Dear Foreign and Commonwealth Office,

1 Did HMG consider it neccessary to satisfy itself that the new interim government in Ukraine, which came to power on 22nd February this year, was legitimate under the Ukrainian Constitution?

2 If the answer to 1 is yes did HMG take legal advice on this question.

3 If the answer to 2 is yes was the advice A) Ukrainian B) other C) both of the preceding

4 If the answers to 2 and 3 are yes please would you publish the advice.

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]

Dear Foreign and Commonwealth Office,

I'm not convinced that this does not fall under FOI.

To my knowledge tou do not have a direct email from me so please can you explain how you will respond - will you do so on this site even though you claim my question does not come under FOI

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]

Dear Foreign and Commonwealth Office,

Thank you. I look forward to yiour reply. I wish to amend part 4 of the request to omit "and 3"

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]

Dear Foreign and Commonwealth Office,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Foreign and Commonwealth Office's handling of my FOI request 'Legitimacy of new government in Ukraine'.

You have not answered within the statutory time period and I am not persuaded that your reasons for not doing are valid. Please can you merge your request for more time with my request for internal review.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/l...

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]

Dear Foreign and Commonwealth Office,

You wrote to me on 11th April that

"We estimate that it will take up to a further 20 days to take a decision on where the balance of the public interest lies. Therefore, we plan to let you have a response by 13 May 2014. We will let you know if it appears that it will take longer than this to reach a conclusion. "

This appears to be based on your statement of 14th March, above, that you received my request on that date. However it clear from your reply of 7th March 2014 that you received it on the earlier date. The 20 day periods to which you work surely run from the date that you received the request, not the date on which you decided that it falls under the Freedom of Information Act. The date of 13th May is based on your claim to have received my request on 14th March, and should be brought forward by a week to 6th May.

I trust that you will consider it in the public interest to avoid giving any impression of procrastination and so make your response by the 6th. In any event I do not see how it can have taken you so long to decide on this matter, for the Foreign Secretary has surely already set out the principle which should guide you when he stated to the Commons on 4th March 2104 that

“Former President Yanukovych left his post and then left the country, and the decisions on replacing him with an acting President were made by the Rada, the Ukrainian Parliament, by the very large majorities required under the constitution, including with the support of members of former President Yanukovych’s party, the Party of Regions, so it is wrong to question the legitimacy of the new authorities.”

He has surely thereby accepted it is in the public interest that he and his department should discuss in public the legitimacy of the interim government in Kiev under the Ukrainian constitution.

I submit therefore that, given the growing turmoil in Ukraine and the implications for our national security, it is in the public interest that by 6th May at the latest you should provide in full the information I requested or give a comprehensive explanation as to why you will not do this.

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]

Dear Foreign and Commonwealth Office,

Further to my note of yesterday it might be helpful in any response if you are able to clarify the meaning of ‘legitimacy’ in the extract from the Foreign Secretary’s statement to the Commons on 4th March this year.
"Former President Yanukovych left his post and then left the country, and the decisions on replacing him with an acting President were made by the Rada, the Ukrainian Parliament, by the very large majorities required under the constitution, including with the support of members of former President Yanukovych’s party, the Party of Regions, so it is wrong to question the legitimacy of the new authorities."
Does the use of 'legitimacy' here signify that the replacement of Yanukovitch was completely in conformity with the constitution, or alternatively that it expressed the will of the people through their elected representatives in the Rada: in other words could it be qualified as either constitutional legitimacy or democratic legitimacy? I appreciate that such a request in itself is unlikely to fall under FOI but if you are able to give such clarification it may assist towards understanding your response.

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]

Dear Foreign and Commonwealth Office,

I have now raised this matter as a concern with the Information Commissioner

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]

Dear Foreign and Commonwealth Office,

Thank you for your reply which has reached me via the Information Commissioner. Can you please send this reply through this site so that everyone can read it?

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]