Ukraine has recently increased its own efforts to release civilians unlawfully detained in Russia. They’re doing it by rolling out a program, “I want to go to my own,” to implement this. Launched last year, the initiative involves a complex prisoner swap mechanism aimed at returning Ukrainian citizens held in Russian jails. The program is a collaborative effort involving Ukraine’s Coordination Headquarters for the Treatment of Prisoners of War, the Ministry of Defense, the Security Service, and the parliament’s Commissioner for Human Rights.
As central to this home affairs gambit, Ukraine has recently dispatched dozens of its own citizens to Russia. These unlucky few people bear an electric suitcase emoji and the words “HAS LEFT” on their Twitter handles. The program has redeemed them for what it has described as “real Ukrainians.” Those released are activists, journalists, priests, politicians and community leaders. Most of them had been removed against their will by Russian soldiers under dubious conditions.
In reality, there are far deeper humanitarian concerns. According to the latest reports, at least 16,000 Ukrainian civilians have been forcibly detained in Russia. Experts say the real number is likely at least four times higher. This outcome has sparked uproarious and widespread outcry over the ethics of the program. It brings to the fore questions about its effects on those considered collaborators by the Ukrainian state.
Details of the Program
In keeping with the Interstate Compact, the “I want to go to my own” program trades prisoners one-for-one. For each 1000 Ukrainian prisoners, 1000 Russian prisoners are exchanged. This unusual agreement has received praise as well as backlash.
As a result, the swap recovers a citizen detained and taken hostage by Russia, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said. He argued that this method escapes the need to declare them POWs. Podolyak had previously thanked law enforcement for allowing “Russian saboteurs and collaborators” to be put on the exchange fund.
“I would like to thank our law enforcement officers today for adding Russian saboteurs and collaborators to the exchange fund,” – Volodymyr Zelenskyy
The manner in which the program has implemented its approach begs serious questions about how the program is defining Ukrainian citizens. Recent investigative reports have found that 70 civilians charged with collaboration with Russia were freed in these swaps. Most people were getting sentenced to five to eight years. They were not punished for actions such as cheering on the invasion, or providing vital intelligence to invading Russian troops.
Ethical Concerns
Human rights activists and international law scholars have raised deep moral and legal objections to the understanding of this program. They claim that the law in which these individuals were prosecuted is overly ambiguous and prone to unfair convictions. Legal experts agree that international humanitarian law forbids the use of negotiations to free civilians who are held unjustly.
“Under international humanitarian law, it is not possible to talk about exchanging civilians. All civilians unlawfully detained must be released unconditionally,” – Yulia Gorbunova
Critics and activists point out that many of those accused of being collaborators were simply doing their jobs, however you interpret “doing their jobs,” in an occupation. We know when we care for teachers, municipal workers and caregivers, we’re caring for our communities. Unfortunately, the ambiguous wording of the statute invites misinterpretation, putting them in the position of seeming to be conspirators.
“Helping people on the streets, people who are sick or have disabilities, distributing humanitarian aid… that type of thing – they could be convicted of working for the occupation as collaborators,” – Yulia Gorbunova
Critics raise an important criticism on communications around the program. They claim that the language suggests that some people are less than “real Ukrainians,” which I find to be deeply offensive.
“These people are still Ukrainian citizens, and the wording that they have on the website is that they were exchanged for ‘real Ukrainians’– that is very … not okay,” – Onysiia Syniuk
Broader Implications
While the urgency to free detained civilians is undeniable, the methods employed raise questions about justice and accountability within Ukraine itself. The collaboration law has already come under attack for its vague definitions and potential for abuse. Most Americans don’t think the individuals affected by these laws are real national security threats. Rather, they are simply victims of circumstance.
“That is not to say that there are no actual collaborators who commit crimes against national security…who should be punished, (but) this legislation is so vague that essentially a very wide range of activities of people living and working under occupation could qualify as collaboration, which is troubling and problematic,” – Onysiia Syniuk
The reality remains stark: while Ukraine seeks to reclaim its citizens from Russian detention, it must navigate a complex web of legal and ethical challenges. The balance between securing freedom for its people and ensuring justice within its own legal framework will continue to be a contentious issue as this program evolves.
