Secret files and the country’s transformation

Post-socialist countries all faced or are still facing the thorny issue of getting rid of the communist legacy, in particular the part of it related to the activities of security agencies. The Day covered in “Inoculation against Dictatorship of the Government” article, published in No. 10 from February 13, 2014, Bulgarian president Rosen Plevneliev’s February 1 speech calling for archiving, digitalization, and storage in the state archives of all documents related to the activities of the communist-era secret services. The Day asked Bulgarian historian, author of a book on the role of the secret services Momchil Metodiev to comment on the president’s speech and tell our readers what his country was doing to ensure citizens’ access to the KGB archives.

“President Plevneliev made this statement on February 1, which is the Day for commemoration of the victims of the communist regime. The statement was made in front of victims or relatives of the victims of the communist regime, who are still feeling that the communist past in the Bulgaria was not properly accessed. So, president stated that the access to the archives of the Communist State Security should be as easy as possible, including digitalization of some of the archives, as part of the attempts to make younger generation more familiar with the communist past.”

Tell us, please, are Bulgarians really that concerned with this issue?

“It is urgent issue as much as the president with all his authority and influence is defending the access to the archives of the State Security. Bulgaria has a relatively good Law for access to the Archives of the State Security. The Law was adopted in the end of 2006 and in the beginning of 2007 was established the so called Dossier Commission (www.comdos.bg) who has three main tasks:

1. To gather and keep all the archives of the institutions related to the repressive apparatus of the Communist regime (it means archives of the former State Security, and both political and military intelligence, that were separated structures). The idea was that successors of those institutions should transfer all their documents to the Dossier Commission, so that it will be an independent body that will control the access to the documents. So far, the Commission gathered most part of those documents with some exceptions with documents of the two intelligence structures.

2. To regulate the access to those documents for victims, researchers, journalists, etc. This also has been done and finally we are able to research those documents with some small restrictions – for example I, as a researcher, can read the dossiers of important historical figures but I cannot read dossiers of third person that I am not related to, because it can contain sensitive personal information.

3. The Commission is most famous with its work on verifying the names of the members of the political, economical, and social elite during the Bulgarian transition and publishing the names of the people, who were agents or officers of the State Security. Once published, their file is becoming public and everyone can read it. The Commission started with members of the political elite in the transitional period and certainly it made some sensational revelations, most famous among them the former President Parvanov. Certainly, there were also people from the Constitutional Court, Parliaments, Media, Academic and Educational Institutions, local authorities, etc. One of the last big revelations concerned the diplomatic service, when 3 years ago it became clear that about 60 percent of Bulgarian ambassadors at that time were affiliated to the State Security. After those revelations the former Minister of Foreign Affairs recalled those ambassadors, this step was supported by the former government and the President Plevneliev stated officially that he will not send as ambassador anyone, who was affiliated to the State Security.

“Most affected by those revelations were Bulgarian Socialist Party (successor of the Bulgarian Communist Party) and Movement for rights and freedom – the Party of Bulgarian Turkish minority. Since those parties currently are in the coalition government there have started talks that they would try to close down the commission. In addition to that the current Foreign Minister stated he would rely on the expertise of the diplomats that were recalled by the former government, which further created the impression of step back on that issue. (The minister cannot appoint those people as ambassadors without President’s consent but he can appoint them in highest administrative position within the Ministry.)

“These days there are two main challenges in front of the Commission:

1. The Scope of the Law for access to the documents and institutions that should be checked. The former government broadened the scope of the Law so that people from the economic elite of the country should have been verified, as well as some officers from the current security structures, who started their career in the communist times. The BSP prepared a draft law, whose intention was to narrow back the scope of the Law, so that the names of those officers, who are still active, should not be verified and announced. This attempt failed so far because it did not have enough support in the parliament.

2. The Commission is pressing to obtain all remaining documents that have not been transferred to it yet, mainly from the two intelligence structures.”

What can you say about your nation’s experience in dealing with totalitarian or communist legacy, and especially with the legacy of the communist-era secret services?

“Bulgarian experience is ambivalent. We have relative good Law on the access to the archives but that Law was adopted too late and it does not have any lustration effect. Lustration was several times outlawed by the Constitutional Court so that nowadays the commission publishes its reports but people remained unpunished in any sense. The issue of the Communist past was very hot in the 1990s and it was widely used by politicians. Nowadays the issue is somehow closed and most of the people do not like to discuss it because it is regarded as painful. My personal opinion is that one of the main mistakes in the Bulgarian transition was that those files remained closed for the whole time until 2007. In that period from 1990 to 2007 some of these people succeeded to create vast networks, to become influential in business or public spheres and although now the information is available, that does not change anything. This situation contributes to the general feeling that the Bulgarian transition was unfair and in general – for the frustration of the public from current political and economic elite.”

What were the main obstacles to opening of the communist-era secret services’ archives to the general public?

“It was the activity of the former agents and officers who were claiming that declassification of the archives would damage the national security and would endanger the life of people, who worked for “their motherland,” irrespective of the political regime. The other myth was that main part of the documents were destroyed – it is true that in 1990-92 big part of the personal dossiers were destroyed – however, the current Commission has access to the card index of those structures and it can verify the names of the people according to the name cards, even if their file has been destroyed.

“There were made several attempts for declassification of the documents in the 1990s but all of them failed, mainly because the Commissions that were established at that time were highly politicized and, moreover, because the archives at that time remained under the control of the current security services and they were able to manipulate the access to that information.”

VERBATIM

Oleksandr YAKYMENKO:  “Ukraine completed declassification of the Soviet-era archives in 2011”

After independence, Ukrainian institutions, too, conducted work on declassification of the KGB archives and rehabilitation of victims of the communist regime. The Day asked head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU) Oleksandr Yakymenko to clarify this issue. In particular, we asked him to describe the current situation of declassifying the KGB archives that had been kept in Ukraine and clarify whether access to the KGB archives was being systematically blocked starting in 2010.

To give honor where honor is due, we got a really prompt answer from the SSU, as in just three days, they sent us the response to our request signed by the agency’s head.

“According to the Decree of the President of Ukraine № 37/2009 ‘On Declassification, Publication, and Study of Archival Documents Related to the Ukrainian Liberation Movement, Political Repressions, and Manmade Famines in Ukraine,’ the Expert Commission of the Specialized State Archive (SSA) of the SSU revised from 2009-11 classification statuses of archival documents related to the Ukrainian liberation movement, political repressions, and manmade famines in Ukraine, declassifying them in the prescribed manner if they did not contain state secrets. Pursuant to orders of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine issued from 2009-11, the commission had to review all archival documents of the Soviet era.

“Its work resulted in declassifying: 2,371 items in 2009, 1,392 items in 2010, and 150,237 items in 2011.

“According to the Corpus of State Secrets, approved by the SSU’s order No. 440 on August 12, 2005 and registered with the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine on August 17, 2005 as the document No. 902/11182, a total of 226 items were reclassified as top secret. The work was completed in 2011.

“Access to documents kept in the SSA is provided in accordance with the requirements of the Laws of Ukraine ‘On National Archival Fund and Archival Institutions,’ ‘On Citizens’ Requests,’ ‘On Access to Public Information,’ ‘On Information,’ ‘On State Secrets’ and the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Resolution ‘On the Interpretation of the Law of Ukraine ‘On the Rehabilitation of Victims of Political Repressions in Ukraine.’ Aside from these requirements, there are no restrictions on Ukrainian citizens’ access to archival documents,” the SSU’s head noted.