The victorious investigation into the Gongadze case reveals more and more suspicious and strange facts. One of them deserves special attention. One week ago Prosecutor General Svyatoslav Piskun told The ZN that Ex-Interior Minister Yuri Kravchenko was summoned as a witness and that there were no grounds to detain him. And this week SBU [Security Service of Ukraine] Chief Alexander Turchinov stated that “Kravchenko was… one of the prime suspects in the Gongadze case”. Turchinov thus reconfirmed what the Ukrainian public had known even without access to the “x-files”.

It is strange that Turchinov regarded Kravchenko as a prime suspect and Piskun only wanted to talk with him as a witness, without any grounds to detain him. This difference needs to be explained. But there are real grounds to assert that Kravchenko would never have walked out of the Prosecutor General’s office, and that both Kravchenko and Piskun knew it very well. There had been many reasons to call Kravchenko in for questioning months before, but now the changed psychological circumstances would surely have made him talk.

On the other hand, the SBU may possess more information than the PGO, because Leonid Derkach, who headed the SBU at the time when Gongadze was murdered, is still in the shade and is a living (knock on wood) link in the chain of the initiated. Derkach knows enough to disclose the circumstances and original causes of Gongadze’s death in any legal status - as a suspect or a witness. And this makes Derkach too valuable and too dangerous. MP Grygoriy Omelchenko [Chairman of the Standing Committee on Fighting Organized Crime and Corruption] is seriously concerned about the personal security of some well-known figures, including Derkach. He expressed such concerns one day before Kravchenko died…

SBU Chief Turchinov says that Kravchenko’s pre-mortem note “gives investigators enough information about definite persons and helps them to determine the further course of investigation”. But if Turchinov means the note that was read out by Interior Minister Yuri Lutsenko, it is anything but a clue.

According to our sources, Ex-President Leonid Kuchma, who was invited to the PGO as a witness, flatly denied his involvement in the case and said “no” to all questions, including those about the Melnychenko tapes.

Parrying rebukes for disclosing the time of Kravchenko’s interrogation, the Prosecutor General said that he “just answered a reporter’s question”. Yes, there was such a question. But his “impromptu” sounded as if it was well-prepared beforehand. It strangely and immediately preceded the fatal shots. The unprecedented openness of the investigation looks too suspicious. Why was General Alexei Pukach, the former chief of the Interior Ministry’s surveillance department, declared wanted? Nobody has seen him ever since.

The purpose of statements like this is either to unnerve the suspect and provoke him to make a wrong move (which is hardly probable, considering the person in question), or to prompt his accomplices to turn him in (which hardly looks convincing). Of course, we assume that the purpose was to track him down, not to scare away or remove that witness.

There were too many strange coincidences. Pukach was kept in custody in Chernigiv: there must have been serious reasons to fear for his life in Kyiv. And his “amnesia” was duly rewarded: Judge Glos released Pukach from custody. According to unnamed sources, Deputy Prosecutor General Kudryavtsev (who still occupies the post and whose name has always been associated with Kuchma’s chief of staff Viktor Medvedchuk) visited Glos. After the visit, the judge suddenly lost interest in the Gongadze case and released Pukach, ignoring the investigators’ insistent requests.

According to our sources, Pukach sent a clear ultimatum to the interested persons: either he would be released, or would start to talk. The signal must have been heard and understood adequately.

It is almost sure that Pukach will never testify. But is he still alive?

Yuri Kravchenko’s note leaves many questions unanswered. A man like him either says goodbye to his family, leaving out accusations against him, or points to something concrete without sentimental words. The note found on Kravchenko reads, “My dear ones, I am not guilty of anything. Forgive me. I fell victim to the political intrigues of President Kuchma and his entourage. I am leaving you with a clean conscience. Good Bye.” The note looks more like a resignation than the last message to this world. There is one more nuance: Kravchenko was crazy about his uniform. His bright aglets, decorations, dark glasses, and prominent cap were not just a small weakness of a strong man. They mirrored his attitude to his service, himself, and other people. Kravchenko was certainly in a state of deep psychological crisis. But he would never have left this world dressed in plain clothes, sitting on a chair in the utility room - he was not that sort of man.

General Kravchenko, who had numerous decorations and headed the Interior Ministry for as long as six years, deserved a funeral ceremony in the Ministry building and a salvo at his grave. But the ceremony that took place at the Children’s Musical Theater was very short and modest.

The deaths of Kravchenko and [Transport Minister] Kyrpa set a bad trend: each committed suicide (according to the official version), and each was committed to earth in defiance of Christian canons. Does this mean that the Church did not believe in the official version or simply did as it was told? But who gave the new leaders of the state the right to ignore Christian canons? Who authorized them to deprive the late man of the last honors according to his status? These questions may be insignificant for Eternity, but they mean a lot to his relatives, and not only them. Nobody can be executed, even posthumously, without a legal verdict. The children standing at the grave can not be liable for their father’s sins. And even dishonor is washed away by blood (only not others’ blood).

President Yushchenko is very earnest in his desire to complete the Gongadze case. Having sort of taken over the PR functions of the Prosecutor General Office, the Interior Ministry, and the SBU, Yushchenko keeps the public posted about the investigation. But he has to be very cautious, considering the unpleasant experience of his previous revelations.

He has to be a hundred percent sure that each step in the investigation is legitimate, i.e. that confessions are not obtained through torture. And, according to the chronology of Yushchenko’s reports about progress in the investigation, almost all the suspects except one confessed suspiciously soon.

What legal grounds did he have to state on the next day after the suspects were detained that the investigators had the cars in which Gongadze and then his body was carried? And what about the indictees’ right to defense?

Since the President has assumed personal responsibility for the investigation, it has to be conducted impeccably and the court’s verdict must preclude any doubts.

There is one more alarming fact: the investigation is being conducted “manually”, with all available forces engaged and radical measures applied at every turn. This technique may well prove effective and the court will finally close the books on this case. But it may create an unhealthy precedent in the Ukrainian judiciary, demonstrating the prevalence of the notorious “rule of expediency” over the rule of law.

Interior Minister Yuri Lutsenko’s initiative to guarantee immunity in exchange for information yielded positive results, but it was not quite correct legally. It actually let other accomplices get off easy or even stay at their posts. As a rule, investigators are not authorized to guarantee any indulgences to suspects in exchange for cooperation. They give promises, but courts pass verdicts.

Prosecutor General Piskun has pardoned Melnychenko in absentia, saying that Kuchma’s former bodyguard is no longer under the threat of criminal persecution. If this promise is broken for any reason, the law enforcers can hardly count on the people’s trust. Melnychenko can feel safe, anticipating his return to the homeland and the restitution of his MP status. But Piskun’s promise to Melnychenko may have an adverse effect, leaving the new President without guarantees of privacy in his own office.

The criminal case against Melnychenko [on charges of eavesdropping in the presidential office and revealing state secrets] has been closed, and he is coming back as a hero. But he holds the tapes that reveal many other secrets and jeopardize too many top-rank officials.