DEFENDING DEMOCRACY IN EXILE Policy Responses to Transnational Repression Introduction O n October 4, 2020, agents of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) stopped a taxi in the city of Mykolayiv and detained the passenger.1 The man, Alisher Haydarov, was seeking asylum in Ukraine, having fled Uzbekistan after being detained and tortured by police. When he failed to return home in Ukraine, relatives filed a missing person report but received no news from the authorities. A few days later, Haydarov appeared in a prison back in Tashkent, Uzbekistan’s capital. The state of his health, the nature of the accusations he faces, and how he arrived in the country all remain unclear. Haydarov’s rendition underscores the dangers faced by foreign activists, oppositionists, and journalists living in Ukraine. In recent years, the country’s authorities have enabled the forced Ukraine’s exceptionally mobilized civil society offers a measure of defense for exiled oppositionists, but it is not an adequate substitute for comprehensive state protection. return of Turkish dissidents,2 repeatedly denied asylum to a Kazakhstani opposition journalist,3 aided in the rendition of Uzbekistani nationals, and complied with abusive Interpol Red Notices issued by the governments of Azerbaijan and Russia.4 Ukraine’s record of democratic reform and its visa-free entry regime for citizens from 81 countries have made it an attractive destination for many people fleeing political repression. Yet real safety is often elusive. The country’s national security framework tends to overlook transnational repression committed by states other than Russia. Violence that befalls foreign activists is rarely met with a serious domestic or foreign policy response, and the country’s migration agency, security service, and courts routinely deny protection for vulnerable individuals. Formal and informal cooperation between the SBU and the security services of other states, including Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Turkey, has been especially dangerous for exiled oppositionists. While Ukraine is relatively easy to enter, a slow-moving and overly bureaucratic asylum system means that few individuals are able to secure permanent residency and accompanying legal protections. Ukraine’s exceptionally mobilized civil society offers a measure of defense for exiled oppositionists, but it is not an adequate substitute for comprehensive state protection. Suggested citation: Yana Gorokhovskaia and Isabel Linzer, “Case Study: Ukraine,” in Defending Democracy in Exile: Policy Responses to Transnational Repression (Washington, DC: Freedom House, June 2022), https://freedomhouse.org/report/transnational-repression/ukraine. 2 @FreedomHouse #TransnationalRepression