affairs, said in a statement that he was ‘shaken’ by the severity of the sentences, which he noted could be appealed, and urged Russia to comply with Council of Europe norms for the humane treatment of prisoners. Dmitry Dinze, a lawyer for Mr. Sentsov, told journalists outside the courthouse that an appeal would be taken to Russia’s Supreme Court, the official Tass news agency reported. ‘This is the height of injustice and lawlessness,’ Mr. Dinze said, according to Tass. ‘The materials of the defense showed that Oleg Sentsov is essentially innocent.’ European filmmakers have spoken out in support of Mr. Sentsov, who is seen as a promising director. His film Gamer, about a computer-game-obsessed Ukrainian teen­ ager, was shown at the International Film Festival Rotter­ dam in 2012. Last week, several major Russian filmmakers expressed their support. In a letter published in Novaya Gazeta, Andrey Zvyagintsev, whose 2014 film ‘Leviathan,’ about a standoff between a lone-wolf provincial auto mechanic and

[ 340 ] local authorities, was nominated for an Academy Award for best foreign language film, asked for leniency for Mr. Sentsov as a ‘talented cinematographer and father of young children.’ Mr. Zvyagintsev said that he had read all available materials about the case and could find no direct proof of Mr. Sentsov’s guilt”.

The Russian court sentenced Ukrainian filmmaker on “terrorism” charges: www.japantimes.co.jp, 26 August 2015 “Rostov-on-Don, RUSSIA — On Tuesday Russian military court has sentenced Ukrainian filmmaker for twenty years in high-security prison on ‘terrorism’ charges, during the court hearing, deeply condiment by official Kyiv, Western human rights activists, and groups and the best filmmakers. Oleg Sentsov, 39, was declared guilty of arson of the buildings of several pro-Kremlin parties in Crimea after Russia has annexed the peninsula from Ukraine in March, last year. He is also convicted of the preparation of the further attacks, including the plans of planting the bomb in Lenin’s monument in the Crimean capital city of Simfe­ ropol. His Ukrainian fellow citizen, also a defendant in this case, a twenty-five-year-old activist Oleksandr Kolchenko, who also opposed Russian annexation of Crimea, was sentenced to ten years in prison after he was declared guilty in the terrorist attacks. <…> Two men, who were transferred to Russia from Ukraine in May of the previous year, have been convicted as Russian citizens, despite the fact that they never applied for receiving Russian citizenship.

[ 341 ] Oleg Sentsov’s lawyer Dmytro Dinze stated that his client, who was transferred to one of the two Russian military courts authorized to investigate the terrorism-related cases, intends to impeach a court judgment. <…> This court sentence was strongly condemned by the Western politicians, officials, filmmakers, artists, and international organizations. Federica Mogherini came forward to voice her criticism of the court process as the one that ‘violates the international law and the elementary standards of justice’. The United States of America also condemned the sentence Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko received and called on Russia to release both of them immediately. ‘It is an obvious miscarriage of justice,’ an official representative of the US State Department John Kirby declared. A famous human rights group ‘Amnesty International’ called this process ‘an outrageous injustice after the clearly unjust and biased court hearing, overshadowed with the statements about using of tortures that deserve to be heard and studied’. Prominent film directors from all over the world, including Pedro Almodovar (Spain) and Mike Lee (Great Britain), wrote to the President of Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, expressing their deep concern regarding the persecution of Oleg Sentsov. <…> ‘Actually, Sentsov was beaten and threatened with rape and murder, he was being strangled with the plastic bag until he lost consciousness,’ Dinze said in October. ‘The officers refused to open a case regarding these incidents and to investigate it, claiming that all those bruises on his back and on his legs were received due to his sadomasochistic sexual practices before the arrest,’ the lawyer stated.

[ 342 ] The lawyers also informed that the witnesses also underwent tortures, so that they were forced to testify against Sentsov and Kolchenko that the two of them were really engaged in the activities related to the ultra-right Ukrainian organization known as ‘Right Sector’, currently banned in Russia. <…> In his last word in court, the filmmaker condemned the authorities in Moscow. ‘Your propaganda works really good, yet there are still people among you, who understand very well that there are no ‘fascists’ in Ukraine, that Crimean annexation was totally illegal and that your troops are presented on the territory of Donbas,’ Oleg Sentsov said referring to the conflict in the East of Ukraine. Vladimir Putin vehemently denies his involvement in the conflict and insist that there are no Russian troops in the military conflict zone in Eastern Ukraine and that there are only ‘volunteers’ or the soldiers who aren’t on duty now. Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko are among eleven Ukrainians, who are currently detained in Russian prisons and are being considered the political prisoners by Kyiv, according to the statements of Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs Pavlo Klimkin”.

Anna Kachko: A film producer “In March 2015 in Berlin, in the Wall Museum (Mauer Museum) an event in support of Nadiia Savchenko and Oleg Sentsov was being held. There was also a new hall dedicated to Nadiia and Oleg opened in the Museum. During this event, I met Oleg’s sister, Natalya Kaplan, a journalist and a human rights activist. On that day we had an idea to organize a more massive event in Berlin to support

[ 343 ] Oleg and to try to attract the attention of more journalists and reporters, social networks and political activists. We wanted to create an information wave around the situation with Oleg, we really wanted to draw public attention in Germany to his case. We wanted to speak out about the illegal things happening to Oleg in Russia, and we wanted to speak out about it as loud as possible. In cooperation with the Ukrainian film producer Anna Palenchuk, we decided to organize a Ukrainian Cinema Week in Berlin to support Oleg Sentsov. Our idea was supported in Europe by many individuals and organizations, among them: Berlinale (International Film Festival in Berlin, Germany), European Film Academy, German Film Academy, Marienboard Berlin Brandenburg Film Fund, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Germany, and Ukraine was represented by Ukrainian Agency for Culture and Cinematography, Embassy of Ukraine in Germany and International Film Festival in Odessa. Oleg was also supported by many prominent filmmakers, including Director of Berlin International Film Festival Dieter Kosslick, film director Wim Wenders and many others, among them influential politicians. Before the opening ceremony of the Ukrainian Cinema Week in Berlin a press-conference was organized, and it was attended by the prominent German media. As a result, various articles and materials about Oleg Sentsov and his case have been published, and the situation around the arrest and the upcoming trial of Oleg Sentsov (at that moment) received wide publicity and captured the headlines in Germany. Unfortunately, as we all know, all the efforts of the public, all the statements and initiatives of the artists and politicians aimed at supporting Oleg Sentsov didn’t bring any significant results and couldn’t influence the court

[ 344 ] decision and to persuade the judges to release Sentsov. But at the same time, I am sure that we have to continue our work with all the means available to us and to spread the information about what is happening with Oleg Sentsov in Russia. It is a civic duty of any normal citizen and, of course, of Oleg’s colleagues from the filmmaking industry from all over the world”.

Anna Palenchuk: “In June Anna Kachko and I organized the ‘Ukrainian Cinema Weeks’ in Berlin. At that moment we’ve already had some experience of organizing similar events in Kyiv and in Tbilisi, so we understood that we had to make this event in a format of public support of Oleg by the numerous prominent cinematographic organizations of Germany, such as Berlin Film Festival, European Film Academy, German Film Academy etc. The film screenings took place at the iconic ‘Babylon’ cinema theatre, where various Ukrainian events used to be held before. We should also give credits to Ukrainian volunteers, who live in Berlin and who joined and helped carry out this event. We’ve selected a special programme consisting of films that could be interesting to the German audience at that moment, and we started the screenings. We’ve also organized a briefing for the journalists and reporters before the event opening. Many journalists and representatives of the above mentioned organizations were presented. Sergei Loznitsa and other colleagues of Oleg from the filmmaking industry also attended to support Oleg. On the next day, lots of German media resources published materials about Oleg Sentsov. Film screenings were with the full-house. What was especially important for us was that the audience attending

[ 345 ] the screenings was predominantly German. After each film, we organized a discussion panel in the ‘Question-Answer’ format, where everybody had the possibility to present their questions to the representatives of different creative groups, who worked on the films. Of course, they’ve been concerned not only with Oleg’s fate but the situation in our country in general and the future that could be waiting for our country. This event was really very important not only from the point of view of Oleg’s support on the international arena but also in the sense of the cultural diplomacy between Germany and Ukraine”.

An open letter of the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko In support of Oleg Sentsov during the Ukrainian Cinema Week in Berlin “I would like to greet you here and congratulate you all with important international art and public event, with the ‘Ukrainian Cinema Weeks’ in Berlin, held in support of Oleg Sentsov. Ukraine is grateful to all who support its citizens, who as a result of the annexation of Crimea and the unannounced war became imprisoned, political prisoners or victims of repressions and persecutions for their patriotic feelings and love to freedom. ‘We need not anger and hatred,’ a prominent Ukrainian artist and an icon of the international cinematography Oleksandr Dovzhenko wrote, ‘We need the heights of mind’. I want to thank all of you, who from the position of mind and of the great European tradition of respect to the human rights and freedoms invested efforts in carrying out of this event. I believe that Europe will not forget about the fate of Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, about the fate of the entire Crimean Tatar folk and about the fact of the first

[ 346 ] military intervention on the territory of a sovereign and independent state since the times of the Second World War. We all are connected with the wish to support an artist, who fights for the independence and sovereignty of his country, who stands for peace, safety, and security of the entire European continent. I believe that together we will be able to make everything possible to help release him from custody. I also believe that the people of Europe would stand united against the dangers and threats Ukrainian people are currently fighting against in the East of your country. I hope that the ‘Ukrainian Cinema Week’ in Berlin will reveal for us the new names, new perspective of the human life, new Ukraine that fights heroically and never stops creating, that continues its efforts to build a state governed by the rule of law and a free society, preserves tolerance and welcomes creative freedom. I wish you all peace, wellbeing and unforgettable impressions”.

Brigitta Manthey: An advisor of Marienboard Berlin Brandenburg for the financing of the cinema in Eastern Europe “I knew Oleg Sentsov from my visits of Odessa International Film Festival. He drew my attention after he was awarded by the FIPRESCI jury for his debut film Gamer in 2012. On this festival, Oleg also received a prize for the best pitch for his new project Rhino. That was how he became acknowledged by the international filmmaking community. Next year, in Odessa, I found out more about his impressive plans for his next project called Kai. A unique perspective and a unique point of view revealed in him one of the biggest and strongest personalities of the young Ukrainian cinematography. Film critics often call the new

[ 347 ] generation of Ukrainian artists ‘The angry Ukrainians’ in order to describe the new power of Ukrainian cinema, and it can be really felt. Oleg Sentsov is a combination of a true filmmaking talent and a great artistic ambition. I was totally sure that we would see his new films included in the programmes of class A film festivals in the future. Later, in the same month, his preparation to the filming of his new film was interrupted by his participation in Euromaidan protests. Since the time of the scandalous arrest of Oleg Sentsov in Crimea, several of our campaigns to support him didn’t have significant results. It saddens me a lot. But one should never forget that our voices are always ready to speak up in his defense and that we will always be with him”.

Myroslav Slaboshpytsky: A movie director “I am often being addressed by the representatives of the various media. They ask me to comment on Oleg Sentsov’s case. I often have to send them to another person, to someone, who really knew Oleg Sentsov, because everything I can do is to actually repeat a position that is already known – Oleg Sentsov must be released immediately. As I didn’t know him personally, I didn’t really have a lot to say. And generally, I am quite skeptical towards this kind of campaigns. I remember how I used to read the letters of the Western intellectuals in support of imprisoned Vasyl Stus and Sergei Parajanov. There were also many different statements there, but, as we all know, it didn’t really have any results. Of course, I am trying to help, I am trying to donate some amounts of money, I am writing the letters. We also made

[ 348 ] an evening in support of Oleg Sentsov in the ‘Lyra’ cinema theatre in Kyiv, where we demonstrated Ukrainian movies and tried to gather some funds. But one should understand that nobody was ever released based on the pressure of the open letters and statements only. They have a different meaning, actually. Publicity, exposure and the constant presence of Oleg on the media scene help focus public attention on him, and this attention in its turn gives him some kind of protection. Even physical influence on the defendant becomes harder when the attention of thousands of people is constantly drawn to his person. For the prison administration, for Oleg’s prison guards Oleg turned into a ‘defaulting customer’, who can’t be hurt without the special command from the officials. Nobody wants to deal with problems within that system. That’s why this public attention works as sort of a little insurance and protection, and it is really quite important. What concerns me more in these recent times is some decline of interest to the case of Oleg Sentsov. It is really difficult to say what the reasons for this could be. Probably, it has something to do with the release if Nadiia Savchenko, who together with Oleg played a role of a symbol of the fight, although they are two completely different personalities in all the senses. Or maybe people simply got tired from all of that. There is some activity now too, but there is a feeling that it declines, and it really makes me sad”.

Anna Palenchuk: “After our initiative in Berlin I understood that the format of film screenings to support Oleg has already outlived itself and that we have to talk about Oleg now from another perspective, more specifically, we have to talk about Oleg Sentsov as a writer.

[ 349 ] I’ve read his novel ‘Buy this book – it’s funny’ in a single burst. Oleg’s writing style is very easy, ironic and, again, very cinematographic. With this literary work of his, he really announced himself as a writer, and that’s why we decided to publish his book in cooperation with Oleksandr Krasovitsky and ‘Folio’ Publishing House. I knew that Oleg wanted this novel to be proofread by a very good editor, as he wasn’t so confident about the version we had. Unfortunately, we didn’t have a chance to send Oleg the edited version of his novel, that’s why we had to act in accordance with our own vision and understanding of how we saw the future edition of this book. I remember that we were quite surprised when the editor said that in fact the novel required very little changes and corrections, and mostly it had to do with some style corrections. That’s why this book saw the world almost as it was in Oleg’s manuscript, just as we received it. It proves that Oleg is a very talented person, and he is really talented in many fields. He showed himself as a great entrepreneur, a talented filmmaker, and a great writer as well. I am sure that this novel can be published in other languages as well. There’s not a lot of modern Ukrainian literature that could be really translated. There’s something very universal in this book. I think this story and this style would be quite relatable and easy to understand for a person from any continent. The same applies to his movies. I really hope that we will find the possibility to translate this novel into different languages, so that not only Ukrainians would have the chance to read Oleg’s novels. ‘Buy this book – it’s funny’ (originally written and published in Russian) was published by ‘Folio’ Publishing House in 2016. It is sort of an adventure novel, with lots of ironies and intelligent humour. It is a story about Americans,

[ 350 ] who are friends and who find themselves in the middle of quite unexpected events, go through lots of challenges and at some point of time even meet God. Oleg has written this text before his imprisonment, that’s why some of the episodes of the book could probably seem to be almost prophetic to the readers because they correspond so much with the events that would happen later in the author’s life. The most important though is that everything has a happy end, that’s why we can really hope that the story of Oleg Sentsov will also end positively”.

A fragment from the Oleg Sentsov’s book “Buy this book – it’s funny”: “…I have never been a religious fanatic, that’s why I usually perceived all the church visits the same way as I felt about the dentist appointments, in other words, with the similarly and proportionally mixed feelings of necessity and responsibility. But to take it like this! At this moment I was ready to deliver the greater heretic of the century to the Holy See Security Services only because he’s just broken and destroyed a part of my world! And the case is even not in the roasted turkey sides and in the holiday presents that could not be stuffed inside of the red felt boot hanging above the fireplace! It’s just impossible, Jimmy, it’s impossible… Nobody’s doing it like this… One can’t tell it aloud at least, that’s for sure. No, maybe you are partially right! Maybe. But there’s no telling what could happen! What if there is someone up, in the skies? What if they really sit there, observe us and make their calculations systematically? I mechanically looked up and started listening and watching very carefully. I was very close to hear the light tapping sound of the abacus tiles, but it turned out later that this sound didn’t come from the skies, but from the earth actually.

[ 351 ] It was just Jebbs, who started rattling with something in the box. It was another bottle of whiskey. Jebbs is definitely a bastard, yet he’s got his supplies! He started making jokes and pinching Elsa, while Elsa started screaming squealing, so the world came back to its usual movement again, and together with it, the circular movement of the new bottle with the whiskey started as well. Everybody calmed down a little, and alcohol eliminated the rests of a complicated conversation we had before. But some time later I suddenly understood or rather felt somewhere on the corner of my sight and mind that now there were more people here. He emerged all of a sudden, literally out of nowhere. One cannot even say that he actually appeared, one cannot even say that I saw him suddenly. It felt like he was always sitting here. During the entire evening, between me and Elsa. Although I remember clearly that there was no one there. But during the evening everybody moved a little bit, changing their seats, and after Jim’s benefice, when everything stopped for a moment and then came back to life again, it was suddenly not five of us here, but six. I don’t know whether I was the first one to realize it, but Elsa was the first to react, as usual. She was always a central figure of any evening, be that a literary reading evening and a sadomasochist orgy. Handing the whiskey bottle again, she finally reacted on a stranger, who was dressed in some kind of a robe. Once she noticed him, she shrieked and tried to get up, but heavy dinner and a certain amount of alcohol she previously consumed kept her body on the ground, just swinging it a little. ‘Oh, who are you?’ Elsa asked for again, holding her balance exclusively thanks to the bottle she held in her right hand and staring at the stranger, although she handed him a bottle of whiskey for several times a little earlier. This

[ 352 ] time it was not only me, but all of us understood that there was a stranger among us. The stranger smiled warmly as a response, took the bottle of whiskey from Elsa’s hand with a very customary gesture, sipped a little from it, then handed it to me and sat quietly, folding his hands on his stomach. I took a very big gulp, as I really hoped that after that the vision would disappear, but it didn’t. I just started seeing this stranger double. I closed my eyes, thinking that the stranger will go away once I’ll open them again, but the only one thing I saw was that Aunt Ginger was still there and continued to manage the public executions, that’s why I opened my eyes straight away. The stranger sat on his seat, and I stopped seeing him double. I handed the bottle to Helen, who still didn’t have enough time to come back to senses after Jim’s monologue, so she easily became shocked again, partially preserving her drinking reflexes, but losing her swallowing reflex, so she simply choked. Smart Billy was fast enough to catch the bottle falling from her hands and relieved his own stress through patting her back energetically. ‘Be careful, Miss Sokolova, you can easily choke to death like that,’ the stranger said. ‘Have we met?’ Helen asked, pronouncing slowly all the letters together with the spaces and all the separating characters. ‘Well, to some extent, we all have met and we all know each other,’ the stranger replied with the same half-smile. ‘We are even all relatives, to some extent,’ Jim joined the conversation from his corner. He was the only one of us who didn’t seem to be scared of the stranger. Most probably, he hasn’t even noticed him yet. ‘How is it?’ Jebbs asked, getting the bottle of whiskey back. His ability to speak returned to him together with the bottle, it seemed.

[ 353 ] ‘There is a theory that all the mankind was born in Africa and derives from one woman. However, it happened hundred thousand years ago,’ Jim stated. ‘Yes, that’s right, and it wasn’t that far from here too,’ the stranger waved his hand, pointing to something in the darkness, behind our backs. ‘The climate was way more pleasant though. It’s very hot here now,’ he hid his hands between the folds of his robe again, and his light and mysterious half-smile appeared on his face again. To be honest, it started to irritate me a little already, and maybe next time I’ll see it I will call it an evil smile. The pause started swinging like a pendulum. The contents of the bottle stopped when it was Jebbs’ turn, but nobody seemed to be sad about it. As for me, it was definitely enough impressions for today. ‘It’s really good here in your company. Thank you for the treat. Thank you for the conversation. Well, I’ve got to go now,’ the stranger started bowing, but it was only verbally, as his body didn’t actually participate in this goodbye speech yet, sending an unlimited amount of the evil smiles though. ‘But we haven’t even talked properly,’ a mistress of the even announced. ‘Well, one shouldn’t necessarily say the words in order to have a conversation. Moreover, I think it was said more than enough today,”’ the stranger smiled again, but now it seemed that he didn’t just smile, but that he directed this smile specifically to Jim. ‘But before I leave, I would like to thank you, my good friends. What would you want now?’ ‘What do you mean?’ I decided to join the conversation. ‘Well, what wishes do you have?’ ‘Me?’ I looked at Jebbs, who sat in front of me, then I looked at the empty bottle standing at his feet, then I noticed a cigarette end lying close, and then suddenly I made a choice.

[ 354 ] Apparently, I rushed too much with my choice though. ‘I would like to have another joint, and better even two of them!’ I said. ‘So how many do you want? One or two? Precision is very important here,’ the stranger turned his head to me and smiled at me again with that smile of an old and wise turtle. You know, there is a certain category of people, who always think they are smarter than the others. They seem to talk to you, they even look at you, yet they smile somewhere to space, and you understand immediately that you mean absolutely nothing to them. I don’t really like this sort of people, and this stranger was just like that, and I think I’ve already told you about his smile. He started irritating me really strong now, so I started talking and couldn’t really stop: ‘That’s right! Why should we squander our talents on trifles? One or two, that’s not the scale! It has to be really a lot, and it has to be an endless supply’. ‘I would like to hear more details,’ an accountant in the robe insisted. ‘More details? No problem! A field! Yes, a field, an entire field. As far as the eye can see,’ and I waved to all the compass points. The stranger in the robe looked to the directions I showed, yet the darkness there was absolutely identical. ‘In other words, you would like it to be something around eight thousand hectares? An entire field? Is that right? And you would like cannabis to grow there?’ ‘Yes, yes, that’s right,’ Crazy Bill blurted out, refusing to quiet down. ‘We would like it to grow and to never end’. ‘No problem. What about you though?’ the stranger addressed Jim, but Jim was somewhere in near Andromeda Nebula, so he didn’t react at all. But it was our lover-boy and a fan of New York nuns, Jebbs, who reacted.

[ 355 ] ‘A field of cannabis, it’s all nonsense. The only one rock festival and all of it would be consumed already, less than in a week. Yet the stones, the diamonds, that’s forever!”’ It seems that the story about the professor and his not so successful and not so scientific expedition not only failed to freeze enthusiasm of some of our representatives of certain social layers but rather the opposite – it only caused some individuals to get even more excited. ‘Really?’ the stranger answered in a warm and friendly tone. ‘Well, how many of those magic and beautiful precious stones do you think you’d need? It is about the diamonds, as far as I understand, or would the rough diamonds also suffice?’ ‘Pass me the cream, please, Missis Hudson,’ I was ready to hear this the next proposal, yet what I’ve heard instead was this: ‘The diamond mines of King Solomon!’ It was Elsa, and she started playing a game of the words-synonyms, she was clearly enjoying it and laughed to herself. ‘Does it really matter?’ Jebbs also started to laugh. ‘Well, maybe it doesn’t matter to you, but I have to know it exactly,’ the stranger replied. ‘Okay, let it be the diamonds then’. ‘Diamonds are a girl’s best friends!’ Elsa started to dance and kept earning the points for her hilarious single player game. ‘o, no, no, the rough diamonds would be still better. Yes, the rough diamonds!’ Jebbs was in a hurry to correct his wish, it looked as if he was totally sure that it will come to reality. ‘Okay. How many?’ the stranger was obviously ready to bargain and to make terms. ‘Well, I definitely don’t need an entire field if diamonds… Just a little bit to the horizon, as I’m afraid to damage the

[ 356 ] stairs,’ Jebbs said and started laughing to his own humour, and as usual, he was alone in it. There was always comic show broadcasting on his channel. As he usually did at such important points of his life, when he needed to make an important decision, he just looked up. Okay, how many times he used to do that since that short period of time we’ve been in his service, but it never actually led to anything good, so I only closed my eyes, just out of habit. There, deep inside of me, I finally saw a usual and familiar darkness. It seems that Aunt Ginger with her team has already left home to prepare her dinner. I suddenly heard a word ‘Waggon’ in the darkness. I took a deep breath, opened my eyes and came back to the reality. ‘What kind of a wagon?’ the stranger continued interrogating Jebbs. He was obviously mocking Jebbs already and making fun of him, and of all us too, actually. ‘Should it be a railway wagon? Should it be an eight-wheel-car? What is the tonnage?’ ‘The biggest possible tonnage in the world,’ greediest Jebbs responded. ‘So, sixty tons then?’ ‘Can it be more?’” ‘No, it can’t’. ‘Okay, fine, let it be sixty tons then,’ Jebbs lay on his back under the pressure of his own desires, he put his hands on his stomach, closed his eyes and, most probably, started to swim and float inside of his imaginary wagon of diamonds. ‘What about you?’ the stranger addressed Jim for the second time. Jim answered in a manner that was quite usual for him and demonstrated his absence during the conversation. ‘It would be good if people told only the truth…’ he said. ‘Hmm,’ the stranger stroked his beard wearily.

[ 357 ] Jimmy could confuse and beat out of reason any normal person, but, as it turned out now, he liked doing that to the not normal ones dressed in the robes too. ‘It can’t be done to the full extent,’ the stranger replied after a pause. He continued stroking his beard and looking distracted in front of himself. In terms of the socialization stage, or rather its total absence, he and Jim were surprisingly similar at this moment. ‘It can’t be done to the full extent…’, yet there was easy to deliver a wagon of diamonds or an entire field of cannabis. These local psychos’ imagination was definitely weaker and less vivid than ours. ‘This is very sad…’ Jim said slowly after a pause. ‘I am getting very tired from lies’. I knew about it. Jimmy once told me that an average human tells lies around fifty times a day. I really tried to count it in my case, yet I never could find more than two times. We also tried to count it with the Uncle. We used to gather a hundred times just before the lunchtime, but later I couldn’t even follow the pace of my relative, who used to get more and more excited about this issue. As for Jim, he himself never lied, but it didn’t help him in his life at all. The mankind was definitely not ready for that, that’s why he decided to try to balance the situation a little bit now. Jimmy really didn’t like lies, although he always tried to politely ignore the cases, when the others were lying. But it was clear and easy to notice, how he was wrinkling each time he heard the lies, and it felt that it went right from his heart. I knew about it, and that’s why I tried to never lie to him. I could lie to him a couple of times only, and that was always with the good intentions. However, I usually do the same with the others too, while those others did the same with me and with the other others, and those others did it

[ 358 ] with their others. In a nutshell, the entire mankind lie. Most of the people do it with the good intentions, some of the people lie just a little bit and some of them lie for the sake of their business. Jimmy really didn’t like it. I got used to it with time, and statistics led us to the number ‘fifty times a d a y ’. ‘It is not easy, it is not easy…”’ our new strange and inadequate friend muttered. ‘I can offer you though…’ ‘A toast!’ Elsa suddenly blurted out, thinking that the time came for the ‘Guess a word’ competition. ‘A compromise. I can offer a compromise. I said this word correctly,’ and the stranger in a robe looked at us attentively. I also didn’t know this word before, but I really hope that I wrote it right here. After all these questions and new words, the six of us suddenly reminded me of a famous Russian intellectual show ‘What? Where? When?’. I saw once how Jim was watching it on the cable TV. Six idiots sit in the chairs, twist the wheel with a little arrow on it and then argue for a long time about who would get the letter! ‘Yes, a compromise,’ the stranger continued talking to himself, it seemed. ‘It is very difficult, or rather impossible to fulfill this wish. People don’t want, or rather they are not ready yet to say the truth and only the truth. And neither us, nor you, nor anybody else have the right to force them to do so. One should never force the people to do something. They have to want to make it themselves. When they will understand that everything depends on them, then they will start telling the truth only, and then they will start doing other right and noble things and deeds. I will definitely wait for this moment to come. It’s impossible that it will not come. What are the purpose and the meaning of all that then?’ the stranger asked, making a wide gesture with his hands. It was clear that his hands got a little swollen already.

[ 359 ] After his words, Jimmy looked down on earth and then looked at the stranger with the great attention. The stranger obviously started feeling a little bit uncomfortable under Jimmy’s steady look, yet he somehow managed to regain control. ‘But I am obliged to help you,’ the stranger said, and it seemed to me, that he even bowed a little to Jim saying it. ‘That’s why everything I can do now is to make it happen that nobody can lie personally to you, Nabii,’ he obviously started feeling weirder and worse, so he even started talking gibberish and being carried away by the conversation. Then the stranger bowed lightly again, and this time it was already obvious that he bowed to Jim, and he made it more clear. He stopped all these half-movements and half- gestures addressed nobody knew to whom. Jimmy though seemed to also catch this infection, because he also bowed a couple of times to the stranger. It looked like he fell asleep for a moment, and then woke up suddenly. ‘Be it so,’ Jimmy said. ‘Be it so!’ the stranger exclaimed and suddenly clapped his hands so that the ladies even shrieked. Then he stood up. ‘ was very glad to meet you’. The stranger started bowing to each of us in turns, and he was doing it very obvious. ‘Well, and I want…’ Elsa stood up slowly, hardly holding her laughter and finally realizing that it was a TV-shop channel, not a channel for some competitions. ‘I want the white one… You know… with the long one…’ But it seemed that the stranger didn’t even hear her, just as he must have never heard about the feminist movement as well. ‘But now it’s really time for me to go. Goodbye!’ he said and bowed another time, this time it was addressed to

[ 360 ] everybody and to nobody in particular. Then the stranger stepped back and disappeared into the darkness. ‘Hey, wait! I just started though!’ Elsa was screaming. ‘Would you probably be so kind and come to visit us again tomorrow? I will make a list ready! I will show you my list, and you will show me what you have under that blanket, and I think we’ll come to an agreement!’ It was followed by the pigs oinking and shrieks of definitely not the best representatives of the cloven-footed mammals of our tribe. ‘Well, you’ve got really strange subjects living here,’ Jebbs said, hardly coming back to senses and calming down a little. ‘We’ve got them?’ Elsa wondered. ‘It was the first time I’ve seen him! I thought he was one of your workers, maybe just a little bit weird’. “There are only three of us here,” Jebbs replied. “The rest are absent…” ‘Or rather they are unresponsive or rather bombed out, or they’re simply in la-la-land,’ I said, trying to flex my sense of humour and to say something funny, in my opinion. ‘I think he is just a psycho,’ Helen made a conclusion about our evening. ‘And he is also quite old!’ Elsa added, joining her favouri­ te female entertainment of discussing those who left shortly. ‘Why is it? He is thirty-five-year old maximum!’ ‘Thirty-five-year-old? Are you insane? He must be seventy at least! Have you seen his beard reaching his knees?’ ‘A beard? Did you mean the mustache? The little mustache?’ ‘Really? It seemed to me that he just hasn’t shaved for a couple of days,’ Jebbs tried to join the discussion, but it moved on even without his participation.

[ 361 ] ‘The mustache? Are you sure about that, my darling?’ Elsa said it a tone, which is only being used to announce to the neighbor that she was diagnosed with schizophrenia. ‘I am totally sure about it!’ an answer of a patient who likes to diagnose himself. ‘I don’t really know where you have looked during the entire evening if you haven’t even noticed that he had a beard! But wait, I know! I know what you are intending to do all the evening long!’ Elsa exclaimed and pointed on Jim, who seemed to fall into meditation mode again. ‘Well, well, well,’ Helen stood up slowly and started approaching Elsa, obviously with not the best intentions…”

“Buy this book – it’s funny” became the second book in Oleg Sentsov’s bibliography. Before that, a cycle of his novels has seen the world. It was published by the “Laurus” Publishing House and was called “Oleg Sentsov. Novels”. It consisted mostly of the autobiographical texts, where the filmmaker describes artistically various episodes from his childhood and youth times.

A fragment from the “Novels” review: gazeta.zn.ua, Ivan Ryabchyi, 4 September 2015 “The book ‘Novels’ requires either a foreword or an afterword. It needs someone wise and polite, in order to write about Oleg Sentsov as a human being and an author, without becoming pathetic. Apparently, the huge letters ‘SENTSOV’ on the book cover is not enough to explain the phenomenon, and quite a sad one, of the emergence of the new legend. And this absence of a foreword to this book is the only one complaint against the publishing house I have.

[ 362 ] Sentsov is a man of system and structure. He always tends to ‘count’ the text he writes (‘Childhood’, ‘Makars’), he tries to build it as a certain structure, to turn it into something perfect, like a ‘perfect human’ of Leonardo da Vinci. Sentsov is a perfectionist. He writes their texts pushing them maximally closer to the screenplays. There are extremely dynamic, despite the fact that there are not so many dialogues there. <…> In the beginning, the word ‘Novels’ can be perceived not as a genre definition, but rather as a full-fledged name of the book. The only one text that somehow falls out of the overall tone is the one that is modestly called ‘Autobiography’. But this is the text that with its first lines defines the entire mood and the overall tone of the book: ‘I was born on Monday, on the day 13. Probably, that’s the reason why my life is so full of fun’. However, nothing really falls out. There is a general style. The style is the author’s personality though. And Sentsov’s personality is strong and very bright. The main tone of Sentsov’s book is bright and candid. Play of white colour, a light grey palette interspersed with warm sun. But anyway, in all of his texts, without exceptions, the author leads us to the theme of death (‘A Dog’, ‘The Testament’, ‘A Granny’), decay (‘Makars’), decadence (‘Childhood’), illness (‘A Hospital’) and humiliation. The double-bottomed novel and one of the boldest ones in the novels cycle is probably “‘A Granny’. It is also the most popular novel to be read on stage. It constitutes a semantic pair with the novel ‘A Dog’, while the novel ‘Makars’ feels to be a continuation of ‘Childhood’. Tonality of Sentsov’s novels is very similar to the one of the most popular and best-selling Dutch-speaking author – Thomas Lanois. In his masterpiece, a novel ‘The Cardboard Boxes’, Lanois artistically creates the kind and warm images

[ 363 ] of his characters (sister, mother, two aunts, children in the holiday centre), while he tickles carefully really difficult and controversial issues (such as cancer, abortion, narcissism, first child’s orgasm etc.), and it feels like they all stem naturally from the text. Lanois, just like Oleg Sentsov, doesn’t fall into the excessive didactic rhetoric, leaving the reader with an opportunity to make conclusions on his or her own. Tonality and voice of Oleg Sentsov somehow remind of Mikhail Zhvanetsky. And it’s no wonder, as Zhvanetsky is probably the only one being quoted by Oleg in his ‘Novels’”.

A fragment from Oleg Sentsov’s novel “The Testament”: “I don’t want to have a grave. I want to be burnt after my death. No, I don’t mean to be burnt on the inquisition fire, not at all. Just at the ordinary crematorium. Let them burn my body and then scatter the ashes to the four winds, somewhere over the sea. Preferably over the Black Sea, preferably in the summer, and it would be great if it would be a sunny weather, with the light and refreshing breeze. But even if it will be autumn, and if it will be raining, it will be not bad either. Nobody would wait till the summer in case if I will die in November, wouldn’t they? Imagine, the guests will come one day and ask: ‘What is it in that vase?’ – “Oh, that’s our grandfather, he’s waiting for the summer there’. By the way, I’d like you to throw the vase into the sea too, don’t make a fetish out of it! Because there could be another scene then: the same room, one year later, and the guests are asking: ‘That’s such an interesting vase! What is it?’ And the relatives would reply solemnly, bowing their heads: ‘Our grandfather’s ashes rested there’. Well, let us then hang my socks and my undergarments everywhere around the house, the most favourite ones and those I was wearing on my last day.

[ 364 ] I want them to burn my body after my death. To ashes. And I want the ashes to be scattered. Over the sea. It would be perfect if it happened in the summer. If I’ll die in the summer, of course. But make sure to scatter the ashes on the side of the wind-exposed-lateral area of the ship, so that the ashes would be scattered over the sea surface, not ending up on the deck surface instead, so that one of the most talk- active and impudent grandsons wouldn’t be able to comment this incident with a phrase like: ‘There was always so much trouble with this old man!’ And let the wind blow, and let it carry my ashes far away to the sea. But even if it will be raining, that’s okay too, as I suppose, people would say something like: ‘See, we are burying a very good person if it’s raining now!’ But we’re not burying, we’re actually sowing, or it’s more accurate to say that we’re scattering the ashes, comrades! If it will be raining, and the ashes would stick to the ash-bin a little, that’s okay too. However, I imagine that the same impudent grandson would definitely peer into the ash- bin, see there a few ashes stuck to the urn and say: ‘Yes, our grandfather is definitely still trying to cling for life!’ But that’s okay too, just throw the rest of the ashes and the ash-bin into the sea too. I don’t want anything to remain after me. Nothing at all. Just the memory. And my deeds. And my friends. And you. So I can always stay with you”.

Danylo Vradiy: A close friend of Oleg Sentsov “Today Oleg Sentsov as a filmmaker is more famous due to the controversial court process he is going through, not due to his actual work. And I know that he is not very happy because of it. Of course, any form of publicity and hype is still publicity and hype anyway, but it seems to me

[ 365 ] that Oleg really wants to become famous in a very different fashion. If everything will be fine and he will be released in the nearest future, his further filmmaking career will always remain in the shadow of this political component. He, his personality and his creative work would be perceived from the perspective of this period of his life, and not through the immediate manifestation of his talent. Oleg knows that his friends haven’t left him, and I think it’s enough. I haven’t written anything to him. At the beginning of the court process, he used to tell openly that he didn’t really want to talk to anybody. Probably now he’s changed his mind about it, but I am still not ready to write to him. I think that I express my position and my stance quite clear, helping him even without actually writing and communicating. There’s no need for it at this stage. Yes, I used to send some information through the lawyers, but you can understand yourself that it cannot be considered a proper communication. There are the people who write to him. There are many new friends and acquaintances, who are also trying to keep in touch with him. I don’t think that he is sad there, in this sense, I mean”.

Oleksandr “Deep.Orcrist” Barkar: A cyber-sportsman “I was quite skeptical about Maidan, about its ideas and its methods. But it happened that most of my friends and relatives have chosen the side of Ukraine and Maidan instead of Yanukovich’s government, greedy and enraged due to the total impunity. The majority of thinking and talented people in Ukraine have chosen this side, haven’t they? Isn’t it surprising? I was a little bit surprised at the beginning. But later I thought that I was really interested in the people of Maidan

[ 366 ] and the people supporting the then government too. There was an energy of art and creativity on Maidan, people who gathered there really believed in some ideas and, believe it or not, they have won. Oleg has also chosen Maidan. To be honest, I knew about it just now, but I’ve never had any doubts regarding his choice. It would be simply impossible for Grunt to stand together with the liars and bastards. When everything started, he headed to Kyiv, like a real man. He was there in the hardest moments, during the violent clashes erupting between the protesters and the ‘Berkut’ fighters, during all the most tragic and heroic events of that winter. And then it got worse and worse as it went on. Simferopol suddenly became a Russian city, and it was a surprise for Oleg and for many other Crimean residents. But at the same time, a Ukrainian citizen Oleg Sentsov, who used to speak and think in the Russian language all his life, suddenly became a stranger in the place where he was born, where he grew up and where he lived most of his life. Till the end, he was helping the people, who couldn’t accept the cynical and outrageous ‘annexation’ of Crimean from Ukraine. Till the end he was trying to do something, to oppose that crazy mayhem that was happening in Crimea, although everybody could understand that this fight was doomed to failure. Probably, C2.Grunt, an old StarCraft player, couldn’t accept his failure. To just write ‘GG’ and to leave was beyond his powers and his principles. And now Oleg is in prison. He is in the Russian prison. And he is a citizen of Ukraine. A father of two, an artist, a great talent, he is sentenced to the long prison term for his views and for his normal patriotism. Just because he refused to give up on his Ukrainian passport”.

[ 367 ] Human rights organizations announced their support of Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko: www.pravda.com.ua, Monday, 4 July 2016 “Human rights organization ‘Amnesty International’ in Ukraine starts a new termless initiative with the demand to immediately release Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko, currently detained in Russia. It is stated in the organization’s press release. The human rights activists stated that the release of Gennadiy Afanasyev was mostly a result of the activists’ efforts in this direction, according to Gennadiy Afanasyev himself, who stated about it in his video address. Human rights activists also called on intensifying of the pressure on Russian government in order to help free Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko. ‘The fact that I am released is actually a result of the public fight for me… It’s the hope for every detainee, it’s their chance to hold on, to endure it all and to survive. Just to know that they are not forgotten is so important for them,’ the press-release quoted Gennadiy Afanasyev’s words. With that knowledge in mind, Amnesty International calls on the people to write the letters in support of Oleg and Oleksandr using a special online form, which would allow to print all these letters and to send them to the addresses. ‘Writing the letters becomes especially relevant on the eve of Oleg Sentsov’s birthday, who will turn forty on 30 July,’ the human rights activists added. As it is known, Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko are currently detained based on the ‘terrorism’ charges. They’ve been sentenced to twenty and to ten years behind the bars respectively. Meanwhile Ukraine and Russian continue holding nego­ tiations regarding the release of Oleg Sentsov and Olek­sandr Kolchenko”.

[ 368 ] A solidarity effort in support of Crimean citizens currently detained in Russian Federation to be held in Poland: www.pravda.com.ua, Thursday, 2 June 2016 “In the city of Krakow Polish activists are preparing a solidarity effort to be held on 4 June in support of Crimean residents Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko, Gennadiy Afanasyev and Oleksiy Chyrniy, currently imprisoned in Russia. It has been published by the organizers of the event, a Polish community ‘Solidarity with the Crimean detainees’, on their official Facebook page. Since the morning participants of the solidarity effort are planning to gather on the main square of the city, to sign the postcards for the detainees and to create an album together, according to ‘Radio Liberty’. Earlier this week the Supreme Court of Russian Federation refused the lawyers of the detained Crimean residents Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko to accept their cassation appeal against the court judgment in the case. The next step within the framework of Russian judicial system could be an appeal of the decision of the Supreme Court, who has declined the cassation appeal, and the next step would be a reference to the European Human Rights Court, according to the lawyers. At the beginning of May, the information appeared that Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko just signed the documents for extradition to Ukraine. In May 2016 it was two years since the arrest and detention of the filmmaker Oleg Sentsov, of Oleksandr Kolchenko and of the participant of the protests against the annexation of Crimea Gennadiy Afanasyev. They became the first Crimean residents imprisoned by Russian and sentenced based on the political motives. In

[ 369 ] August 2015 the Northern-Caucasus military district court has sentenced Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko to twenty and to ten years in prison respectively. All the three Crimean residents have been convicted and declared the participants of the same terrorist organization that was responsible for preparation of the terrorist attacks to be carried out on the territory of the Crimean peninsula. The defendants and their defense team consider these charges unfounded, baseless and politically motivated. It is known that at the beginning of 2014 Russia has annexed Crimea, using the turmoil and power transition in Kyiv. The territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea was annexed under the cover of the so-called ‘referendum’ and in the presence of Russian troops on the peninsula. Afterward, the supporters of Ukraine started being persecuted and getting arrested in Crimea”.

Ukraine cannot get permission for the Consul to visit Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko: 112.ua, 3 August 2016 “Ukraine still cannot get permission for Ukrainian Consul to visit Ukrainian citizens Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko, who are being illegally detained in Russia, according to the information of the Consular Service department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs published on its official Facebook page. ‘As of today, the Embassy of Ukraine and Ukrainian consular services in Russian Federation are waiting during the extended period of time (more than two-three months) to receive from Russian responsible authorities over twenty permits for the meetings with our fellow citizens. In particular, official Ukraine still hasn’t received from Russia permission to visit the citizens of Ukraine Oleg Sentsov

[ 370 ] and Oleksandr Kolchenko, sentenced based on the illegal and fabricated charges. Despite the numerous addresses of Ukrainian diplomatic and consular institutions to the relevant competent state institutions of Russian Federation, no reply was received,’ the statement says. We would like to emphasize that these actions of the Russian side could be considered as a grave violation of the Article 13 of the Consular Convention between Ukraine and Russian Federation, which foresees the right of the consular and diplomatic officials of Ukraine to visit Ukrainian citizens in the detention facilities located on the territory of Russian Federation. Meanwhile, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine officials promise to continue taking all the necessary measures in order to receive the right to visit Sentsov, Kolchenko and other citizens of Ukraine, who are being currently detained and are convicted on the territory of Russian Federation. In addition to that, it is reported that a visit of the Ukrainian citizen Sergiy Litvinov, who is illegally detained and sentenced to eight and half years in prison and is being held in the remand prison of the city of Novocherkassk in Rostov region, is scheduled to take place in the nearest future. ‘At the same time, we must admit that, unfortunately, we still continue dealing with the practice of noncompliance with the international legal obligations by the Russian side, in particular, in the sphere of the protection of rights of the citizens,’ the department officials added. It is reported that on 10 March the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine has directed an inquiry to the Russian side with the demand to return Ukrainian citizens Oleg Sentsov, Yuriy Soloshenko, Oleksandr Kolchenko, and Gennadiy Afanasyev, convicted in Russia, on the territory of Ukraine”.

[ 371 ] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine called on the international community to pressure the Russian Federation with the aim of releasing of Ukrainian political prisoners: 112.ua, 13 September 2016 “Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine calls on the international community to apply all the possible means of the legal and political pressure on Russian Federation with the purpose of release of Ukrainian political prisoners and hostages, being currently detained on the territory of Russian Federation and on the ‘occupied Ukrainian lands’, and with the aim of ceasing of violation of human rights and freedoms. The statement was published by the Ministry press service. ‘Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine expresses its absolute protest regarding the unjust and inappropriate actions, degrading human dignity, committed by Russian Federation towards the citizens of Ukraine, who are currently unlawfully detained both on the territory of their own country and on the territory of the occupied Ukrainian lands,’ the statement has it. Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs reminds that ‘Russian authorities and its occupation forces’ still held captive at least twenty-nine citizens of Ukraine, while dozens of Ukrainian citizens are being persecuted on the territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Sixteen Ukrainian citizens are considered missing, while 115 Ukrainians are hostages of the illegal armed groups operating on the territories currently not controlled by Ukraine. ‘It (Russia. — Author’s remark) crudely violates inter­ national legal norms in regard to the defense of human rights, in particular, Convention for the protection of human rights and basic freedoms and Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,’ the statement says. This state of affairs is being

[ 372 ] interpreted as ‘return of Russian Federation to the political repressions and rigged trials in the best traditions of the Stalinism epoch’. Russia reportedly continues to hold on detention more than forty Ukrainian political prisoners, among them a Deputy Head of the Crimean Tatar Majlis Ilmi Umerov, a journalist Stanislav Klykh, a leader of the Ukrainian National Assembly Mykola Karpyuk, a film director Oleg Sentsov, a civil activist Oleksandr Kolchenko, and many others. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine is planning to launch since the work of a special platform to facilitate the release of Ukrainian citizens detained in Russia. The platform is scheduled to start its work next week. Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yuriy Lutsenko and the former Ukrainian political prisoner in Russia Gennadiy Afanasyev are expected to be involved in the work aimed at releasing Ukrainian political prisoners and hostages”.

Oleg Sentsov’s letter: “To whom it may concern! I am here in the Russian prison for the third year. For the third year, there is a war waged against my country. The enemy fights mean, dirty, through the back door, pretending that he has nothing to do with it. Nobody really believes him anymore, yet it doesn’t stop him. The war cannot be beautiful, but the truth is with us. We’ve never attacked anybody, we are just trying to defend our land. But there is not only that main enemy, an external enemy everybody knows about. There is another enemy as well. This enemy is way smaller in size, yet it is here within, right inside of each of us, he is underneath our skin, he feels almost like part of us. But he doesn’t stand with us, he stands for himself only. Somebody stayed here since the olden times, somebody just wants to continue

[ 373 ] living in an old fashion, just hiding under the new masks. But it won’t work. The big enemy and the smaller enemy have different purposes, but our paths are definitely different. And I don’t want to say that we will see who will win in this battle. I know who will win. Nobody can stop striving for progress and freedom. There are many of us held captive in Russia. There are many more in Donbass. Some of them are already released, families of others are still waiting and hoping to see their beloved ones soon. Each of us has his or her own story and detention conditions. Somebody tries to make a name using the stories of the prisoners, others really work hard, trying to help. To become a more famous defendant, just so that you would be exchanged faster, is definitely not the path I’d want to walk. I really don’t want to hog the blanket and take advantage of the situation. I just want to be a name on the general list. I doubt that they would offer me to leave the prison the last, but it would be still a good choice. We are very limited here in detention. And not only our freedom is restricted here (because one can never really take the freedom away from a person), the saddest thing is that we cannot do more for our country while being here. Actually, the only one thing we can do here is to hold on and to keep going. Don’t pay any price in order to get us out of here. The victory won’t become closer because of it. As for using us as a strong weapon against the enemy, then I’d say yes. You should know that we aren’t your weak spot. If we were destined to become the nails in the coffin of the tyrant, then I would like to be that nail. Just know and remember that this nail will never bend or break”. On 21 October 2016, after demands of the Ukrainian side regarding the release of Oleg Sentsov and returning him to Ukraine, Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation sent an

[ 374 ] official letter of rejection, where it was stated that according to the Russian law this procedure was impossible to be carried out. In this context referring to the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons from 1983, used by Russian Federation to allegedly prove that it follows the norms of the international law, looked and felt especially cynical.

A fragment of the letter of the Ministry of Justice of Russia addressed to Ukrainian side: “Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation informs about its decision regarding proceeding of the application of the Ukrainian party regarding transferring of Sentsov O.G., born in 1976, to Ukraine for the further serving of the term. Sentsov O.G. was granted Russian citizenship according to the Part 1 of the Article 4 of the Federal Constitutional Law from 21 April 2014 No. 6-FKZ ‘On the Admission of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea as a Part of Russian Federation and on Creation of Two New Subjects within Russian Federation – the Republic of Crimea and the City with Federal Status Sevastopol’. Taking into consideration provisions of the Part 1 of the Article 6 of the Federal Law from 31 May 2002 No. 62-F3 ‘On the Citizenship of Russian Federation’, according to which a Russian citizen, who also holds a citizenship of another country, is considered by Russian Federation exclusively as a citizen of Russia (with the exception of the cases foreseen by the International Agreement of Russian Federation or by the Federal Laws), and considering the absence of an International Agreement between Russian and Ukraine to regulate the dual citizenship issues, and also considering the fact that Sentsov O.G. is a Russian citizen, transferring of this defendant to Ukraine in accordance with the Convention on the Transfer of the Sentenced Persons from 1983 is impossible”.

[ 375 ] Ombudsman of Russian Federation made a statement regarding Sentsov and Kolchenko: www.pravda.com.ua, 25 October 2016 “Human Rights Ombudsman of Russian Federation Tatiana Moskalkova has announced that the defendants Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko cannot be transferred to Ukraine if they are citizens of Russian Federation. She told it the journalists during her Tuesday interview, according to the Russian ‘Interfax’ news agency. ‘I work with all the applications and inquiries of the Ukrainian ombudsman Valeria Lutkovska. They are receiving special treatment from me. Yet I haven’t received any requests regarding this issue yet. If they (Sentsov and Kolchenko) are really citizens of Russia, then according to the Constitution they cannot be transferred to another country,’ Moskalkova stated. Earlier though Russian ombudsman admitted that Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko were citizens of Ukraine. At the same time, Russian party also stated that they hold Russian citizenship as well, as they ‘didn’t officially declare their refusal to get Russian citizenship within the time required’, however, they also ‘didn’t apply for the Russian passports, which means, that they haven’t received Russian passports’. It is known that Russia refused to give Ukraine Crimean residents Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko, currently detained in Russia, as it considers them being citizens of Russian Federation. On 25 August 2015, the court in Rostov-on-Don (Russian Federation) has sentenced Ukrainian filmmaker Oleg Sentsov to twenty years in high-security prison on charges of preparation of the terrorist attacks to be carried out in Crimea.

[ 376 ] International organizations admitted that the cases against Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko were fabri­ cated and strongly criticised Russian Federation, demanding to release the prisoners”.

Valeria Lutkovska: “Automatic granting of citizenship of Russian Federation is actually a forcible act”: 26 October 2016 “Commissioner for Human Rights of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Valeria Lutkovska has addressed Commissioner for Human Rights of Russian Federation Tatiana Moskalkova regarding the forceful gaining of citizenship of Russian Federation for the citizens of Ukraine, who resided on the territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and weren’t able to address the immigration services office at the stated time in order to refuse Russian citizenship. One of the reasons for that was that they’ve been imprisoned in Russian detention facilities at that time. This issue becomes more and more relevant also because due to the fact that Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko have Russian citizenship (which was given them automatically) Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation refused to transfer them to Ukraine for the following serving of the prison term sentence. ‘Automatic granting of Russian citizenship to the persons, who due to various reasons weren’t able to refuse this citizenship, is actually an involuntary and forceful act,’ Valeria Lutkovska points out in her letter. It is obvious that while being under guard Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko both were deprived of the opportunity to address immigration services office with the application to refuse their newly gained Russian citizen­ship. Ombudsman of Ukraine also states that the European Convention on Citizenship states that citizenship ex-lege

[ 377 ] can be received only by the children (Part 1 of the Article 6 of the Convention). Meanwhile, there are no conventions and international norms and regulations stipulating the possibility of the forceful naturalization, which was actually the case of the automatic naturalization and granting Russian citizenship to the residents of Crimea. Valeria Lutkovska is convinced that automatic natura­ lization of Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko not only contradicts with the international norms and standards of the citizenship issues but also violates their right to return to their motherland. In addition to that, the case materials also contained passport of Oleg Sentsov, which proved his Ukrainian citizenship, while Sentsov himself officially declared multiple times that he has never changed his citizenship status and that he has never applied for and received Russian one. ‘In its time I presented your predecessor with the evidences of the fact that both Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolcheko are citizens of Ukraine, while the fact that Ukrainian Consul didn’t get an access to them only proves that Russian government acknowledged Ukrainian citizenship of Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko. Moreover, in her 2015 report the previous Commissioner for Human Rights Pamfilova E.A. stated that as a result of the measures taken following complaints of Sentsov and Kolchenko, legal uncertainties regarding their nationality have been eliminated and their Ukrainian citizenship has been acknowledged,’ Ukrainian ombudsman emphasises in her letter.. With that knowledge in mind, Valeria Lutkovska asks her Russian colleague to intervene in the situation with the transfer of Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko to Ukraine and to initiate an examination of the rightful premises of the naturalization of the abovementioned citizens of Ukraine and granting them Russian citizenship”.

[ 378 ] Sentsov’s sister: Nobody acknowledges his Russian citizenship, except the FSB: www.pravda.com.ua, 21 October 2016 “A cousin of the Ukrainian political prisoner Oleg Sentsov Natalya Kaplan has confirmed that he holds only one passport, and this passport is Ukrainian. That was how she commented for the news website ‘15 minutes’ refusal of Russia to extradite Sentsov based on the fact that, according to the Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation, he was a Russian citizenship. ‘It’s nonsense! It’s an absolute abuse of power of the Russian Federation! Oleg got no Russian citizenship. The man has only one passport, and this passport is Ukrainian,’ Kaplan reacted. According to her, Sentsov got the problems with the citizenship almost right away. ‘When Oleg was in the remand prison, he was presented with the fact: Crimea belongs to us, and all of the people who live there also belong to us. Oleg commented it in the court: ‘I am not a slave to be given together with the land’. Yet he was given to Russia together with the land. And he has never given up his Ukrainian citizenship, he’s never written any applications to grant him Russian citizenship,’ stressed the political prisoner’s sister. In Kaplan’s opinion, the FSB investigation officer might have been involved in fabricating of the documents ‘proving Russian citizenship of Oleg Sentsov’: ‘Nobody acknowledges him as a citizen of Russia, except the FSB. And what is even more interesting is that the fact of his alleged Russian citizenship was established also by the FSB investigation officer! Have you ever seen anything like this? Apparently, the FSB investigation officer is the one who issues the citizenship certificate!’ she said.

[ 379 ] It is known that on 21 October Deputy Minister of Justice of Ukraine Sergiy Petukhov published on his Facebook page an answer of the Russian Ministry of Justice on the impossibility of transferring Oleg Sentsov to Ukraine due to that fact that he was allegedly a Russian citizen”.

A Lawyer: From the judicial point of view, Oleg Sentsov doesn’t hold Russian citizenship, it is invalid: 112.ua, 21 October 2016 “From the judicial point of view, Ukrainian filmmaker Oleg Sentsov doesn’t hold the Russian citizenship. His lawyer Dmytro Dinze announced it during the interview for the ‘112 Ukraine’ TV channel. ‘From the judicial point of view, he doesn’t have the Russian citizenship, because didn’t undergo the official procedure of naturalization and receiving the citizenship, he didn’t write any applications and he didn’t receive Russian passport either. There is a federal constitutional law about the ‘merging’(‘annexation’ – Editor’s Note) of the Republic of Crimea with Russian Federation. That’s why it was stated in that law that the persons who resided on the territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and who didn’t give up Ukrainian citizenship in the written form, were automa­ tically considered being Russian citizens. And they base their decision exclusively on this paragraph of the law. Meanwhile, this paragraph actually contradicts the provisions of the Convention on the Human Rights and even the Federal Law ‘On Citizenship’ of Russian Federation… Based on this para­ graph, one can say that there is allegedly the Russian citizen­ ship, but without all the necessary legal actions and proce­ dures this citizenship cannot be considered as valid,’ he said. The lawyer doesn’t rule out the possibility that Russian Federation would probably change its decision regarding Ukrainian film director.

[ 380 ] ‘Of course, it is quite possible (changing of the decision regarding the transfer to Ukraine – Editor’s Note). I think that when it will be beneficial for Russia to declare Oleg Sentsov citizen of Ukraine and to transfer him to Ukraine, it will be done immediately. But due to some reasons, it is probably not beneficial for Russia at the moment,’ he emphasized. Dinze thinks that we need to use the international channels in order to influence the situation. ‘I think that it’s really possible if we will be acting using the international channels and acting on the level of the President of Ukraine. I don’t think that it’s possible to change this situation in an ordinary manner, through the court, for instance,’ he added. In the nearest future, he plans to visit Oleg Sentsov in the high-security prison in Yakutia. As a reminder, Russia refused to transfer Oleg Sentsov to Ukraine. It was declared at the Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation that Oleg Sentsov allegedly received Russian citizenship in March 2014 and that this citizenship is being considered as a priority one in case of the dual citizenship”.

Minister of Justice of Ukraine Pavlo Petrenko: Facebook, 22 October “Russian government took a decision not to transfer to Ukraine Ukrainian political prisoners Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko and continues holding our guys hostages. The official rejections to our requests to release and transfer to Ukraine Ukrainian citizens have been received today. There are no boundaries for the cynicism of today’s Russia. They explained their decision with the fact that the guys are allegedly Russian citizens. However, both Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko have been protesting exactly against

[ 381 ] the Russian occupation of Crimea. The Kremlin put them behind the bars for these protests. We will never leave our citizens to face to face with the enemy’s repressive machine. Return of the guys to Ukraine is a compulsory condition for the further dialogue. If the Russian side will not do that and will continue abusing political prisoners, I will initiate imposing of the new and extending of the existing personal sanctions against Russian officials responsible for that. Moreover, these steps of the aggressor only prove again that Russia has no place among the democratic countries in the Parliament Assembly of the European Council. I really want our guys to know that we will continue to fight for them. I will personally pursue all the issues regarding the possibility of the release of Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko, and I will pursue these issues in all international organizations and judicial authorities. We are currently working on the plan of our actions, which will be presented by me later. We will force the Kremlin to acknowledge their Ukrainian citizenship!”

Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation is wrong: Sentsov has Ukrainian citizenship and doesn’t hold citizenship of Russia: www.openrussia.org, Zoya Svetova, 21 October 2016 “On 7 October 2016 Ministry of Justice of Ukraine has received an official letter from the Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation stating that as Oleg Sentsov has a dual citizenship, one of them is Russian and another one is Ukrainian, he cannot be transferred and conveyed for service of sentence to Ukraine, as the filmmaker and his defense team requested.

[ 382 ] The letter from the Russian Ministry of Justice was signed by the Deputy Director of the Department of the International Law and Cooperation V.I. Lysak. This letter is quite interesting because the Ministry of Justice official doesn’t write what is the document he bases his decision and his confidence to claim that Oleg Sentsov has Russian citizenship. It is not mentioned on what day, in what month and in what year citizen of Ukraine Oleg Sentsov was granted citizenship of Russia. To the knowledge of the Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation, we would like to inform that it is stated in the judgment of conviction that Oleg Sentsov is a citizen of Ukraine, with his Ukrainian passport details. In the meantime, there are no details of the new Russian passport, which he allegedly received as well, according to the version of the Russian Ministry of Justice. If the judgment of conviction is not enough to prove the fact that Oleg Sentsov is a citizen of Ukraine only, we request Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation to kindly refer to the report of the Commissioner for Human Rights of Russian Federation for 2015. It is clearly written in this report on page 62: ‘As a result of the measures taken following complaints of O.G. Sentsov and O.O. Kolchenko, legal uncertainties regarding their nationality have been eliminated and their Ukrainian citizenship has been acknowledged’. Ella Pamfilova sent the requests to the state institutions, and that help to recognize Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko as citizens of Ukraine. In addition to that, lawyer of Oleksandr Kolchenko Svetlana Sidorkina said to the Open Russia that ‘it was stated in the sentence of the Northern-Caucasian district military court in Sentsov-Kolchenko case that as there are no pieces

[ 383 ] of evidence in the criminal case proving that the defendants have given up Ukrainian citizenship, the court didn’t apply additional sanctions while fixing a sentence. In other words, the court didn’t deny that the defendants had Ukrainian citizenship. The court sentence generally doesn’t have it what citizenship the defendants have’. It means that there are actually no legal obstacles for their transfer to Ukraine for serving their term. Dear Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation, please, do not confuse and misinform your colleagues from the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine and the rest of the world as well! There are no judicial obstacles for transfer of Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko. No obstacles, except political will”.

Oleg Sentsov was put to the punitive confinement after the letter to the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine with the refusal to transfer him to Ukraine: zona.media, 22 October 2016 “Oleg Sentsov, convicted with regard to the terrorism case, was out to the disciplinary punitive confinement, his sister Natalya Kaplan told the ‘Mediazone’. According to her, Sentsov was put to the punitive confinement for fifteen days, probably, starting today. The prison administration is unaware of the reasons for such a decision. Earlier the Deputy Head of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine Sergiy Petukhov has published a photograph of a letter from the Russian Ministry of Justice, where refusal to transfer Sentsov to Ukraine is explained with the claim that in Crimea he was automatically granted Russian citizenship. The document also stated that transfer of Sentsov to Ukraine was impossible due to his dual citizenship,

[ 384 ] as a person with the Russian citizenship is considered in Russia ‘exclusively as a citizen of Russian Federation, with the exception of the cases stipulated by the international agreements or this law’. Ukrainian filmmaker Oleg Sentsov was sentenced in August of the previous year to twenty years in high-security prison with regard of the ‘Crimean terrorists’ case’. The accusations included forming of the terrorist organization, carrying out of two terrorist attacks and preparation for another two. Human Rights Centre ‘Memorial’ declared Oleg Sentsov and other defendants, in this case, political prisoners. Oleg Sentsov is being detained in the penitentiary No. 1 in Yakutsk”.

Oleg Sentsov, currently detained in Russia, was sent to the punitive confinement: tsn.ua, 22 October 2016 “Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, who is currently illegally detained in Russia, was sent to the punitive confine­ ment. The prisoner’s sister Natalya Kaplan reported about it. The Russians decided to make this step after they refused to extradite Oleg Sentsov and his fellow citizen Oleksandr Kolcheko to Ukraine. Kaplan assumed that it could indicate that her brother could be tortured in the Russian prison. In Moscow, the refusal was explained with the claim that the defendants were allegedly citizens of Russian Federation. In the reality though, the imprisoned Ukrainians were registered in Crimea and never accepted the annexation of the peninsula. Russian Federal Security Service arrested Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko in Crimea two years ago. They’ve been accused of the terrorist activities and sentenced to twenty and ten years behind the bars respectively.

[ 385 ] Ukrainian, European and even Russian cinematographers and politicians repeatedly demanded to release the political prisoners. It was reported earlier that Ukraine would try to arrange the prisoner exchange Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko for the Russians being held in Ukraine. It is also possible that Ukrainian political prisoners would be pardoned by the President of Russia Vladimir Putin, as it was the case with Gennadiy Afanasyev and Yuriy Soloshenko and with the member of Ukrainian Parliament Nadiia Savchenko”.

Despite all the obstacles and futile attempts to influence Russian authorities, Oleg’s friends and family don’t lose hope for his premature release and returning back to Ukraine. The “case of Oleg Sentsov” continues to be actively and widely promoted all over the world. Artists, colleagues from the filmmaking industry and simply people who care about Oleg and his fate are trying to use every opportunity to remind the world about that injustice the Ukrainian film director is still the victim of. One of the latest fierce attempts to influence Sentsov’s fate was made by the prominent Russian film director Aleksandr Sokurov during the common assembly of the Presidential Council for the Culture and Arts and of the Council for the Russian Language. It was obvious that Aleksandr Sokurov was quite nervous and agitated, as he understood perfectly well the danger of the issue he was about to raise. Of course, it is very naive to really think that one can simply ask Vladimir Putin to release Sentsov and to let him go and that Putin will show his ‘kingly mercy’, but as an honest man, Sokurov couldn’t lose this opportunity.

[ 386 ] Sokurov : I have a cordial request to you, Vladimir Vladimirovich, as a citizen of Russia, as a film director. Let us try to resolve the problem of Oleg Sentsov. Twenty years, he’s a talented Ukrainian filmmaker. Twenty years of camps, the guy is imprisoned in the Northern camp now. And I feel ashamed that we still cannot resolve this problem. I beg you, please, find the solution to this problem. It is impossible. He is a film director, he has to compete with me during the film festivals, if he has a different point of view, including from the political perspective, he shouldn’t be detained in our northern, practically Arctic remote prison. It feels so painful and so bitter that I have to talk about it now… Putin: …regarding Sentsov. We have to proceed from the premise that we live in a state of law, so the questions of this type have to be resolved by the judicial system. As for his creative work, he was sentenced not because of his creative work, but because he decided to take on a completely different role, according to the investigative and judicial bodies, in particular, he decided to dedicate his life to the terrorist activities. Sokurov : Vladimir Vladimirovich, but that was a dif­ fi­cult political collision though. Can an ordinary man, an average emotional young man, can he really understand pro­perly all the intricacies and difficulties of the political moment? Putin: This is not about his position. This is not about what he thinks about the events that happened in Crimea. This is rather about his intentions and in preparation of the illegal actions that could possibly hard our fellow citizens as a result. Sokurov : Vladimir Vladimirovich, but in a Russian, in a good Christian fashion, mercy is more important than justice. I beg you. Mercy is more important than justice. Please.

[ 387 ] Putin: I’m afraid in this situation we cannot act in a Russian and in a Christian fashion without the court decision. There was a court decision, we have it. Yes, there are certain rules and regulations that we can probably use, but it is necessary that there would be relevant conditions for this. Sokurov : Please, help. Putin: I would like to repeat it again: he wasn’t sentenced for his position or for his views. He was sentenced for his intention to commit the deeds classified by the law as those of the terrorist nature that could possibly cause grave and tragic consequences for our fellow citizens. That’s the case, not his position. Everybody has the right to have his or her own position, and nobody would accuse and sentence him for that. That’s the case, believe me, that’s the case. There are other persons involved in this case too, and you know, they are being caught now from time to time. And that’s the problem. Sokurov : But he is not guilty of any deaths, he didn’t cause any casualties. And I am totally sure that it wouldn’t happen. Putin: Thank God, there were no deaths. But there could be deaths if he would be allowed to carry out his intentions. And that’s the problem. The fact that he thought different than us is definitely not the case here, Aleksandr Nikolayevich, believe me. That’s not the case. But anyway, I would like to thank you for drawing attention to this issue. I know, that’s a quite sensitive issue, and I will bear it in mind. After this dialogue, it really doesn’t make sense to make assumptions about whether Vladimir Putin knows about Sentsov’s case. Of course, he knows about it. Yes, probably, he doesn’t really pay it so much of his attention, yet there is still some portion of interest. His phrase about the necessity of the “certain conditions to ripen” for Sentsov’s release speaks

[ 388 ] for the fact that Russian government is actually ready to “use” Ukrainian filmmaker as a “bargaining chip” in the following negotiations. Yet one question remains open: what would they want to get in exchange? It is worth mentioning that on 25 May 2016 a famous Kremlin hostage, a female pilot, and now also a member of Ukrainian Parliament, Nadiia Savchenko was exchanged for two Russian spies. It is quite strange though that there was no equal prisoner exchange back then, two for two, as the names of Oleg Sentsov and Nadiia Savchenko have been often remembered together, as an example of the unbroken spirit and resistance to Russian aggression. It is really very difficult to understand this backstage logic, remaining on the position of an outside observer.

Alyokhina from Pussy Riot called to support the political prisoner Oleg Sentsov during the ceremony of the “European Film Awards”: hromadske.ua, 11 December 2016 “A member of the Russian Pussy Riot band Maria Alyokhina called during the closing ceremony of the “European Film Awards” to support Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov, who is currently detained in Russia, according to the report on the official Facebook page of the event. “A couple of years ago I sang the forty-second song against Putin, against the guy nobody really likes here. I spent two years in the prison afterward. But I am here now to talk about Ukrainian filmmaker Oleg Sentsov, your colleague, who has never committed any crime. Sentsov was sentenced to twenty years in prison,” Alyokhina said during the ceremony held in the Polish city of Wroclaw. “Oleg is a father of two children, and he is forty years old. Twenty years in Russian prison basically mean his death,” a Russian artist stated.

[ 389 ] She has also read in front of the audience a famous quote from the letter Sentsov has written several months ago. “If we were destined to become the nails for the coffin of the tyrant, then I would like to be such a nail. Just know that this nail will never bend or break,” she quoted the Ukrainian political prisoner. “I would like to tell you one very easy thing now: I really believe that the society is stronger than any state authority because the society doesn’t have boundaries. And I believe, I really believe that together with the society we definitely change the state of affairs. And the last thing I would like to ask of you. I would like to ask you to stand up now, to stand up for Oleg and for his freedom. Right now,” Alyokhina called on the audience and stood up herself as a sign of her support of Ukrainian filmmaker”. The lawyer Dmytro Dinze, who visited Oleg Sentsov in the remand prison in Yakutia in December 2016, told that Oleg continued to actively work on the new screenplays and that he was generally being “in the constant creative process”. During the harsh time, he spent in Russian detention, in horrible prison conditions, he’s already created five new screenplays and written a new novel. This news sound quite positive, because it means that the prison still hasn’t broken and defeated Ukrainian filmmaker, and that probably it never will.

From the Facebook page of Dmytro Dinze: 15 December 2015 “Good day to everybody. Today I visited Oleg Sentsov in the federal government institution, the penal colony settlement 1 of the Department of the Federal Service for the Execution of Sentences of Russian Federation in the

[ 390 ] Republic of Sakha (Yakutia). In general, he is doing well. The weather during the latest five months is quite cold, with the air temperatures between 20 and 50 degrees Celsius below zero. It is -35 now, and it is considered being quite warm. One week ago it was -47, and that was really cold, a waitress at the local restaurant told me. The penitentiary is located within the limits of the city, it’s possible to get there with the microbus or with the taxi. Oleg sends his greetings to everybody. He’s already written five screenplays and one new novel. He’s all in the creative process. He told me that the convoy to Yakutia was quite long, there was the train at the beginning, and then they’ve been traveling with the airplane. He received his number in the central prison, and also a couple of stripes ‘for the mayhem’. Generally, the situation in the prison camp is normal, the warden is quite adequate. There are no problems in the prison camp at the moment. The only one thing is that the letters don’t come regularly, there are long delays, and there are also really too little letters. He refused to answer the journalists’ questions and said that there was nothing to say or to write about. Of course, he is waiting for the prisoner exchange and he has really high hopes for Ukraine. He congratulates everybody with the New Year and embraces everybody”. Oleg Sentsov’s case is quite emblematic and even archetypical for Ukrainian history. Confrontation with the Russian state machine in any of its incarnations, be that Tsarist, Communist or Putin’s Russia, always ended for our people with repressions and deportations to the far and cold East. It was how it used to happen a hundred years ago, and it is what is happening today. Aggressive and invasive methods used by the Empire didn’t change. And the scariest thing is that during all those years we haven’t succeeded in finding an adequate and effective way to resist and confront it.

[ 391 ] Anna Palenchuk: “When Oleg was detained at the beginning, I really thought that everything will end fast. When he was being transferred from Rostov to Moscow and then back again, it seemed that he is very close to being released or to be exchanged. But the months have passed, and now the years have passed too, yet he still remains imprisoned. I know that he can sense support of every person supporting and helping him. Some of them write the letters to him, others try to gather some funds, and others organize and carry out various initiatives and solidarity efforts. There are so many people there who really care about him and his destiny. I often say that when Oleg will be finally released, he will need to meet so many people in Ukraine and in other countries all over the world too and to thank them all for all their support and help. Today I understand that Oleg won’t be released as soon, as we all would want it to happen, but I know for sure that we have no right to give up, we have to continue organizing various initiatives and events, to collect money and to express our position. I know that we have to remember about him during every cinematography related event in Ukraine, calling the society for solidarity. Perhaps, Oleg has done some really impossible things. He has managed to consolidate Ukrainian filmmakers. He increased the value and importance of Ukrainian filmmaking industry and of Ukrainian cinema for the Ukrainian audience. He became a national hero, who doesn’t just refuse to give up, but who actually don’t even think about giving up. Many of us would really envy his strength and his endurance. Oleg doesn’t feel good there in the prison. He is that kind of an artist who wants to walk in the streets and to listen

[ 392 ] to the new stories, knowing more and more about people. Freedom is our ultimate value, and when we see that such great and talented people as him aren’t free, we start to value and appreciate this freedom even more than before. Each of us has his or her own mental memory. And my mental memory tells me that we must fight for freedom, then we must always fight, without the end, until we gain it, until it will be gained by the people, who are currently deprived of it, and until our country will gain this freedom too. Unfortunately, this fight will last for a very long time, but it will definitely end with our victory. I am hundred percent sure that Oleg will be released from prison and that he will be a very strong personality, who will be able to express his thoughts and ideas even deepen and louder than he could possibly do it now, not having this experience. Actually, they say, all the tests and challenges that accrue to us are equal to us, to our powers and our abilities. It seems that it’s Oleg’s destiny, to pass all of these tests and to make it into history as a person, who inspires the others, who helps the others to fi g h t ”.

So who is Oleg Sentsov? Is he a film director? Is he a revolutionary? Or maybe is he a terrorist, just like the Russian intelligence services are trying to portray him? There cannot be several answers to that. Oleg Sentsov is a complicated and many-sided artist, who, like a little stone, was thrown into the huge and terrible mechanism of the enormous militarist and totalitarian machine called Russian Federation. His strength factor appears to be sufficient to prevent this machine from the uninterrupted operation and to remain an unsolvable problem for it. Oleg didn’t allow to break him and to mill him into ashes.

[ 393 ] Following the rather unsuccessful and hopeless at­tempts of the public to somehow influence the destiny of Oleg Sentsov, I tend to think more and more often that now Oleg’s fate really depends exclusively on the fate of the ruling regime in contemporary Russia. The faster Putin’s dictatorship will collapse, the faster Oleg will be released.

But unfortunately, it is not enough action for that. Especially it applies to the big and influential international structures and institutions and to the entire civilized world in general. During the latest decades, the Western countries almost totally lost their profound solidity, steadiness, and decisiveness, sacrificing it for the sake of the almost ineffective diplomacy, with no real actions to follow it. The UN, as an international arbitrator and the world consen­ sus body, demonstrates its absolute inability to resolve contemporary pressing issues. At every session of the UN Security Council, the representatives of Russian Federation openly and blatantly lie to the entire world, while the world in its turn is attempting to somehow continue this dialogue with the liars. Russia invades Ukrainian Crimea and Donbas, destroys Syrian cities with its aerial attacks, leaving a bloody trace of the thousands of the peaceful victims, while the world continues to “express its deepest concern” and to listen to the other lies of Russian propagandists. Unfortunately, the modern geopolitics turned into a real kaleidoscope of absurdity. There was a similar situation on the eve of the Second World War too, when the civilized world really tried to “pacify” Hitler with the diplomatic means and methods, allowing him to annex and occupy the Sudetes. We all know where and how it ended. Millions of victims, total destruction, genocide, an absolute devaluation of a human’s

[ 394 ] life. It seems that this story is known to everybody, but the Western world seems to be unable to learn from its own mistakes and continues falling into the same old trap. Adherence to principles and decisive consistency are what can save our civilization from another catastrophe today. If it is about sanctions and economic blockade then it should be the maximal sanctions, not some barely efficient restrictions. If it is about supporting Ukraine in its fight, then it should be the real support, not the hardly understandable fear to give Ukraine “lethal weapons”. If it’s just blatant lies, then we all should understand that there’s no constructive dialogue with the liars. It is simply not possible. What is happening with Oleg Sentsov today is a metaphor of the entire Ukrainian-Russian conflict, repre­ sented through the personal story and tragedy of a certain person. The fate of the Ukrainian filmmaker, just like the fate of the entire country, depend only on us: to what extent we, the people of the free world, are ready to fight for what we believe in, for what we consider to be right.

There is no other path.

[ 395 ] Contents

[ ■ ]

About Oleg Sentsov...... 3 [►A Perfect Day for Banana-Fish] ■ 22 About “Gamer”...... 31 [►”Gamer” Trailer] ■ 49 About “Rhino” ...... 96 [►”Rhino” Trailer] ■ 123 About Maidan and Crimea...... 124 About the detention...... 156 About the trial...... 189 About the support ...... 278 Further Information...... 318 Літературно-художнє видання

МИМРУК Олександр Віталійович

ОЛЕГ СЕНЦОВ

Переклад з української (англійською мовою)

Головний редактор О. В. Красовицький Відповідальна за випуск І. В. Мазінг Художній редактор О. А Гугалова Технічний редактор Г. С. Таран Комп’ютерна верстка І. В. Мазінг Коректор А. Р. Коник

1 Підписано до друку 24.09.2018. Формат 60×90 /16. Умов. друк. арк. 25,00. Облік.-вид. арк. 16,33. Тираж 1000 прим. ТОВ «Видавництво Фоліо» вул. Римарська, 21 А, Харків, 61057 Свідоцтво суб’єкта видавничої справи ДК № 5244 від 09.11.2016 Сайт видавництва:: www.folio.com.ua Електронна адреса: [email protected] Надруковано з готових позитивів у ТОВ «Видавництво Фоліо» вул. Римарська, 21 А, Харків, 61057 Свідоцтво суб’єкта видавничої справи ДК № 5244 від 09.11.2016 Напевно, зараз немає людини, яка не чула б ім’я Олега Сенцова — аж надто гучним був суд над ним і неймовірним вирок: двадцять років ув’язнення. Кіно­режисер, сценарист, письменник був засуджений за нібито терористичну діяльніс­ ть. І незважаючи на протести громадськості, звернення до найголовнішого керівництва країни, яка звинувачує Сенцова, він до цього часу перебуває в неволі. Це видання складається зі спогадів людей, які добре знали Олега, з уривків його книг і сценаріїв до фільмів, а ще з витягів протоколів допитів свідків, які проходять по цій сфабрикованій справі. У ньому багато фотографій — і з домашнього архіву, і з залу суду. Хоча, як стверджують рідні та друзі, Сенцов ніколи не любив говорити про себе, за нього говорять його твори, і перш за все практично автобіографічні оповідання. А ще до свого затримання він написав книгу, назва якої повністю відповідає змісту: «Купіть книгу — вона смішна». Вона вийшла у видавництві «Фоліо» і російською, і в перекладі українською. Боротьба за звільнення Сенцова триває.