The head of the State Service for Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience, Olena Bohdan, believes that excessive emphasis on the law on the forcible renaming of the UOC is not advisable. This is stated in an interview with Bohdan for Glavkom.

“In general, the situation is not as black and white as it is often portrayed. The requirement for a name is a problematic norm from the point of view of international law, because Ukraine has a number of international legal obligations. Do they demand from political parties a note on all their informational materials “Our members have business ties with the Russian Federation”? I do not intend to oversimplify anything with this sarcastic remark. We all understand our realities.

But it is very wrong to position all people affiliated with the UOC in unity with the MP as enemies of Ukraine – this is absolutely not true. To marginalize a certain part of the population on this basis is the way to an artificial conflict,” stated Olena Bohdan.

“In the end, let’s imagine that we have renamed – the largest system of churches in Ukraine today is full of the words “Moscow” or “Russia”. The supporters of the renaming believe that this will never happen: that in case of renaming, the overwhelming majority will immediately unite into a single local Ukrainian Church. But a completely different scenario is also possible after believers, having a sense of trust in their priest and church, see on the plate not the usual “UOC”, but affiliation with Moscow or Russia. If a person has already formed a positive attitude towards the church over the years, will such a change on the plate contribute to the consolidation of the Ukrainian society?” says Bohdan.