“A fuzzy line between permitted and gross violation”

On October 18 the law “On security guard activities” supposed to enlarge the powers of private security agencies came into force. Headlines of certain editions loudly declared: “The law allowing security beating customers came into force in Ukraine” and provoked unrest amongst Ukrainians. “Nobody is allowed to beat customers,” director of the private security agency Maksyma in Ternopil Borys Bezruchenko emphasized. Security have no right not only to use special equipment or traumatic weapons (by the way, it is still unknown when private security will have them, though the media have already “armed” them on October 18), but even make someone suspected of stealing something open their bag or have their pockets checked. They can only call the police for fact-finding.

“I saw bulletproof vests, handcuffs and traumatic weapons in the list published in one of newspapers,” Bezruchenko said. “However, even if our security guards stop somebody on the territory, they have to immediately call the police for administrative detention. Our security guards have no right for any handcuffs. I think that there is a need for an addition to this law which would clearly list the special equipment private security agencies are allowed to buy and use in their work and how that special equipment should be stored. If this law had been adopted before the accident in the Kyiv shopping mall Karavan, probably, it would have had those points.” As for traumatic weapons, to get them one should have permission for a specific person issued by law-enforcement bodies, Bezruchenko emphasized. “We cannot distribute weapons and special equipment previously used only by military and law-enforcement bodies. We cannot say that private security agencies have the right for the same complex of special equipment provided by the Cabinet Council. For example, point 1 of article 9 of this law allows entities of security guard activities to purchase, store and use special equipment defined by the Cabinet Council of Ukraine, in accordance with the procedure stipulated by law. However, point 1 of article 10 of the abovementioned law bans purchasing and using property, which must be used exclusively by military and law-enforcement bodies for security guard activities. That is why there should be a clear distinction. What do we usually do? An accident happens and we start trying to understand if this person had or did not have this right. Before that we had even used rubber truncheons of different length as compared to ones law-enforcement bodies have. As for tear-gas spray containers, we use only those women buy to protect themselves from hooligans. If one number changes, it is called war gas that can only be used by law-enforcement bodies. This line is very fuzzy and can be easily overstepped, and we might be accused of gross violation. It will be right since it is provided by the law. In general, the law is good, however, there are some issues that need to be clarified as we have a lot of questions left without answers. This is my opinion as a specialist with a many-year experience in this sphere.”