Ukrainian MP does not call for punishment of children who speak Russian

In parts of Ukraine, the Russian language is rather present, while the post spreads a false claim from a Macedonian website that the Ukrainian MP Nataliya Pipa proposed a law according to which children will be punished if they speak Russian in school, during breaks between classes, which are otherwise in Ukrainian. The news is taken and translated from a Serbian (and pro-Russian) source, already assessed by other fact-checkers as obscure and disinforming. According to Pipa, children will not be punished or reprimanded for using the Russian language during breaks, but the document will oblige employees of educational institutions to create and maintain a Ukrainian-speaking atmosphere

 

A Facebook post says the following:

Ukrainian MP calls for punishment of children who speak Russian

In parts of Ukraine, the Russian language is rather present, while the post spreads a false claim from a Macedonian website that the Ukrainian MP Nataliya Pipa proposed a law according to which children will be punished if they speak Russian in school, during breaks between classes, which are otherwise in Ukrainian. The news is taken and translated from a Serbian (and pro-Russian) source, already assessed by other fact-checkers as obscure and disinforming.

In relation to this, the Ukrainian weekly news outlet Focus writes (in both Ukrainian and Russian):

As the author of the draft law, People’s Deputy Nataliya Pipa pointed out, children will not be punished or reprimanded for using the Russian language during breaks, but the document will oblige the founders, heads and employees of educational institutions to create and maintain a Ukrainian-speaking atmosphere.

The Ukrainian version of the famous business magazine Forbes reports something similar:

No one will punish the children or scold them, that is the wrong approach to the issue.

According to Pipa, the reason behind this law is that some teachers tend to have informal conversations in Russian during the breaks, forgetting they are still at work and have a duty to preserve the Ukrainian language. Pipa explains this in a Facebook post, in which she shares messages from the citizens, who point out the problem.

In a comment under the post, Pipa adds it is not a penal law, it will rather allow students and principals to make remarks to colleagues and other students, for which they now have no legal right, with the aim of preventing the enemy’s language from being spoken in schools.

Ukraine has been a victim of the Russian aggression for 10.5 years, and the state was under the Russian yoke in the distant past. Under the Russian Empire, Ukrainian language was persecuted with prohibitions like the Valuev Circular (1863) and the Ems Ukaz (1876), while in the USSR it was formally allowed, but still suppressed in favor of the Russian language, which was dominant. That is why, thousands of ethnic Ukrainians do not know Ukrainian, and that assimilation is even stronger in Belarus, where not even the president speaks Belorussian, only Russian.

The Russian language was strongly present in Ukraine even after is independence, with Russian language schools, in which all subjects were taught in Russian; through Russian media outlets, music and films, as well as through pro-Russian politicians such as president Viktor Yanukovych.

He was known for corruption and vassalage toward Russia, as well as for beating and shooting those who protested against him, and the article claims he was overthrown in a “coup d’etat.” However, that is not true, Yanukovych was dismissed by a procedure (not an ideal one, but a procedure nonetheless), for which on the 22^nd of February, 2014 MPS, legitimately elected in 2012, including 36 of his party members, voted.

In 2012, Yanukovych’s politicians created a controversial law, with which the Russian language became official among regions with a minimum of 10% of speakers, which offended many Ukrainians. The article claims that after the “coup d’etat,” the new authorities stripped the Russian language of that status, so it suggests that separatism in Crimea and Donbas was a justified reaction to that, which is not true.

Indeed, on the 23^rd of February, 2014, the Ukrainian assembly voted to repeal that law. However, it was done by MPs elected in 2012, not some new ones, and also, the then new acting President Oleksandr Turchynov did not sign that repeal. He felt that it would be discriminatory and demanded that a new and better law be passed first.

And so, that controversial law was not repealed, however the Crimea and Donbas events still happened. It was only repealed after many troubles in 2018, by the decision of the constitutional court, which was certainly influenced by Russia’s aggressiveness. It previously annexed Crimea and instigated the war in Donbas with its own agents like Igor Girkin-Strelkov.

The article hushes up the fact that such Russian aggression was the reason for Ukraine to enact a law on the dominance of the Ukrainian language in 2019 (for example in media outlets and behind the counters, as well as in all schools, allowing the opportunity for classes in minority languages).

That process of de-Russification has now led to the draft law no. 12086, which is our main topic here. It was proposed by Pipa, who represents the pro-European and liberal party Golos, as well as by her colleagues from similar parties: European Solidarity, Batkivshchyna and Servant of the People, and make no mistake, there are no extreme nationalists or neo-Nazis among them.

Ukraine is a democratic country, and on Pipa’s profile there are various reactions to her proposal. Some believe this should have been done earlier, and others ask whether Pipa has something better to do. One comment calls her a “mare,” asking if she is really the one to dictate what language his children will speak in the hiding places in Kharkiv and reminds her of Article 10 of the constitution, which guarantees the free use of the Russian language. Another says that Pippa is dividing Ukrainians in favor of Putin.

Some say this law is unclear and the question is how it will be implemented. In the end though, it may not be passed. We cannot evaluate all of that now. The most important thing for us is whether the post, as well as the article shared in it, accurately describe the events. The answer to that is negative; therefore, we assess the post as untrue.

 

All comments and remarks regarding this and other Vistinomer articles, correction and clarification requests as well as suggestions for fact-checking politicians’ statements and political parties’ promises can be submitted by using this form