146 Tanja Penter
Many of the civilian workers were very young, inexperienced men who
were gaining their first work experience. Vladimir Isoilovich G. had been
sent to work in Mayak in 1958 after completing his professional training,
together with a group of ten other 18- to 19-year olds, and worked there for
more than 15 months:
The object where I worked was on the river Techa. We dug a sewer
beside the ‘dirty’ lake. Our supervisor told us that the lake was ‘dirty’
and that we should not go near it. […] The machine operators were soldiers. Then they were ordered to demobilize, and they could be replaced
and go home. They taught us quickly and we became machine operators
and continued to work on the canal with four of us. The foreman came
only once a month. […] Once in spring other soldiers came and asked us
if we had been working here for a long time. We answered that we had
been here since autumn. Then they asked how much x-rays we get per
week. How would we know that? The management had kept quiet about
it and they hadn’t given us any equipment to measure it. The soldiers
were very surprised. When they left, they told us to ask for dosimeters or
refuse to work in this region. As volunteers, we should not be forced to
work here. […] When we demanded the dosimeters, we were no longer
used at this object. […] In my opinion, this can be regarded as a crime of
the superiors who sent us there at that age. […] I have no children of my
own and Chelyabinsk-40 is to blame for this, because in my family there
were no other such cases. 29
The man wrote angrily to the Chelyabinsk authorities to find out whether
he was entitled to the social privileges, which he had read about in the newspaper. He pointed out that many of his previous letters to various authorities
had gone unanswered.
In addition to detailed descriptions of the historical everyday life, working
and living conditions in the radioactively contaminated areas, the letters also
provide valuable insights into the individual transformation experiences of
the former Soviet citizens after the end of the Soviet Union. 30
Actions of Russian and Ukrainian Citizens before
the ECHR for Chernobyl Compensation
Since the 1990s, Russian and Ukrainian victims have also increasingly turned
to international organizations to claim their rights, including the European
Court of Human Rights. 31 In the understanding of some victims’ associations, the right to compensation has even been elevated to a general human
right, which is why the Court of Human Rights seemed to them to be a suitable addressee. With its judgments, the European Court of Human Rights
sometimes (involuntarily) also becomes an actor in the field of historical policy, because its jurisdiction occasionally includes judgments on history. 32
Many of the civilian workers were very young, inexperienced men who
were gaining their first work experience. Vladimir Isoilovich G. had been
sent to work in Mayak in 1958 after completing his professional training,
together with a group of ten other 18- to 19-year olds, and worked there for
more than 15 months:
The object where I worked was on the river Techa. We dug a sewer
beside the ‘dirty’ lake. Our supervisor told us that the lake was ‘dirty’
and that we should not go near it. […] The machine operators were soldiers. Then they were ordered to demobilize, and they could be replaced
and go home. They taught us quickly and we became machine operators
and continued to work on the canal with four of us. The foreman came
only once a month. […] Once in spring other soldiers came and asked us
if we had been working here for a long time. We answered that we had
been here since autumn. Then they asked how much x-rays we get per
week. How would we know that? The management had kept quiet about
it and they hadn’t given us any equipment to measure it. The soldiers
were very surprised. When they left, they told us to ask for dosimeters or
refuse to work in this region. As volunteers, we should not be forced to
work here. […] When we demanded the dosimeters, we were no longer
used at this object. […] In my opinion, this can be regarded as a crime of
the superiors who sent us there at that age. […] I have no children of my
own and Chelyabinsk-40 is to blame for this, because in my family there
were no other such cases. 29
The man wrote angrily to the Chelyabinsk authorities to find out whether
he was entitled to the social privileges, which he had read about in the newspaper. He pointed out that many of his previous letters to various authorities
had gone unanswered.
In addition to detailed descriptions of the historical everyday life, working
and living conditions in the radioactively contaminated areas, the letters also
provide valuable insights into the individual transformation experiences of
the former Soviet citizens after the end of the Soviet Union. 30
Actions of Russian and Ukrainian Citizens before
the ECHR for Chernobyl Compensation
Since the 1990s, Russian and Ukrainian victims have also increasingly turned
to international organizations to claim their rights, including the European
Court of Human Rights. 31 In the understanding of some victims’ associations, the right to compensation has even been elevated to a general human
right, which is why the Court of Human Rights seemed to them to be a suitable addressee. With its judgments, the European Court of Human Rights
sometimes (involuntarily) also becomes an actor in the field of historical policy, because its jurisdiction occasionally includes judgments on history. 32