The outlets of the Ukrainska Pravda group will not use the word "president" to refer to Vladimir Putin.

This change is justified. And it is important not only from a moral standpoint, but also as a further punishment of the Russian ruler for the international crimes he has committed in office – crimes supported by the vast majority of Russian citizens.

Read more in the article by Sergiy Sydorenko, European Pravda's editor – We're no longer referring to Putin as "president". Why not, and why it matters.

Several circumstances politically undermine Putin's legitimacy.

He did not have the right to nominate himself for a third consecutive presidential term. He made some legally questionable amendments to the Russian constitution, which stipulated that the maximum of two consecutive terms would not apply to him.

Furthermore, the level of violations during the recent "elections" was extreme.

The opposition in Russia (as in Belarus) was purged long ago, leaving no alternatives to Putin other than fully Kremlin-controlled caricatures of parties like the Communists, the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (formerly led by Zhirinovsky), or A Just Russia. But this time, Putin's fear of opponents went even further, forcing him to expunge all non-government-approved candidates from the ballot papers. And let's not forget the assassination of Navalny: regardless of the (justified) attitude towards him in Ukraine, his death was another blow to the legitimacy of the Putin regime.

The voting rules were changed before the elections to add electronic and early voting, which in Russia were already considered discredited. And journalistic investigations using mathematical models to identify the most blatant ballot box stuffing show that between a third and half of the votes in Putin's "elections" were most likely fabricated.

There was also a massive election process in the occupied territories.

Putin also lacks international legitimacy, since he has become an internationally wanted criminal in most of the world.

Of course there is no legal right to call Putin a criminal until a court verdict is reached, but there are more than enough political and social grounds to do so. The world has long had no doubts about Putin's guilt of the international crime of aggression. The only question is how to hold him accountable.

The list could go on. Each point, taken separately, probably isn't sufficient reason to declare Putin illegitimate. But together, they create sufficient grounds for that statement.

That’s even more true for Ukraine, the Ukrainian authorities and the Ukrainian media.

It would be strange and unnatural in the extreme to continue recognising Putin as "president" after his "election" under such conditions, with Ukrainians voting at gunpoint under occupation. Even some Western partners have declared Putin's loss of legitimacy. The most interesting is the official statement by a spokesperson for the German Foreign Ministry, who announced that Berlin has stopped referring to Putin as president.

So who is Putin now (besides being an international criminal)? There is no obvious answer to that.

To emphasise that we no longer recognise Putin's legitimacy but do not deny his leadership in Russia, European Pravda and other outlets of the Ukrainska Pravda group have agreed on the following descriptors for Putin.

He is and will be: the ruler, the leader, the chief, the head, the de facto leader of the Russian Federation (this last option, though perhaps complex, is the most appropriate in Western terminology and emphasises Putin's illegitimacy).

The new "government" of Russia will also lose its legitimacy, and the ministers will not be legally appointed.

Finally, another no less important consequence will be that this will provide an opportunity for Ukraine to clearly and officially state that any negotiations with Putin are meaningless.

If we manage to convince the world that Putin and his government have lost their legitimacy, then this immunity will vanish.