Is it possible not to let someone into the shelter? Legal assessment of the situation with Radisson Blu – Views

According to “UP. Life”, the four-star Radisson Blu hotel in Kyiv refused to let a woman into the shelter during an air raid on March 25, when there was a threat of ballistic strikes.

According to this citizen, she was told at the reception that the shelter is only for hotel guests. Later, the hotel administration reported on social networks that there were no free places in the shelter, that only residents of three of the seven floors could be accommodated there.

As a result, the citizen was forced to look for another nearby shelter.

Undoubtedly, this situation caused strong indignation in society – however, this is not an isolated case. Unfortunately, there are cases when, in particular, the owners put the mother in front of a choice – either to let the child into the shelter alone, or to go look for some other shelter, in which both the mother and the child will be admitted together.

A relative of mine faced such a situation, so I know about it “first hand.” In other cases, they may not be allowed into the shelter together with animals, even regardless of their size. I note that both of these cases happened in the shelter of general educational institutions in the cities of Sumy and Kyiv. There are many such examples that simply did not gain much publicity.

Some Kyivans decide not to respond at all to the sound of the air-raid alarm and continue to go about their business. Some may mistake the sound of the siren for a formality. However, the fact that the citizen turned to the hotel with a request to let her into the shelter, and she was refused, requires an assessment – both legal and universal, valuable. The criminal carelessness of the hotel staff can lead to tragic consequences.

Is there really a shelter?

Studying this situation from a legal perspective, it is necessary to take into account two main legal documents: the Code of Civil Protection of Ukraine and Resolution of the Government of Ukraine dated 03.10.2017 No. 138 “Some issues of the use of protective structures of civil protection”.

Chapter 7 of the Code of Civil Protection clearly states that a basement or basement room, in which people can temporarily stay in order to reduce the combined damage from dangerous factors, as well as from the effects of means of damage, belongs to the simplest shelters (Article 32).

In the same article, it is determined that “the population that is not subject to shelter in protective structures and dual-purpose structures” is subject to shelter in the simplest shelters.

That is, the provisions of the Code of Civil Protection of Ukraine establish that everyone who needs it should be allowed into the simplest shelter.

Part 16 of Article 32 of the Civil Protection Code of Ukraine specifies that the simplest shelters, regardless of the form of ownership, must be made ready to receive the population within a period not exceeding 24 hours after the unified state civil protection system is put on high alert.

This means that if the hotel has a room that can be used as the simplest shelter, the hotel is obliged to provide public access to it (readiness to receive the public).

If access is not provided, then this is a violation of the law. Moreover, the Code establishes that property that takes up extra space in such a shelter can simply be exhibited from such a shelter – because people’s lives and health are more important. In the case of a hotel parking lot, such “excess” property is obviously the parked cars, cabinets, etc.

What is public access? This is an elementary guide to the shelter; and it is also the absence of obstacles to such access. The law does not provide for face control in such cases. That is, if a citizen enters the territory of the hotel and asks where the shelter is, then no censors can be applied to her.

That is, the hotel administration does not have the right to check whether those who go to the shelter are really staying there.

One of the arguments of the hotel staff was also that their shelter is not marked on the map of shelters – therefore, formally, it does not seem to exist.

Government Resolution No. 138 specifies that such simplest shelters are taken into account by local self-government bodies, district state administrations in the city of Kyiv as protective structures (clauses 6, 15). For this, an inspection of the object is carried out, about which the corresponding act is drawn up.

Such protective structures are included in the record book of protective structures – an auxiliary accounting document. The owner of such premises is obliged to notify the authorities that he has such a protective structure. In fact, it may turn out that the hotel deliberately hid from the authorities the fact that it has the simplest shelter.

According to the letter dated 01.04.24 of the Shevchenko District State Administration in the city of Kyivthis premises was not inspected, and its owners did not provide relevant documents.

So the question of the obligation to provide such a basic shelter at the Radisson Blu Hotel depends on whether it is suitable for use as a public shelter according to the results of the relevant survey (with the number of places), and not on whether it was concealed or not.

I will note once again, that in the Information System “Accounting and visualization of the fund of protective structures of civil protection”, the information that building No. 22 on Yaroslaviv Val Street is the easiest shelter is missing, because the hotel did not inform the district administration about it.

The issue of formal registration or not should not affect the sense of security of our citizens. Whether Radisson Blu actually owns such premises is the most important aspect of this question.

Are there free places in the shelter?

Can a citizen be denied guaranteed access to a shelter for the reason that there is no free space in the shelter?

Returning to the wording “ensure access”, “readiness to receive the population”, we can come to the conclusion that issues of refusal-permission cannot arise at all.

A person approaches the shelter – and evaluates this possibility independently. Also, of course, in this case, the element of manipulation disappears. Otherwise, it is similar to the scene in the movie “Titanic” – where some privileged passengers were seated in the boats, and others were closed on the lower floors. That is, in fact, physical characteristics are important – but on the condition that they are actually observed, and not used as an excuse.

Corporate ethical dilemma

It is important to take into account that in elite global hotel chains there are additional, internal, rules and procedures, requirements for conducting business. For example, the Radisson Hotels chain, headquartered in Brussels, Belgium, has very extensive and detailed written policies on human rights, anti-slavery, business ethics, and more.

That is, the Radisson Hotels chain obliges its employees to follow even more formalized rules in order to “keep the brand.” One of the network’s slogans, which appears on the code of ethics, says: “Trust, like respect, must be earned. Respect must be shown to earn respect.”

Among the main principles of the network, in particular, there are:

• We respect the law;
• We show respect to all people in all situations;
• We think ethically;
• We act honestly;
• We do not discriminate against anyone for any reason;
• We are honest and transparent;
• We always think about safety.

Whether these principles are followed in the situation that has arisen or not is a question for network management to decide. Law enforcement officers should give a legal assessment of these events, and local self-government bodies should take into account this simplest shelter, which is currently not reflected in the Information System.

As a lawyer, a client and just a citizen, I hope that such situations will never happen again, and that the guilty parties will be brought to justice.

Perhaps the largest and most authoritative hotel chains in Ukraine could sign a joint declaration that they provide free access of the population to their simplest shelters – this would be able to extinguish this “fire” a little and testify that the business community is taking all possible measures and learning from your mistakes

Semen Yatsenkolawyer, assistant consultant to the People’s Deputy of Ukraine, member of the Ukrainian Truth Club

Publications in the “View” section are not editorial articles and reflect exclusively the author’s point of view.