Rector of the Catholic University: Attempt of the SBU to put pressure on us attests about the government’s fear

Anna Yashchenko – UNIAN, May 31, 2010

My Western colleagues were shocked: such violations against university autonomy are unheard of in Europe…. Ukrainians are going abroad to make money in order to pay bribes in educational institutions, which can return under Tabachnyk…

In the last couple of weeks the rector of the Ukrainian Catholic University in Lviv Father Borys Gudziak, Ph.D., professed about the attempt of workers of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) to “pursue him into cooperation.” In his memorandum the rector of UCU described his meeting with a representative of the SBU, during which he was asked to sign a letter of agreement. When he found out that the letter would not stay with him, but become property of the security service, the rector refused to sign or even read the letter. Such a “letter” he interpreted as an agreement to cooperate, or simply as “recruitment.” At the same time the spokesperson of the SBU Maryna Ostapenko confirmed the fact of the meeting of the SBU worker with the rector of the Catholic university, indicated that everything occurred in line with the current legislation. Why does the security service have an interest in Father Borys and the Catholic University? Does the service “work” with other rectors? What was the reaction of the SBU after the memorandum of the rector was published? And why did the security service go after the students and educationalists? These are the questions that we asked Fr. Borys Gudziak.

PARENTS FEAR THAT UCU WILL LOSE ITS LISCENCE

Father, is this the first time that the Security Service has shown an interest in you, or have you been “confronted” by representatives of the SBU before?

I had a similar meeting in 2001. Then students were badly beaten during the Shevchenko Day in Kyiv on March 9 – after the murder of Gongadze. A wave of protests began against the threat of authoritarianism in the state. In Kyiv force was used against students, including students from Lviv.  This was a Friday. On Monday morning students in Lviv announced a strike to show support for their arrested and beaten colleagues.

At the Lviv university were a lot of students from our institution. And in the afternoon to our university came two SBU workers. Myroslav Marynovych [the first vice rector of UCU, a famous human rights defender], another coworkers who at the time headed the educational department, and I had a meeting with them. They asked us to inform them about how the students organized themselves. We responded: “This is a matter of the students, this is a question of their freedom, and we are not involved in this.” Then the SBU workers asked: “Fine, you didn’t answer how they organized today’s demonstration, but if you will know what students plan to do tomorrow, can you call and inform us?” Maroslav Marynovych responded: “Mr., you came poorly prepared. You don’t know in what institute you are and do not understand with whom you are speaking. I was deprived of freedom for 10 years during Soviet times for refusing to be an informer in the Soviet Union. I am not about to become one in independent Ukraine.”

On the second day threats were sounded against us on one of the TV channels. Later to us came the then vice prime minister in humanitarian questions Mykola Zhulynskyi to calm down the students. It is worth noting the woman, our coworker (I don’t want to use her name so not to bring her any trouble), which organized the student work. The SBU called her for more then a year afterward. On Christmas, on Easter, at 9 in the morning she was greeted and pressured to cooperate.

That was during the Kuchma administration. During the presidency of Yushchenko nothing like that happened. There was some contact with the SBU when Yushchenko visited our university, but it related to organizational questions and the safety of the president.

How did the SBU react to your memorandum?

In the last few days our workers have received phone calls. One professor was asked what he thought of the memorandum of the rector… Our workers are young. They are very worried. Some students shared amongst themselves: “We are not voicing our opinions on our blogs because we fear our parents could lose their jobs if the service finds out who wrote them.” One father came with his daughter, a student, because the family feared that UCU will lose its license. Fear arose… We asked our workers and students to inform us if they should be contacted by the SBU. But I don’t have all the information. We don’t have counterintelligence (laughs).

HERMAN CALLED WHAT HAPPENED SHAMEFUL

Were you personally contacted at all after the memorandum?

Not from the SBU. But I did receive a call from Ms. Anna Herman. She called what happened shameful. She called this some big misunderstanding, that no one gave such an order to bother the Catholic University. As if to say they did not know what was going on in Lviv. And she said that the head of the SBU Mr. Khoroshkovskyi is ready to fly to Lviv to meet with me. But I was in a monastery outside of Lviv. I said that I would not be around. She said she would contact me again, but so far I haven’t heard back.

There are two important things here. First, that which Ms. Herman calls disgraceful and impermissible, the spokesperson of the SBU considers normal, routine practice. It is mutually exclusive positions of the official authority structures. Which position is official? Second – responsibility is thrust on local structures.  I can’t say that the team came from the highest level. But in the country there is an atmosphere which induces the security agency to act in an undemocratic manner. It scares the population, returns the feelings of Soviet times. This is not the responsibility and guilt of that young worker who came to me.

How did he behave with you?

He acted properly. He was a bit taken back by my response. The rectorate of UCU decided that if he is blamed for that which ensued and is reprimanded because of the wide reaction, we will campaign for the defense of this young employee of the SBU for he followed an order “from above.”

During the conversation did he warn you about what await students who take part in protests?

He said that students who take part in protests that can lead to provocations, for example, to blocking access to work places, will be prosecuted.

So you did not read the letter?

No, I did not.

But you saw that there were signatures. What else do you remember? How did the letter look?

The letter was printed on a letterhead. It looked as though there were two signatures at the bottom. I saw in bold letters that it was addressed to me: Rector Borys Gudziak… but, as he passed me the letter, the workers stated the conditions (to read, to sign, and to give it back), and immediately I refused to look at it. Then the young SBU worker called his superiors and asked if he could leave a copy or the original letter. They answered no. Therefore I refused to read it, and asked him to understand my reaction. He did not challenge that the letter addressed to me logically should be mine.

And what do you think was written in the letter?  

I think that there were the same warnings. I don’t know how they were expressed, maybe in a captious manner.  By signing such a letter I could bring myself under moral, and maybe even legal, obligation. Under certain circumstances such a letter could be used in moral buying, and even in blackmail

It is known that in Poland during the last few years clerics were greatly criticized for signing documents about cooperating with state bodies. Four years ago Stanislaw Wielgus, a respected professor of the Catholic university in Lublin, who was the rector for three terms, was appointed archbishop of Warsaw. He at the time signed some document on the request of the security service. The press knew about it. In the end he had to resign. It was big scandal on the international level. A lot of priests were greatly criticized by the society for signing documents from the security service.

IT SEEMS IN UNIVERSITIES THERE ARE SECRET AGENTS OF THE SECURITY SERVICE

A few influential European publications cited your memorandum. How did you publish the information from this incident?

Today the Internet opens up great possibilities. Our university actively supports international relations. Recently a General Assembly of the European Federation of Catholic Universities (FUCE) took place in Lviv. The visit of the SBU representative took place on Tuesday. I wrote my memorandum by Wednesday evening in English so that I could share this information with the rectors who beginning Thursday were to start their work in Lviv. On Wednesday the rectors were already arriving, and some where here until Monday. The memorandum was being widely distributed outside of Ukraine. As soon as the assembly was over I wrote the Ukrainian version.

And what was the reaction of the Western educational clerics to your statement?

They were shocked. Such a violation on university autonomy is unheard of in European counties.

In April students held a demonstration near the SBU building in Kyiv against the presence of their workers in the educational institutes and the collection by them of information. Do security service agents really work in universities?

I think that there is a collection of information. Such practice was common in the Soviet Union. It looks likes today there are secret employees of the special services in the universities. But I personally try not too much to pay attention to such things. Firstly, we have nothing to hide. Secondly, it’s not healthy to think and guess who is an agent of the special services. Doing so can create an atmosphere of paranoia

BRIBERY TO ENROLL IN THE UNIVERSITY HAS TREMENDOUS SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES

Do you associate the increase of the attention of the secret services to you with your open criticism of the appointment of Tabachnyk as the minister of education?

It is hard not to associate these things. We made a stance not only in the matter of Tabachnyk.  It is a pity for us that there was a retreat in the cause of the university entrance exams. For two years, the applicants practically did not pay bribes and now, a return of that is possible.  Thus, if every year hundreds of young people become students (I do not say that everyone pays a bribe in each higher education institution), we can talk about tens of millions of dollars circulating in this black market.

The population of Ukraine has decreased in the last 20 years approximately by 6 million. There are two main reasons why millions of Ukrainian parents went abroad to work, particularly from western Ukraine. The migrants want to buy housing and pay their children’s tuition and they consider not only the fees but also bribes. Bribery to enroll in the university has tremendous consequences.  People leave small children to earn for the bribe that will allow them to have a higher education.

The entrance exam was not perfect. But the step of the ex-minister of education, Vakarchuk, chopped off Medusa’s head. Now, it has grown back. We created our own system of testing of applicants and there were no complaints of non-transparent entrance or bribe during those 16 years. And we did support the exams for talented but poor youth got chances in life.

FEAR HAS RETURNED TO UKRAINE

And why did it happen so that only you and the rector of the Kyiv Mohyla Academy, Serhii Kvit, spoke out against the appointment of Tabachnyk. The rest of the heads of higher education institutions showed their support to the new leadership at the last meeting in T. Shevchenko’s National University in Kyiv. Do the rectors care so much about their positions? 

I don’t know. It is hard to say. It seems that fear has returned to Ukraine. Students tell me about this. The response of the rectors testifies to it. I can see that some people cannot imagine themselves without power, regardless of its kind. People either are very afraid or wish to keep to their profits connected with their positions or power; it is either one or the other. I do not think that such steps are motivated by sincere deep ideological beliefs or change of political ideology.

Do you think the SBU showed interest only in your university or do they also “work” with other rectors?

The SBU is a very large structure, whereas we are very small. I do not think our university has exclusive attention. Apparently, there is interest in other universities. The interest of the Lviv Oblast State Administration in student activity is obvious. A secretary from the regional state administration called and asked our secretaries how many of our students participated in the demonstration in Lviv and Kyiv. If they called us, I am sure they called other higher education institutions.

Father, what is your attitude to student actions of protest? Do you freely let your alumni go?

We do not follow their activity outside the university. We are not an intelligence service. Our students traditionally behave in a fitting way in crises situations. They urge people to joint prayer, talk about ethical principles, and call people to be free, free from fear. I am proud of the students of UCU. They know there will never be repressions against them in this university.

THE BUSINESS PLAN OF JESUS OF NAZARETH WAS WEAK

Is the student movement able to change anything?

It is not known. We are called to work, live, testify, not only to expect a result. If the result was the only criterion, one might not even try many things. A Christian is called to be a witness. From a strictly secular viewpoint, what does Jesus Christ change? Very little, actually nothing. From such a viewpoint, the business plan of Jesus of Nazareth was weak. After his work even those closest to him forsook him. But he gave up his life for them anyway. Christ testified to the end, to the death on the cross. Christianity and genuine ethic never change their position because of a difficulty or lack of prospect of result. Myroslav Marynovych was 27 when he was told by KGB: “Give up your indulgence in human rights or you will be imprisoned. You are either with us or against us.” He said: “In that case, I am against you.” He was arrested. He was not sure if he would stay alive but he still acted and testified. I am encouraging all people in Ukraine who struggle for the free, proud, happy, prosperous Ukrainian state governed by the rule of law not to become desperate or discouraged but to testify, profess genuine ideals to unite people and not separate them.

THE GOVERNMENT FEARS ITS PEOPLE

Father, what sort of signal is this that the Security Service went after the students and educationalists?

This testifies about the fear of the authority. Such behavior is the behavior of people who are afraid of their own people. It is unfortunate that the government does not trust its people.

Can espionage be resisted?

We must talk about this. Fight with openness. That is why I wrote this memorandum.

President Yanukovych visited Lviv. He was received with protests. Did your students participate in them?

I don’t know about this.

You studied at Harvard and in Rome; you had countless opportunities to make a career in the West. Why did you choose to return to Ukraine?

I am Ukrainian. My ancestors gave their lives for the freedom of Ukraine. I believed that to serve Ukraine, that at the time was retreating from a very complicated totalitarian circumstances and historical trauma, to be a big honor and great privilege. I do not regret this. I am very happy that from our university already 700 students have graduated who are not only good at in their fields, but are people with morals. They are individuals, happy, and want to serve God and Ukraine. This inspires me.

Interviewed by Anna Yashchenko