Ukraine-Forum von Ukraine-Nachrichten.de

Diplomats Briefed and Demonstrations Held in Kyiv

Leader of the Opposition Yulia Tymoshenko claims that the authorities are resorting to measures to reduce the gains of the opposition in the local elections due at the end of October. She cited evidence of bogus branches of the Tymoshenko-led Batkivshchyna (Motherland party) set up by the authorities in Western Ukraine to undermine the party in the local elections.

During a meeting with foreign diplomats in Kyiv, she said, “Our party is being hijacked by Yanukovych and his administration with Mr Lyovochkin at its helm.”

Members expelled

Three party members, Bohdan Hubsky, Ivan Denkovych and Arnold Radovets, have been expelled from the party for cooperating with the current authorities to hinder Batkivshchyna’s participation in the local elections.

The opposition warned that in the case of a dispute over the election results, its chances of getting a fair ruling are greatly diminished as such disputes will not be resolved by outside courts, but settled through the Central Election Commission alone. The latter is known to be controlled by President Viktor Yanukovych.

Ms Tymoshenko also reminded diplomats that the elections will take place in an environment where media freedoms have been severely curtailed. By way of example she pointed to the recent revocation of the broadcasting licenses of two TV channels: Channel 5 and TVi.

Mass protest rally

Yesterday, the opposition kick-started the new political season with a mass rally in Kyiv and temporarily blocked the work of parliament after its proposal to introduce a moratorium on gas price hikes wasn’t put to a vote.

Some 10,000 demonstrators protested outside parliament. Many of them made their own personal transport plans to attend. This was necessary as there were widespread reports of bus companies preventing demonstrators from travelling to the city.

Ms Tymoshenko called upon the demonstrators to resist the new 50 percent rise in domestic gas prices introduced by the government. The price hike was one of the measures undertaken to gain a $15 billion stand-by loan from the IMF to help resolve Ukraine’s crippling fiscal crisis.

In parallel, Batkivshchyna warned that the first tranche of IMF money might be diverted to pay a $5.4 billion payment to the gas intermediary, RosUkrEnergo, in line with the ruling of the Stockholm tribunal issued earlier this year. “Our team would be happy to provide the IMF with the information regarding the provenance of the disputed gas and how the whole case was handled at the Stockholm tribunal,” said Ms Tymoshenko at the meeting with foreign diplomats.

The opposition also remains deeply critical of the new draft Tax Code of Ukraine which puts extra pressure on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). "Every clause of the Tax Code is a step towards rolling up the SME sector while oligarch-run corporations are being given a free rein,” Ms Tymoshenko said.

Speculation suggests that Serhiy Teryohin, a deputy from Ms Tymoshenko’s bloc, may be ousted from his post as the head of the parliamentary tax committee. Mr Teryohin claims this is due to his tough stance on the new version of the Tax Code to be voted upon this autumn. "They know I won’t give them an easy ride. Even more so, the business future of many deputies is directly conditional upon what shape the new Tax Code will take. The people’s interests must come first.”

After much political horse-trading during the summer months, parliament voted on Tuesday for the first reading of the Tax Code adopted in June to be null and void. The new draft of the document was only released this week. The business community complains that the full text remains unavailable, even to the head of the parliamentary tax committee.






Heat Turned Up on Opposition

Former Minister on Interpol List, Net Closing on Turchynov

Ukraine’s law enforcement agencies have intensified the hunt for former officials of Yulia Tymoshenko’s government, with one of its ex-ministers published on Interpol’s wanted list and an arrest of the former first deputy prime minister anticipated by the media. The investigations, aimed exclusively at officials from Ms Tymoshenko’s former administration, represent the worst example of political persecution since the days of President Leonid Kuchma.

Bohdan Danylyshyn, the former Minister for the Economy became a fugitive after the Prosecutor General’s Office launched a criminal probe this summer. He is accused of enriching himself through fraudulent state procurement contracts. Prosecutors claim Mr Danylyshyn caused damages worth of UAH 4.5 million ($570,000) to the Ukrainian state.

The former minister, who is believed by some to be in Germany, denies the allegations and says that he acted in full accordance with the law. In an interview with Kyiv Post, he said he had been on vacation abroad where he was seeking medical treatment. Some sources suspect he may seek political asylum in the EU. However, Mr Danylyshyn denies this saying, “I’m not afraid of anything.” He indicated he would return to Ukraine to clear his name once his medical treatment was completed. Also, he said that he did not consider the case against him to be part of a political vendetta and supported moves to clean-up the state procurement system.

The ex-minister said the charges against him were not valid as he did not handle procurements directly. He stressed that the job of the Ministry was to sign contracts into force once the requisite stamps and paperwork were received. “Typically, it was not our job to choose bidders or negotiate procurement prices,” said Mr Danylyshyn.

The reporter who managed to secure the fugitive ex-minster for an interview was later summoned to the prosecutor’s office for questioning.

Turchynov appears the prime target

Meanwhile, the authorities are closing in on Yulia Tymoshenko’s right-hand man, Oleksandr Turchynov. He was called in for questioning by the SBU today. Reporters are speculating that the former first deputy prime minister could be arrested within days. A former SBU chief himself, he is being investigated for alleged fraud in selling discounted gas to private companies in 2009.
Mr Turchynov claims the charges against him are politically motivated, dismissing them as “completely fabricated.” He pointed out that it was Mr Yanukovych that signed the illegal contracts which saw gas sold at below-market prices when he was prime minister in 2007. Following his questioning today he said, “the security service is investigating a case against state officials who protected the interests of Ukraine."

An insider told Inform, “their goal is not to imprison Tymoshenko as this would embolden support for her. Their focus is Turchynov. By taking him out they aim to remove an effective administrator and make her guilty by association before the local elections.”

Volodymyr Fesenko, the director of the Penta think-tank in Kyiv said, “Arresting officials is one thing, but arresting leaders of the opposition is another. It can boost not only the opposition’s support in Ukraine, but draw unwanted international attention.” He said, “the arrest of Turchynov could be considered political persecution.”

Mr Turchynov says that the state officials detained earlier, the former Deputy Head of Naftohaz Ihor Didenko and the former Head of State Customs Anatoly Makarenko, might be forced to testify against him. They were detained in June and July respectively in an investigation into gas fraud. “With no pre-text allowing them to get at me, they’ll be trying to manipulate the case by forcing evidence from those already detained,” said Mr Turchynov.

Political analysts say the recent moves to detain ex-government officials are designed to give voters the impression of a clampdown on corruption in the run-up to local elections on 31 October.

“This has nothing to do with combating corruption,” says Hryhoriy Nemyria, Ms Tymoshenko’s foreign policy adviser and former deputy prime minister. “If it was, they would be opening investigations into other officials associated with previous administrations. No one from the Party of Regions or Our Ukraine has been detained. This is a witch-hunt aimed at BYuT and it’s because we still pose a threat to them.”




What’s 4 km of Asphalt Between Friends?

Beware, the camera is rolling and the microphone is on. Before a Cabinet of Ministers meeting on 27 August, Deputy Prime Minister Borys Kolesnykov and First Deputy Prime Minister Andriy Klyuyev were heard arguing over the reconstruction of a road from Kyiv to the suburb of Koncha Zaspa.

An incensed Mr Kolesnykov berated his colleague, claiming the road had only been asphalted as far as Mr Klyuyev’s house. He demanded the asphalt be extended another 4 km to his house. "Is it difficult to re-pave another 4 km of the Obukhiv highway?" In summing up his needs he said, “Maybe you can give the order [to continue reconstruction of the highway]. For another 4 km at least, that's all.”

It is noted that an 8 km stretch of road to Mr Yanukovych’s dacha has been renovated at a reputed cost of UAH 50 million ($6.3 million). The estimated cost of the renovation of the major Kyiv ring road is UAH 69 million ($8.7 million).

The video of the exchange is on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOWjDk3laHQ&feature =player_embedded




Will Ukraine’s Democracy Survive 2010?

As President Viktor Yanukovych calls for extra powers others warn that this could heighten political corruption. Long before he became president, the Ukrainian Centre for Economic and Political Studies cited “political corruption” as the largest threat to Ukrainian democracy. Now, with local elections two months away, Ukraine is beset by low levels of public trust in state institutions and there exists a deep cynicism of politicians.

The public does not have to look far to see how corruption has permeated Ukraine’s political structures. Nowhere is this more evident than in the buying up of deputies. A practice that effectively changes the election result after the people have had their say.

The practise was common under the Yanukovych government in 2006-2007 and led to the presidential decree that dissolved parliament and triggered pre-term elections. Politically speaking, it is a one-way street. In 2007-2010 neither Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko nor President Viktor Yushchenko sought to change parliament’s configuration by buying up Party of Regions deputies even though their coalition had a wafer thin majority.

One can argue that before President Yanukovych came into office, Ukraine’s institutions were already suffering from low levels of public trust – a fact that manifested itself in a lack of public enthusiasm for this year’s presidential elections. A November 2009 survey by the Washington-based International Centre for Electoral Studies found that all the leading candidates received negative ratings. While this was not surprising for the incumbent prime minister who was dealing with the worst economic and financial crisis in half a century, opposition leader Yanukovych also had negative ratings and received half a million fewer votes than he received in the 2004 elections. The so called “new face” candidates, such as Arseniy Yatseniuk and Sergei Tigipko, faired little better. Today, according to the latest polls, nothing much has changed other than a dramatic double digit plunge in Mr Yanukovych’s ratings. This is largely as a result of tough austerity measures combined with unconstitutional moves such as extending the Russian navy’s lease of its Black Sea base in Sevastopol.

This political malaise is set against a backdrop of media repression and persecution of opposition politicians. Not surprisingly it is prompting many to ask if Ukraine’s democracy will survive 2010? Perhaps one way to answer this question is to examine the health of the country’s democratic institutions.

Constitutional Court pressured

The Constitutional Court – the nation’s supreme legal authority – has its reputation in tatters after being intimidated to change its position from its 2008 ruling that only permitted factions to establish coalitions. Whilst this enabled a coalition and a government to be formed, it took away the credibility and legitimacy of this once revered state institution.

Enabling parliament to establish a coalition that includes individual defectors gave a green light for the bribing of opposition deputies. With only 220 deputies in three factions, the remaining members of the Stability and Reforms coalition, numbering nearly 40, have been bribed, blackmailed or coerced to defect from the opposition. Various sources point to sums in the region of a $1 million one-off payment to join the coalition, coupled with $25,000 paid each month until the next parliamentary election in September 2012. The desired result is a weakening of another important democratic institution: the opposition.

The opposition is facing a full scale assault. Its leaders are under the scrutiny of the SBU and the subject of Kuchma-style witch-hunts. They have all but been squeezed off television and given little coverage by the Ukrainian press.

This leads to the undermining of the other institution crucial to a democracy, the media. International watchdogs have been critical of numerous instances of censorship – from the removal of broadcasting licenses to the intimidation and assault of journalists.

Cancelling constitutional reforms

Political corruption and coercion has enabled Mr Yanukovych to de facto revert Ukraine to a presidential system and place the coalition and government under presidential control. To ensure that the move back to the 1996 presidential system is complete, the Party of Regions has raised the question of changing the constitution.

There is already speculation about extending the length of the president’s term from five to seven years. There exists a precedent for this. The president’s term was extended from four to five years by the 2006 constitution. A second autocratic step will be to bribe deputies to support the extension of the life of parliament by three years to 2015.

For now the Yanukovych administration appears intent on cancelling the 2004 constitutional reforms introduced in 2006, thereby giving the president absolute power for an extended term. If it succeeds, Parliamentary Chairman Volodymyr Lytvyn believes that parliament’s fate will be unclear.

Of course none of this was mentioned during Mr Yanukovych’s presidential election campaign. “This is because nobody would have gone to vote for Kuchma-2,” wrote Ukrayinska Pravda journalist Serhiy Leshchenko. Mr Yanukovych did not campaign to increase presidential powers and therefore has no moral right to now seek to increase them, he added, comparing claims by Mr Yanukovych that he needs more powers to introduce “reforms” with other authoritarian leaders such as Robert Mugabe, who called for greater power to undertake “land reforms.”

As Rutgers University Professor Alexander Motyl states, “the Party of Regions wants power for the sake of power. It wants to rule. Alone. Everything. All the time. Controlling the Parliament and the Cabinet and the Presidency is therefore not enough. The governors must be subordinated, the capital city Kyiv must be captured, university autonomy, freedom of assembly, and press freedoms must be curbed, and the secret police must be mandated to sniff out dissenters. Oh, and the city councils and the mayors must be subordinated – as indeed they will be in forthcoming local elections in October.”

Democracy threat from a super presidential system

The threat to Ukrainian democracy with the move back to a super presidential system could galvanise opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko as she was the first Ukrainian leader who, in a April 2008 speech in Strasbourg, outlined her support for a parliamentary system.

The last two decades have proven that countries in Eastern Europe and the Baltic states that adopted parliamentary systems have moved ahead in successfully building democracies. In contrast, countries in the CIS adopting presidential systems have become autocracies.

If President Yanukovych makes Ukraine a super presidential system he will threaten both its democratic progress and its prospects for European integration. Parliament would resort to an ineffectual rubber stamp institution. It is not far off that now.

Local election law undermines democracy

Another area threatening Ukraine’s democracy is the new law on local elections. Although aspects of it were watered down on 30 August, the law still prevents political blocs from fielding candidates. Traditionally, the two former orange forces have competed in elections as blocs (BYuT, Our Ukraine-People’s Self Defence). The new law is designed to benefit the Party of Regions and keep the opposition fragmented and weakened.

Of course there are many other deeply worrying developments in Ukraine that infringe on standards of democracy. These include the use of the State Security Service to pressure the media and opposition; the use of tax inspectors to harass opponents; the selling off of state assets at discount prices; the granting of state contracts without public tender; ignoring the rights of Crimean Tartars; the jailing of officials working for the former administration to get them to testify against political opponents; the list goes on and on.

So back to our question, will Ukraine’s democracy survive until the end of 2010? When you examine the erosion of democratic institutions the outlook appears bleak. Yet maybe there is a more important question that needs answering – one that eclipses all others. Why are Washington and Brussels so softly-spoken in their criticism of Ukraine’s democratic regression?




Top of the Mornin’ to You Mr Prodi

President Viktor Yanukovych’s visit to Germany was marred by criticism over the deterioration of media freedoms in Ukraine. While the gaffe-prone head of state avoided any embarrassing collisions with wreaths he again revealed a penchant for confusing countries.

His geographical faux pas occurred during a speech in Berlin at the Hotel Adlon. When recalling a conversation with Romano Prodi the former Italian President of the European Commission, Mr Yanukovych referred to him as “Romano Prodi from Ireland.”

In March 2010 Mr Yanukovych confused Kosovo with Serbia and Montenegro. Another time he confused Austria with Australia. All this comes from a man who boasts an MA and Ph.D.

In an article for the Atlantic Council, Alexander J Motyl, Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University wrote: “A twice-convicted felon as a youth, Yanukovych the mature politician then completed two degrees in two years while working full-time running Donetsk province. Either the guy’s a genius, or running Donetsk is a piece of cake, or–wait–maybe the degrees aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on, or–wait–maybe someone did his homework.”

Another insight into Mr Yanukovych’s academic prowess came during a visit last week to a school in the Obolon district of Kyiv. When a journalist enquired as to his favourite school subject, he replied “I enjoyed sports most of all.” When quizzed about his behaviour at school, he replied enigmatically that he behaved “in different ways.” Enough said.

Newsletter for the international community providing views and analysis from the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYuT)





Page 1 EPP Delivers Stinging Rebuke to Yanukovych

Page 2 EPP Resolution on Ukraine

Page 4 Ukraine’s Opposition Finds its Voice

Page 4 Tymoshenko’s Bloc Considers Election Boycott

Page 5 Batkivshchyna is the Main Target
Page 6 Shuster Live





Click here to be removed from the newsletter distribution list
For further information contact taras{ät}byti.org.ua





EPP Delivers Stinging Rebuke to Yanukovych

Leader of the Opposition, Yulia Tymoshenko addressed delegates at the European People’s Party (EPP) summit in Brussels on Wednesday, warning them that Ukraine’s democracy is under threat.

In a half-hour speech to Europe’s leaders, Ms Tymoshenko talked about restrictions to democratic freedoms, media censorship, and the repression of the opposition. Her remarks follow a strongly worded resolution from the Political Assembly of the EPP on 13 September.

The EPP resolution expressed “deep concern” over Ukraine’s democratic development. In particular it was critical of government interference with the democratic activity of the opposition, including Ms Tymoshenko’s Batkivshchyna party and fellow opposition parties, Rukh and Our Ukraine.

An EPP press statement said, “the EPP resolution also expresses its regret over the government’s curtailment of media freedoms and interference in the work of foreign charity and other foundations.”

“The EPP is sending a clear message to Ukraine’s government: do not backtrack on your country’s hard earned democratic freedoms,” said Wilfried Martens, EPP President. Democratic freedoms are not safeguarded by public relations visits to European capitals by government leaders; they are safeguarded by sincere and tangible commitments to Ukrainian society,” Mr Martens added.

“European politicians understand very well that the rhetoric from the new Ukrainian president and government regarding promoting and strengthening democratic values differs considerably from reality,” said Ms Tymoshenko

On Monday, President Viktor Yanukovych visited Brussels where he met Herman Van Rompuy, President of the European Council, and José Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission. Mr Yanukovych presented the latter with a football and promised Europe’s leaders that there would be no repetition of the damaging gas dispute with Russia that saw supplies cut to EU households in the winter of 2008/2009.

Despites the diplomatic words and handshaking, Europe’s leaders are worried by the repressive actions taking place in Ukraine against the media and opponents of the regime.

In an interview in the Wall Street Journal, Ms Tymoshenko called on the West not to overlook abuses in Ukraine. "People in Ukraine … are horrified when Western leaders say they are very pleased that there is stability in Ukraine," she added.

A BBC Ukrainian Service reporter remarked, in an interview with Hryhoriy Nemyria, Ms Tymoshenko’s foreign policy adviser, that it was ironic that the European Commission talked to Mr Yanukovych of “deepening cooperation” and “progress in negotiations” and not a word about infringements to democracy. Mr Nemyria said that one should distinguish between what EU officials say when being governed by protocol and what they really think.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



EPP Resolution on Ukraine

The following text is the European People’s Party (EPP) Resolution on Ukraine, adopted at the EPP Political Assembly, in Brussels, on 13 September 2010.

The European People's Party:

- Being deeply concerned by the current situation with the democratic development in Ukraine,

- Condemning state interference in the main opposition party’s internal affairs, which may disrupt its participation in local elections in several regions, namely:

· Refusal by local justice departments, notably in Kyiv, Lviv, Luhansk and some other oblasts, to acknowledge decisions of the local offices of the Batkivshchyna party, despite their authority only to take note of such internal party decisions;

· Condonation by the state authorities of creation of parallel party structures in the regions and court injunctions prohibiting changes of local party leadership;

· Repressive actions and intimidations by the tax and other state controlling authorities aimed at the local party offices and party activists,

- Regretting the curtailment of media freedoms, witnessed in particular by the following:

· Annulment of the broadcasting licences of two TV companies with balanced political news coverage;

· Increase in the number of cases of physical violence against journalists and inadequate reaction of law enforcement authorities; disappearance of an investigative journalist in Kharkiv;

· Statements by journalists of major TV channels about internal editorial and managerial censorship;

· Unacceptable conflict of interests of the current head of the Security Service of Ukraine who is also an owner of the biggest media holding in Ukraine and member of the High Council of Justice responsible for appointment and dismissal of judges,

- Being deeply concerned by the selective use of the criminal justice system, where criminal prosecutions seem to constitute a politically motivated campaign against the allies of the leader of the political opposition,

- Whereas activity of the Security Service of Ukraine appears to go beyond the normal functions exercised by such agencies in democratic states governed by the rule of law. This includes unwarranted meetings of the security agents with university staff, journalists, civil society organisations, etc.; interference in the work of foreign charity and other foundations, including the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, which Head of Kyiv Office Nico Lange had been detained by the Ukrainian Security Service at the border; pressure on the independent broadcasting sector regulator in the interests of one of the TV companies owned by the Security Service head, and other worrying cases well documented by “Reporters without Borders” in their Report on Fact Finding visit to Ukraine,

- Whereas several recent legislative reforms have been hastily adopted without due public discussion and consideration of international standards. For example, the judicial reform, while including many positive and long overdue changes, concentrated too much powers in the High Council of Justice without modifying its composition in line with European standards; the Supreme Court was practically eviscerated,

- Whereas recent legislation can undermine local self-government and democratic local elections in Ukraine. The new law on the local elections still falls short of the democratic standards by not allowing individual candidates to self-nominate and preserving closed party lists. Decisions on the abolishment of city districts (and relevant self-government councils) in Kyiv and Kharkiv are being approved in a hasty and non-transparent manner without any consultations with the local population,

- Whereas representatives of the governing political party have requested the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to abrogate the 2004 constitutional amendments Ukraine, in which case Ukraine would be thrown back to a previous system of state governance with the main power concentrated in the Presidency and role of the parliament diminished,

Reaffirms its full and strong support and solidarity to Yulia Tymoshenko, Opposition Leader and to the EPP sister parties from Ukraine: BATKIVSHCHYNA, RUKH and OUR UKRAINE; and calls on President Yanukovych and on the Ukrainian state authorities:

· to ensure that the period of political stability is used for the systemic reforms Ukraine so drastically needs but not for silencing the dissenting voices, intimidating mass media and replacing political pluralism with a monopolized state vertical;

· to stop their anti-democratic actions and any interference in internal party activities of the opposition and ensure its unhindered participation in the local elections;

· to ensure that justice is administered equally and that no criminal prosecution is motivated by political interests. The fight against corruption in which only members of the former government are picked out can hardly be seen as genuine and politically unbiased;

· to guarantee in practice the rights of the media and journalists, to refrain from censorship in any form, to ensure swift and comprehensive investigation of all cases of violence against journalists and disappearance of journalist Klymentyev, to eliminate conflict of interests in the mass media area of the current Security Service head, to adopt in consultation with the civil society and international organisations laws on the public service broadcasting and access to public information;

· to limit functions and activities of the Security Service of Ukraine to the protection of national security and consider stripping it of any powers in the criminal justice area;

· to ensure that any changes in the Constitution of Ukraine follow established constitutional procedures and recommendations of the international organisations, including the Venice Commission.
The European People’s Party addresses the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly with a request to closely consider the above concerns and recommendations and reflect them in its upcoming debate and resolution on the functioning of democratic institutions in Ukraine.
A PDF of the resolution can be downloaded from:
http://images.europaemail.eu/client_id_ ... ine_EN.pdf



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Ukraine’s Opposition Finds its Voice

Ukraine’s opposition seems to have found its voice again. After a quiet summer spent regrouping, Yulia Tymoshenko’s eponymous bloc has dusted itself down, revamped its constitution and come out fighting.
“The party has shown itself capable of purging its ranks and is enhancing intra-party democracy,” said Hryhoriy Nemyria, foreign policy adviser and Deputy Chairman of Ms Tymoshenko’s Batkivshchyna (Mother-land) party. “We aim to reach out to young and disenchanted people and will bring new blood into the party.”
The expulsion last week of one of the bloc’s deputy chairman, Bohdan Hubsky, along with two other parliamentary deputies illustrated that the party means business. Mr Hubsky was found to be involved in a plot to set up bogus party offices with fake candidates. The bizarre plot was established with the connivance of the presidential administration in order to sabotage Batkivshchyna’s chances in the local elections on 31 October.
Speaking about the incident, Ms Tymoshenko said, "Yanukovych instructed the head of his administration, Mr Lyovochkin, to create fake party branches of Batkivshchyna in the regions and enlist fake party members with hand-picked leaders. The police are now giving out stamps and doctored party certificates to these fake leaders. This is happening in the Ivano-Frankivsk, Lviv, Kharkiv, Kyiv and Luhansk oblasts,” said Ms Tymoshenko.
In reference to Mr Hubsky and others who have thrown their lot in with the authorities, Ms Tymoshenko said, "There are many who can’t handle political work, the political struggle, or confrontation with this anti-Ukrainian government. They take their money, job offers and cooperate with them… But the team that will remain will include strong people capable of concluding the struggle for Ukraine’s independence.
“There are always weak people, and strong people. As is the case in our team. The weak will leave and the party will become a strong and a most worthy choice for the people."
The bloc also announced a name change to the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko – Batkivshchyna. The new name meets procedural requirements for it to field candidates at the forthcoming local election.
A bloc spokesperson told Inform, “Tymoshenko has found her voice again. The ramification of her defeat in the presidential election has sunk in and lessons learned. She is sweeping the stables within her own party and plans to broaden her faction’s appeal. She and her team recognise that remodelling the faction will take time, but they’re in it for the long haul.”



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Tymoshenko’s Bloc Considers Election Boycott

The Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko – Batkivshchyna is considering boycotting the 31 October local elections in major regions. This is because of “administrative resources” being applied by the authorities. The party’s local branches in Kyiv, Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Kharkiv and Luhansk have effectively been hijacked by the authorities. Read all about it on page 5.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Batkivshchyna is the Main Target

Regime Strategy Aims to Remove Biggest Opposition Force Ahead of Local Elections

Opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko is threatening to undertake a partial boycott of the 31 October local elections because of “political raiding.” In an open letter to President Viktor Yanukovych, Ms Tymoshenko threatened to boycott the local elections in the five oblasts unless there is a “halt to the raider activity.”

The threat refers to five of Ukraine’s 25 oblasts – Kyiv, Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Kharkiv and Luhansk – where the presidential administration, Justice and Interior Ministries are unconstitutionally interfering into the internal affairs of the Batkivshchyna (Motherland) party that Ms Tymoshenko leads. Two of these regions – Kyiv and Lviv – are where the party is the most popular political force. The strategy is to cripple the party in these strategic regions that are hubs for Central and Western Ukraine.

The interference is being undertaken in four ways.

1. The Justice Ministry is refusing to register new oblast leaders of the Batkivshchyna party and is continuing to work with leaders who have been replaced. Since the presidential elections, Batkivshchyna has undergone an internal verification of local leaders to remove corrupt and politically disloyal individuals.

2. There has been interference in the work of the Pechersk Rayon Court in Kyiv to prevent the holding of local party conferences to elect new leaders. “Such interference in the internal affairs of political parties,” Ms Tymoshenko said, “is a direct breach of the constitution and legislation.”

3. The Interior Ministry illegally made duplicates of local party stamps and the Justice Ministry gave false registration documents to ousted local leaders.

4. The head of the presidential administration, Serhiy Lyvochkin, is using the situation to draw up “candidates” for Batkivshchyna who are being put forward by ousted local leaders. “In other words, deputies running under our political party are being appointed not by the party but by Yanukovych’s presidential administration,” Ms Tymoshenko complained.

Interference at regional level

The Crimean branch of Batkivshchyna has also come under attack. It appears that the aim is two-fold: to destroy the local branch as well as the main independent television station in the region, which is owned by Andriy Senchenko, head of the Crimean branch of the party. The Security Service (SBU) illegally raided one of Mr Senchenko’s businesses, the Zolotyi Symvol (Gold Symbol) Yacht Club, without a court order.

The objective is again to disrupt the ability of Batkivshchyna to participate in upcoming local elections. “This is undertaken with the aim of disorganising the opposition at the start of the local elections so that we cannot undertake a normal campaign, select members for electoral commissions, register candidates and other required steps,” said Mr Senchenko.

The strategy of sowing chaos inside Batkivshchyna does not square with the president’s claim to be bringing political stability to Ukraine or his claim, made repeatedly during his visit to Germany, that he is committed to upholding Ukraine’s democracy. But, the strategy of destroying the main opposition force goes further through the use of selective justice.

This month, Prosecutor General Oleksandr Medvedko told Profil magazine that the president had “put before us clear responsibility to increase the struggle against corruption, in the first place in the highest levels of the authorities, and this task is being fulfilled.” Mr Medvedko, who is from Donetsk and was appointed by President Viktor Yushchenko in October 2005, is seemingly unaware of the anomaly that the only “corruption” cases are levelled against cabinet members from Ms Tymoshenko’s former
administration.

Does Mr Medvedko really expect Ukrainians believe that there were no corrupt members within the Party of Regions and Our Ukraine, two political forces that gained the most from corruption in the energy sector, or in the Volodymyr Lytvyn bloc? Opinion polls have shown that Ukrainians believe the Party of Regions to be the most corrupt Ukrainian party.

Authorities focus attention on Turchynov

The irony is that Oleksandr Turchynov, Deputy Chairman of Batkivshchyna, was summoned for questioning by the SBU accused of actions that led to the state losing money in a scheme that was introduced by the 2006-2007 Yanukovych government. The corrupt scheme between Naftohaz Ukrainy and the State Reserve was introduced in a government resolution dated 27 July 2007 (no. 974/7), entitled ‘On Introducing Changes to the Nomenklatura.’ The purpose was to provide gas at knock-down prices for business structures close to then Prime Minister Yanukovych.

Mr Turchynov said that when the Tymoshenko government took office in December 2007 “we banned the release of gas under this criminal scheme.” The then head of the State Reserve, Mr Sinkovsky, was appointed to this position by the Yanukovych government. Mr Turchynov therefore has a clear conscience but doubts that those who were behind government resolution 974/7, and who profited from it, will ever be brought to justice.

The main target of the authorities’ selective “campaign against corruption” is Mr Turchynov. Previously arrested officials from the 2007-2010 Tymoshenko government, such as former Head of State Customs Anatoliy Makarenko and former Deputy Head of Naftohaz Ukrainy Ihor Didenko, are being pressured to give evidence against Mr Turchynov. Former Interior Minister Yuriy Lutsenko said that the prosecutor’s office is hell bent on “finding kompromat against Oleksandr Turchynov and the possibility of his arrest is high.”

Besides Makarenko and Didenko, former Defence Minister Valeriy Ivashchenko is under arrest. Former Minister of Economics Bohdan Danylyshyn has been placed on the Interpol wanted list (see last week’s Inform, Issue 162).

A source in the SBU told Fokus magazine that, “Tymoshenko herself will not be touched. Everybody understands that such a course of action would only play into her hands. But silencing Turchynov would be a serious blow to her. Because, he is the main organiser for Tymoshenko.”

Political expert Viktor Nebozhenko added, “This will be a loud PR-arrest. Most likely taking place closer to the new year.” Tymoshenko bloc deputy Serhiy Vlasenko said, “The authorities would not gain from arresting Tymoshenko from the viewpoint that this would assist her electorally, but they will do everything possible to limit the freedom of people who surround her.”

One of the aims of going after Mr Turchynov is to cripple the economic basis of the Batkivshchyna party as he is in charge of the party’s financial relationships with sponsors. Nebozhenko sees the aim of the authorities is to “scare and force businessmen to move over to their side.”

Similar tactics were used by the State Tax Authority against businessmen who supported the opposition when the authority was led in 1996-2002 by the current Prime Minister Mykola Azarov. Mr Turchynov is also head of Batkivshchyna’s election campaign and any criminal case against him will negatively impact upon the party’s election chances in the 31 October local elections.

After leaving the SBU’s office on 8 September, Mr Turchynov said that “political repression” was continuing using “fabricated cases that had been ordered (from above).” The SBU meanwhile, is being “transformed into a repressive organ.”



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Shuster Live
Quote of the week comes from the insightful blogger LEvko writing for the Foreign Notes website:

“Watching last Friday’s ‘Shuster Live,’ the constant barracking by supporters of the ruling coalition of former PM Yulia Tymoshenko, and their persistent dismissal of complaints from journalists present in the studio about challenges to free speech in the media, it's pretty clear in which direction democracy is headed in Ukraine, particularly as president Yanukovych recently boasted that Ukraine is like a big automobile...and that today there is only one driver at the wheel…

“Shuster, at times, was not able to control the studio guests. At one point, at the end of his tether, he seems to lose it: "Gentlemen, you're ruining the country! I've worked with lots of politicians, but I have never seen such a thing [spectacle]! He shouts at one Party of Regions deputy: "You need treatment. "

“Tymoshenko may be needing that bag she claims she has already packed for prison if this carries on.””

Newsletter for the international community providing views and analysis from the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYuT)





Page 1 EPP Resolution Provokes Backlash

Page 2 Authorities Purge Constitutional Court

Page 3 President Seizes Control of Kyiv City Council

Page 4 SBU Now Targets Historians





Click here to be removed from the newsletter distribution list
For further information contact taras{ät}byti.org.ua





EPP Resolution Provokes Backlash

Leader of the Opposition Yulia Tymoshenko’s trip to Brussels last week was not popular with everyone. On Thursday she received an anonymous phone call; the caller was annoyed by her visit to Brussels and the strongly worded resolution from the European People’s Party (EPP), which was highly critical of the authoritarian actions of President Viktor Yanukovych. The threatening caller predicted she would soon “spit blood.”

On Thursday, the Bloc of Yulia (BYuT) – Batkivshchyna issued a statement in which Ms Tymoshenko said, "I've just received a phone call from an unknown man, who in Russian said that no one would let me humiliate Viktor Fedorovych [Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych] abroad. This man claimed that I would remember my visit to Brussels for a long time, and regret that the EPP adopted a resolution which sharply criticised Yanukovych. He also said that I would “spit blood” and that Oleksandr Turchynov's detention would be a result – and this is just the beginning. This man also advised me next time think carefully before doing anything like this again."

Today and last Friday, Oleksandr Turchynov, the Deputy Chairman of BYuT-Batkivshchyna was summoned for questioning by the State Security Services (SBU). It appears that he has been singled out for particular persecution by the authorities. Officials from Ms Tymoshenko’s former administration, such as Ihor Didenko, the former Deputy Head of Naftohaz Ukrainy, and Anatoliy Makarenko, the former Head of State Customs, have been detained since the summer. It is believed they are being pressured to incriminate Mr Turchynov on trumped up charges that he authorised the sale of discount gas to large enterprises. Ironically, the scheme in question was introduced by the 2006-2007 Yanukovych government. Moreover, on entering government, Mr Turchynov said that he “banned the release of gas under this criminal scheme.”

“The harassment of opposition figures and the media is reaching epidemic proportions,” commented Dr Taras Kuzio, Visiting Fellow, Centre for Transatlantic Relations, School of Advanced International Studies, John Hopkins University, Washington and Editor of Ukraine Analyst. “The EPP resolution recognised this and appears to have provoked the ire of the authorities.” he added.

As part of its criticism, the EPP resolution said that the party was “deeply concerned by the selective use of the criminal justice system, where criminal prosecutions seem to constitute a politically motivated campaign against the allies of the leader of the political opposition.”

The president’s office said that Mr Yanukovych had authorised the SBU to launch an immediate investigation into the call and to strengthen Ms Tymoshenko’s security.

"All those offers by Yanukovych to strengthen my security sound like a joke," Ms Tymoshenko told reporters last Friday. "They are watching me 24-hours a day. They've tapped all my phones."

Other BYuT-Batkivshchyna officials have complained that they are under surveillance and received menacing phone calls – not only to themselves but to close family members.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Authorities Purge Constitutional Court

Four of the Constitutional Court judges who ruled that parliamentary coalitions could only be formed by “parties” and not “individuals” have been removed from office. In March 2010, a majority verdict from the Constitutional Court, overturning an earlier decision it made on the same issue in 2008, enabled the formation of the ruling coalition and government.

The vacant posts in the court have been given to judges loyal to the president. "They replaced them with people incompetent from the point of view of the law, who will approve without consideration all the decisions ordered by the president and his administration," said Yulia Tymoshenko, Leader of the Opposition.

Evidence to be put before PACE

Ms Tymoshenko said that her team would detail the facts and provide documentation of what has happened to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) and its Monitoring Committee. She also said that her team intends to provide PACE with information regarding illegal decisions taken by the Central Election Committee (CEC). For example, the CEC in Kyiv has barred BYuT-Batkivshchyna and Our Ukraine from being represented on local commissions by admitting only those former opposition forces which have sided with the ruling coalition. BYuT-Batkivshchyna fears the authorities are gearing up for widespread election fraud ahead of the local elections scheduled for 31 October.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



President Seizes Control of Kyiv City Council

President Viktor Yanukovych has cemented his grip over the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv. A new law, gives him authority to appoint the head of the city council’s executive branch and representatives of city districts. The new power effectively removes Kyivite’s rights to self-rule and will thwart any attempt to re-run the Orange Revolution, which saw hundreds of thousands of anti-government protestors descend on the capital’s main thoroughfares in December 2004.

Experts say that the management structure of Kyiv city administration was far from perfect with too many powers vested in the mayor. However, the new law undermines direct democracy by stripping the elected mayor of most of his powers.

The new “Law on the capital of Ukraine” vests the president with the powers to appoint the chairman of Kyiv city council, while the mayor, elected by the popular vote “will reign but not rule.” The latter will chair city council meetings, but won’t have any organisational or financial leverage over any decisions of the council.

It is rumoured that the position of the chairman will be offered to Alexander Popov, a loyal Party of the Regions member. He would de-facto sideline Kyiv’s incumbent mayor, Leonid Chernovetsky. While many Kyivites were unhappy with Mr Chernovetsky’s notoriously corrupt rule, they are equally unhappy about losing their say in influencing the running of their city.

“At least if we thought the man at the top was bad, we could remove him,” said one Kyiv resident who asked not to be named, “now we have no voice.”

“Through intricate manipulations Kyiv ended up being built into Yanukovych’s edifice of centralised powers,” Ukraine’s Mirror Weekly commented. “The outcome of his “reformist zeal” is depriving Kyivites of not only their right to outvote Chernovetsky, but to influence Kyiv’s politics in any way in the future.”

“Whilst Chernovetsky has fallen short as a mayor, he was legitimately voted in by the people of Kyiv, that’s democracy,” said Hryhoriy Nemyria, Ms Tymoshenko’s foreign policy adviser and former Deputy Prime Minister. “Now Kyiv’s citizens have lost the right to self-rule.”

Procedural Violations

The new law was pushed through with numerous procedural violations. For instance, there was no endorsement by relevant parliamentary departments, which is needed before the draft could be taken to a vote.

In addition, the law dissolves so-called Kyiv district councils, with the heads of the capital’s districts now appointed directly by the president. “The president issued a directive to summon the district heads and to discuss their suitability for the job, if they are ready to run reforms,” Head of the Presidential Administration, Serhiy Lyovochkin said. “Most of them will be re-appointed.”

“The irony is that the Kyiv district councils, inherited from the Soviet times, are indeed out of date,” Kostyantyn Matvieyenko, an independent expert, says. “It is one of those rare cases when the leadership’s current political interests went in line with an overdue change the society demanded.”

Political commentators are nevertheless concerned that this change will not put an end to the plundering of municipal assets or the suppression of local initiatives to improve inadequate communal services. Most believe it will be used as a tool to exercise piecemeal political control over the capital.

Alexander Motyl, Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University-Newark, wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “The parliamentary measure now gives Mr Yanukovych control over the one city in Ukraine that has consistently voted against him, his party, and his cronies; that was the site of the Orange Revolution that disgraced him in 2004; and that has the country's highest concentration of foreign diplomats, journalists, and business people. Mr Yanukovych knows that he cannot control Ukraine without controlling Kyiv. Now he does.”



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



SBU Now Targets Historians

Unbelievably, Ukraine’s authorities have opened a criminal probe against a historian accused of divulging state secrets relating to Ukraine’s history during the era of Joseph Stalin and Word War Two (WW2). On 6 September, Ukrainian State Security (SBU) operatives detained Ruslan Zabily and interrogated him for 14 hours.

Throughout the interrogation, Mr Zabily, a director of the Lonsky prison museum in Lviv, was only allowed one telephone call to his wife and refused a lawyer. No detention warrant was produced, nor did his interrogators name themselves. Mr Zabily’s laptop was confiscated, as well as two disks containing many archive files and important pieces of academic work.

The detention of Mr Zabily shocked and puzzled Ukraine’s historians. This was because the so-called “secrets” he worked with were de-classified under the previous leadership of Viktor Yushchenko and are available from the libraries of Ukraine’s two leading universities.

Despite SBU agents advising Mr Zabily to stop his work and “to think of his family,” the historian went on to organise a press-conference the following day. "I demand from Mr Valery Khoroshkovsky [head of the SBU] an explanation with regard to the action of the SBU officers and to immediately return my private property,” he said. “I appeal to you, dear journalists, to help stop the censorship and pressure put on history and historians.”

“Mr Zabiliy has taken a leaf from the Dean of the Ukrainian Catholic University who kept the SBU at bay by going to the media,” said the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko – Batkivshchyna deputy Andriy Shevchenko. “When you “out” these people they tend to shrink back in to the shadows,” he added.

The recent move was viewed by some commentators as evidence of Mr Khoroshkovsky (who has close business links to Russia) using the SBU to toe the Kremlin’s official line of the interpretation of Soviet history. Mr Zabily is convinced that his detention was linked to his research about Ukraine’s nationalist movements during WW2, which were ruthlessly crushed by the KGB’s predecessor, the NKVD.

“Everybody understands we are talking about ideology here. But the way it’s done is totally unacceptable, one does not do this in a democratic society. What the SBU is engaging in these days is typical of totalitarian regimes,” said Myroslav Popovych, the Ukrainian academic and historian.

In parallel to Mr Zabily’s detention, the SBU prevented workers at the Lonsky prison museum from accessing the building. SBU operatives conducted an unwarranted search of the premises, taking away research materials. The Lonsky prison museum is known as the WW2 Nazi and NKVD prison where thousands of people were slaughtered.

Ukraine’s Helsinki Human Rights Union has condemned the SBU’s “barbarism” in again trying to seal off documents once classified by the Soviet Union – a country that no longer exists – and depriving Ukrainians of their own version of their recent history. “It is inadmissible that what constitutes the history of our country should be determined by the Security Service and politicians, and not historians,” a statement from the Union says.

Newsletter for the international community providing views and analysis from the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko – Batkivshchyna





Page 1 EU Concerned Over Attacks on Media Freedoms

Page 3 Smear Campaign Targets Opposition Leaders

Page 4 28 Deputies Expelled from Party

Page 4 Quote of the Week: Fighting Corruption





Click here to be removed from the newsletter distribution list
For further information contact taras{ät}byti.org.ua





EU Concerned Over Attacks on Media Freedoms

The European Union (EU) has expressed its deep concern over reports of violence and harassment experienced by Ukrainian journalists, and called for a full and timely investigation into the case of the Kharkiv journalist who disappeared in August.

“It is of utmost importance that journalists can carry out their work without fear of violence and intimidation,” says the statement from the Organisation for the Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

The statement refers to the disappearance of the investigative editor of the Kharkiv Novy Svit newspaper, Vasyl Klymentiev, whose cell phone was found next to a reservoir. His body is still missing. More recently, journalist Artyom Furmanyuk, from Donestk, was severely beaten by police. Mr Furmanyuk runs a news website investigating crime and corruption in the home region of Ukraine’s incumbent president.

“This year is undoubtedly the worst for the last ten years in terms of the number of assaults committed against journalists,” said Andriy Shevchenko the new Head of the Parliamentary Committee of Media Freedom and a deputy of the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko-Batkivshchyna.

“The pro-government majority might have decided to improve its image in the West by giving this committee to the opposition,” Mr Shevchenko said, “but they should not deceive themselves by thinking they’ll muzzle us. There are signs everywhere that Ukrainian democracy and media freedoms are being rolled back. My main mission as the head of the commission is to do my best to stop this process.”

Ukraine’s media remain bitter about the way that the high-profile investigation into the 2000 murder of the journalist Georgy Gongadze is now likely to end. Earlier this month prosecutors announced that the murder was ordered by Ukraine’s former Interior Minister, Yuri Kravchenko, who then allegedly committed suicide in 2005 (shooting himself in the head twice!). Ex-president Leonid Kuchma will not be charged as a suspect, despite evidence implicating him in ordering the killing of Mr Gongadze.

The Gongadze affair became a symbol of the impunity and cynicism of Ukraine’s political environment. “This means society has not learnt any lesson from this. No one can be sure it will not happen again. Anybody can become an accidental victim. Somebody’s life could become part of a plan. Somebody’s death, a step up the career ladder,” Serhiy Rakhmaninov, a Mirror Weekly commentator said.

This sentiment is not shared by the Ukrainian leadership. “As far as certain conflicts in the media sector are concerned, I can assure you: the authorities have got nothing to do with it,” President Viktor Yanukovych said on 23 September at the US
Atlantic Council in New York. “As a guarantor of the Constitution, I can assure you: media freedoms in Ukraine will keep advancing further.”

Individual occurrences?

In an interview in the Wall Street Journal, Ukraine’s head of state dismissed the catalogue of media abuses as not being systemic. "There have been some separate individual occurrences when rights and freedoms” were violated. But this could not be further from the truth.

The EU welcomed the planned visit of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Ms Dunja Mijatovic, to Kyiv on 11 and 12 October, “with the aim of collecting first-hand information on the media freedom situation from all stakeholders, including government representatives, civil society and journalists.” Her report should make interesting reading.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Smear Campaign Targets Opposition Leaders

There is ample evidence of a concerted smear campaign being directed against the Leader of the Opposition, Yulia Tymoshenko. The latest attempt to blacken her name ahead of the local elections on 31 October, is the allegation that her government fraudulently sold vaccines and other medicines used during last year’s swine flu outbreak.

"We state that all these accusations are groundless. The Yulia Tymoshenko government did not purchase a single flu vaccine vial. All flu vaccines were bought under the previous government led by [incumbent President Viktor] Yanukovych," said a statement from the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYuT)-Batkivshchyna.

The Ukrainian state-run company Ukrvaktsyna, which was responsible for the procurement and storage of medicines and supplies for Ukraine’s Ministry of Health, has filed a law suit in the US. It is seeking damages for fraud, conspiracy and violations, alleging that a US company, the Olden Group, through its offshore companies, played a major role in marking-up the price of vaccines. The matter concerns some $50 million paid by Ukrvaktsyna over several years.

BYuT-Batkivshchyna also denied allegations that the Tymoshenko government in September 2009 allowed Ukrvaktsyna to attract an €800 million loan by giving government guarantees.

Election Ploy

Mr Yanukovych has sought to curry favour with the electorate by appearing to clamp down on corruption. However, most reports indicate a recent dramatic rise in corruption and that his initiative is aimed at discrediting his political opponents.

Alexander Motyl, Professor of Sciences at Rutgers University, Newark, said, "Yanukovych's “anticorruption” campaign conveniently targets his opponents, invariably enhances his power, and overlooks his cronies, who continue to promote their own material interests."

The most recent allegations come after the Ministry of Finance hired in May the US law firm Trout Cacheris to undertake an audit of the government’s activities. Yet the Trout Cacheris investigation appears to be focused exclusively on the period that Ms Tymoshenko’s administration was in office. Furthermore, Trout Cacheris is being assisted by detective company Kroll Associates, which was involved in investigations into the murder of journalist Georgy Gongadze. Its investigation, believed by some to be a whitewash, failed to result in any convictions of senior government officials believed by many to be involved in plotting the journalist’s death. Furthermore, supporting Trout Cacheris is law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, which has links to oligarchs supporting the Party of Regions.

Also being targeted is Oleksandr Turchynov, Deputy Chairman of BYuT-Batkivshchyna, who was questioned last week over his alleged role in selling discount gas to large enterprises. Mr Turchynov told reporters that, ironically, the scheme was actually established by Mr Yanukovych’s former administration and that it was closed down by the Tymoshenko government.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



28 Deputies Expelled from Party

Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYuT)-Batkivshchyna has announced the expulsions of 28 parliamentary deputies who joined the government’s coalition earlier this year. "The faction passed a decision to expel those people who entered the so-called majority," announced Serhiy Sobolev, one of the party’s prominent members. "This is the list of people who declared their conversion to the majority or who collaborate with them," he added.

The turncoat deputies enabled the parliamentary majority to be formed. The coalition is now over 260 strong and has become a rubber stamp for passing whatever is put before it in the 450-seat parliament. The Ukrainian media have published numerous reports on hefty monetary sums received by those deputies who switched sides to the pro-government coalition. The going rate is believed to be a sign-on fee of $1 million plus as much as $25,000 a month until 2012.

Ukrayinska Pravda claimed that some of the defecting politicians secured lucrative positions in the government or blue chip state assets in exchange for their loyalty. One of the first turncoat deputies was Oleg Cherpitsky. Soon after his move to the coalition, his brother, Oleksandr, was appointed as a deputy defence minister.

Another former BYuT-Batkivshchyna member, Oleg Savchenko, was graced with the state-owned “Mystetsky Arsenal” art and museum complex for his loyalty, to be managed by his wife. In similar fashion, top positions in state-managed banks and in state customs were handed out, Ukrayinska Pravda claimed.

Among those expelled from BYuT-Batkivshchyna is Bohdan Hubsky, one of its most prominent and affluent members. Mr Hubsky says his expulsion was due to his rift with one of the party leaders, Oleksandr Turchynov. Yet Mr Hubsky himself has faced grave charges of orchestrating the setting-up of bogus BYuT-Batkivshchyna branches in the Kyiv region.

The party earlier expressed concerns over attempts to hijack it with the authorities registering fake branches in Kyiv and Lviv. As these branches enjoy an independent legal status, they obtain the right to nominate their own candidates for the local 31 October elections. The candidates selected have no relation to the party and are loyal to the authorities.

The leaders of BYuT-Batkivshchyna complain that as the party goes through a major re-organisation in the run-up to the local elections, the authorities are refusing to register their newly elected Kyiv and Lviv regional heads of the party.

Oleksandr Turchynov says that the ruling of Ukraine’s courts is preventing the party from holding its meetings and nominating its candidates, while the Justice Ministry is allowing illegal party stamps and registration certificates to be issued to people who are non-party members.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Quote of the Week: Fighting Corruption
"How can you fight corruption unless you have a media that's independent enough to hold people accountable and cast a spotlight on that kind of behaviour?"

William Burns, US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. He recently travelled to Ukraine.

Heute hab ich folgenden Text per Massen-E-Mail von Batkiwschtschyna bekommen. Auf Englisch verfasst, daher wohl nur an Ausländer gerichtet...

Diese Ausführungen schlicht als Propaganda abzutun, schiene mir etwas zu einfach sein und den Inhalt als erledigt abzuhaken. Besitzen die Schilderungen denn keinen Wahrheitsgehalt?

Könnte vielleicht jemand der Ukrainischkundigen, Frau Tymoschenko eine Nachricht mit der Bitte zukommen lassen, in Zukunft englisch verfasste Texte auch in Deutsch zu versenden.

Nach meiner Einschätzung sind viele Ukrainer der leeren Wahlversprechen und dem egoistischen Dasein der Werchovna Rada müde und enttäuscht. Aus den egoistischen Sozialisten wurden egoistische Kapitalisten, und damit dürfte sich die Scheindemokratie fundamentiert haben. Wen kümmerts im Höchsten Rat, ob der entlegendste Ukrainer (m/w) sich gesund ernähren kann, ordentlich gebildet und gekleidet ist, eine Krankenversicherung hat und sich in seiner Heimat wohl fühlt? Der hocherlesene Kreis der Milliardäre und Millionäre macht mir nicht den Eindruck, sich wirklich um das Wohlbefinden jedes einzelnen Staatsbürgers und nachfolgender Generationen zu sorgen. So kochen also die Wohlbetuchten weiterhin ihr eigenes Süppchen und der Rest der Bevölkerung kann sehen, wie er klar kommt. Wenn ich diese Situation mit meiner Deutschen vergleiche, läuft bei uns der osteuropäische Politimport auf Hochtouren. ... insbesondere bei der Aushöhlung staatsbürgerlicher Rechte! "An ihren Taten sollt ihr sie erkennen!" (1. Johannes 2,1-6)

Diese Ausführungen schlicht als Propaganda abzutun, schiene mir etwas zu einfach sein und den Inhalt als erledigt abzuhaken. Besitzen die Schilderungen denn keinen Wahrheitsgehalt?

Natürlich haben diese Meldungen einen Wahrheitsgehalt, doch ist es für Außenstehende nahezu unmöglich diesen herauszufiltern, daher ist es eindeutig als Propaganda einzustufen, die im Kleide der objektiven Berichterstattung daherkommt.

Könnte vielleicht jemand der Ukrainischkundigen, Frau Tymoschenko eine Nachricht mit der Bitte zukommen lassen, in Zukunft englisch verfasste Texte auch in Deutsch zu versenden.

Meinst du das ernst? Du kannst doch weder Tymoschenko noch irgendeinem anderen bekannten Politiker in der Ukraine, aber auch in D-Land eine direkte E-Mail schicken. Das würde, selbst wenn sie es denn wollten, ihre Kapazitäten sprengen. Zudem müssten Übersetzungen ins Deutsche bezahlt werden und sich in Form einer Unterstützung Tymoschenkos von außen rentieren. Ob die deutschsprachigen Leser solcher Publikationen da relevant sind - ich schätze mal ganze fünf - wage ich zu bezweifeln.

Nach meiner Einschätzung sind viele Ukrainer der leeren Wahlversprechen und dem egoistischen Dasein der Werchovna Rada müde und enttäuscht. Aus den egoistischen Sozialisten wurden egoistische Kapitalisten, und damit dürfte sich die Scheindemokratie fundamentiert haben. Wen kümmerts im Höchsten Rat, ob der entlegendste Ukrainer (m/w) sich gesund ernähren kann, ordentlich gebildet und gekleidet ist, eine Krankenversicherung hat und sich in seiner Heimat wohl fühlt? Der hocherlesene Kreis der Milliardäre und Millionäre macht mir nicht den Eindruck, sich wirklich um das Wohlbefinden jedes einzelnen Staatsbürgers und nachfolgender Generationen zu sorgen. So kochen also die Wohlbetuchten weiterhin ihr eigenes Süppchen und der Rest der Bevölkerung kann sehen, wie er klar kommt. Wenn ich diese Situation mit meiner Deutschen vergleiche, läuft bei uns der osteuropäische Politimport auf Hochtouren. ... insbesondere bei der Aushöhlung staatsbürgerlicher Rechte! "An ihren Taten sollt ihr sie erkennen!" (1. Johannes 2,1-6)

Daher wird der interessanteste Wert bei den Kommunalwahlen, der Wert für die Wahlbeteiligung sein. Bei den vorgezogenen Wahlen für den Oblastrat 2009 in Ternopil gingen ganze 51 Prozent (bei den Parlamentswahlen 71 Prozent) zu den Urnen. Der Block Julia Tymoschenko verlor prompt auch die Oblast an diese obskure "Swoboda" Vereinigung.
Bei den vorgezogenen Parlamentswahlen 2007 gingen ukraineweit 58 Prozent zu den Wahlen. Bei den letzten Präsidentschaftswahlen 67 bzw. 69 Prozent.

Wenn für dich nur der Prozentsatz der Wahlbeteiligung von Bedeutung ist, dann wirst du gewiss auch den Wahlausgang für die kommenden Kommunalwahlen bereits kennen, oder?

Dann dürftest du überhaupt keine Zitate oder Texte von anderen Personen verwenden bzw. hier der Allgemeinheit zur Diskussion stellen. Ist das Forum kein Ort der freien Meinungsäußerung?

Ja, ich meine ernsthaft, Frau Tymoschenko eine E-Mail oder in anderer Weise eine Nachricht mit der Bitte zu senden, englisch formulierte Texte auch ins Deutsche übersetzen zu lassen. In Deutschland sind Bundestagsabgeordnete, Kommunalpolitiker und andere bedeutende Personen des öffentlichen Lebens, jedoch nicht alle, per E-Mail zu erreichen. ... und das ist gut so! Ich nehme doch an, dass die Portokasse der Opposition sich den Aufwand für Übersetzungen leisten kann. Für dich mag es eine Frage der Rentabilität sein, für Menschen jedoch, die gute Politik machen wollen, liegt das Ziel nicht in Gewinnmaximierung sondern in der Steigerung des Allgemeinwohls.

Sicherlich reflektiert eine Wahlbeteiligung die Stimmung im Volke und das Vertrauen in die Politik, und das mag auch interessant sein. Über das Thema "Wahlbeobachtung und Wahlmanipulation in Ukraine" könnte man Bücher ohne Ende schreiben, und da taucht bei mir die Frage auf: Gibt es sorgfältig recherchierte und objektive Bücher, die auf Tatsachen beruhend, die ukrainischen Wahlen seit dem Referendum über die Unabhängigkeit der Ukraine vom 1. Dezember 1991 beschreiben? Wenn für dich nur der Prozentsatz der Wahlbeteiligung von Bedeutung ist, dann wirst du gewiss auch den Wahlausgang für die kommenden Kommunalwahlen bereits kennen, oder? "Was sich auch der Mensch ersinnt, erdenkt, zuguterletzt doch Gott es lenkt."

Der Zusammenhang erschließt sich mir nicht ganz.
Wenn BJuT einen Newsletter für Ausländer zusammenstellt, um vorgeblich unabhängig über die Ukraine zu informieren und letztendlich nur versucht die Meinungshoheit bei ausländischen Journalisten zu behalten, dann bezeichne ich das als Propaganda. Im Übrigen haben ja durch diese Veröffentlichung hier alle die Möglichkeit sich selbst eine Meinung zu bilden und die Möglichkeit Zweifel an meiner "These" der BJuT-Propaganda anzumelden. Du hast ja offensichtlich davon Gebrauch gemacht .

Der Zusammenhang zwischen deiner Propaganda-Einstufung und meiner Anmerkung besteht darin, dass du mir eine Portion Voreingenommenheit vermittelst, in dem du den Begriff der Propaganda zu voreilig verwendest. Für Propaganda halte ich die folgende Definition für zutreffend:"Propaganda bezeichnet einen absichtlichen und systematischen Versuch, Sichtweisen zu formen, Erkenntnisse zu manipulieren und Verhalten zu steuern, zum Zwecke der Erzeugung einer vom Propagandisten erwünschten Reaktion." Wenn Frau Tymoschenko ausländischen Journalisten über wahre Begebenheiten in der Ukraine berichtet, kann ich darin keine Propaganda erkennen.

Das ist es ja eben. BJuT versucht absichtlich und systematisch die eigene Sichtweise als "Wahrheit" zu verkaufen und das nennt man Propaganda!

Moment mal, du solltest hier vielleicht trennen zwischen dem Aufzeigen von wahren Begebenheiten und eigenen Kommentaren. Meine Hochachtung vor der Leidensfähigkeit des Ukrainischen Volkes, doch wenn BJuT klarmacht, dass die Preise für den täglichen Bedarf nicht für alle Bürger bezahlbar sind, die Arbeitslosenquote wesentlicher höher ist und das Einkommen vielerorts nicht für ein würdiges Leben reicht, dann ist das für mich keine Propaganda sondern ein Hilferuf an hilfsbereite und mutige Menschen, die sich davon angesprochen fühlen.

Nun wird in diesem Rundbrief aber nicht zwischen Bericht und Kommentar unterschieden. Dennoch möchte ich noch einmal auf das Thema hinweisen. Ich habe die Frage gestellt, ist es alles was die Opposition noch kann? Wenn sie schon versuchen die Informationshoheit der Partei der Regionen zu brechen, warum gibt es bspw. keine Flugblattaktionen in den Städten und wo ist ein vergleichbarer Newsletter für Ukrainer? Vielleicht habe ich es auch übersehen, aber ich sehe auf den BJuT-Seiten keine Möglichkeit für das Abonnement eines Newsletters in ukrainischer Sprache mehr. Daher kann ich mich des Eindrucks nicht erwehren, dass für BJuT derzeit das Bild im Ausland wichtiger ist, als das Inland. Der Verein BJuT macht derzeit so einen desolaten Eindruck, dass man eigentlich nicht von Opposition sprechen kann. Und diese hilflosen Anrufe an den Patriotismus gehen an den wirklichen Problemen der Leute vorbei, vor allem wenn man sich vergegenwärtigt, wie "Lady Ju & Co." selbst leben. Die Aktion im Parlament war ok (zwei Körbe mit Lebensmitteln und einem Preisvergleich, auch wenn die Preise ausgedacht waren), aber wo sind die Demos? Niemand glaubt Janukowytsch, aber auch niemand glaubt Tymoschenko .... Die einzige Organisation in der Ukraine, die Demonstranten ohne Geld zusammenbringt ist "Swoboda" und das ist ein Armutszeichen für das was als Opposition bezeichnet wird.

"Ist das alles... ?" hört sich wie Verhöhnung an.

Ich weiß fast gar nichts über den Lebensstil der Oppositionsführerin Tymoshenko und erlaube mir deshalb auch diesbezüglich keine Meinungsäußerung.

Wer sich für sein Land einsetzt und es vertreten will, sollte den Mut besitzen, Misstände klar aufzuzeigen und Lösungswege einzubringen.

Soweit mir bekannt ist, wurden vom BJuT eindeutige Wahlmanipulationen bei der jüngsten Präsidentenwahl festgestellt und beim Verfassungsgericht vorgetragen.

Doch mit der gleichen Selbstherrlichkeit und Ignoranz, wie die Einlassung überhört wurde, geschah das Gleiche mit der Verfassung der Ukraine. Nach Artikel 5 der Verfassung der Ukraine, steht ausschließlich dem Volk das Recht zu, die verfassungsmäßige Ordnung in der Ukraine zu bestimmen und zu ändern, und soll vom Staat, seinen Körperschaften oder Beamten nicht unterlaufen werden. Und, wer hat eigenmächtig den Verfassungszustand geändert? Diese Gruppe von Amtspersonen, die Frau Tymoshenko gebeten hat, für klare Verhältnisse nach der Präsidentenwahl zu sorgen! Kann man da nicht seltsam und vorsichtig werden, wenn Recht und Logik derart zweifelhaft angewendet werden?

Was meinst du, wie viele Ukrainer (m/w) über diese Vorkommnissen nicht informiert sind? Was sollen da Flugblattaktionen, wenn die Bevölkerung ohnehin schon weiß, warum und für wen sie jeden Tag um ihr Leben kämpfen müssen?

Glaube mir, ich habe selbst in Запоріжжя erlebt, wie die Menschen bei klirrender Hundekälte stundenlang im Wind stehen und ihr letzte Habe verkaufen, nur um ein paar UAH zu bekommen.

Wo steht in den ukrainischen Zeitungen, dass die Standmieten auf den Märkten dennoch drastisch erhöht wurden?

Besagt die Einstellung des Abonnements der ukrainischen Newsletter, dass du sie nicht herunterladen kannst?

Oppositionspolitik wird nicht nur mit Demonstrationen gemacht... sondern auch mit und Береженого Бог береже!

.... Die einzige Organisation in der Ukraine, die Demonstranten ohne Geld zusammenbringt ist "Swoboda" und das ist ein Armutszeichen für das was als Opposition bezeichnet wird.

................. Angesichts des sich ausbreitenden Elends in der ukrainischen Bevölkerung, möchte ich ebenso von großer Armut an Weisheit bei einigen Mächtigen der Ukraine sprechen, die mit ihrer Gier rücksichtlos menschliche Existenzen zerstören und sich wie Bestien in Menschengestalt benehmen. Derartiges asoziales Verhalten ist nicht Ur-Bestandteil des ukrainischen Volkes und seiner reichen und vielfältigen Kultur. "Einer trage des andern Last, so werdet ihr das Gesetz Christi erfüllen", sagt die Bibel. Also können Entscheidungen der Staatsführung gegen das Wohl der ukrainischen Bevölkerung auch nicht im Sinne Christi sein.

Wäre es ungewöhnlich, wenn eine Opposition arm ist, weil Wirtschaftsführer und Regierung den Geldkreislauf blockieren?

Was kann eine Opposition tun, wenn der Staatspräsident alle Macht an sich reißt? Oder wenn das Verfassungsgericht die Verfassung des eigenen Staates missachtet? Wären dir Massendemonstrationen lieber, bei denen die TeilnehmerInnen wie in Russland, brutal zusammen geschlagen werden?

Die Tatsache der weit verbreiteten Geldknappheit, der fehlenden ärztlichen Versorgung und der mangelhaften Infrastruktur in weiten Gebieten des Landes, zeigt mir eher eine Armut an Verantwortung des Staates gegenüber der Bevölkerung auf.

Anscheinend möchtest du dich mit deinem Armutszeichen für die Opposition, auf die Seite derer begeben, die sich Unterdrückung, Ausbeutung und Entrechtung auf die Fahnen geschrieben haben.

Solch ein Vorgehen hätte weder etwas mit Menschlichkeit noch mit christlicher Nächstenliebe zu tun. Angesichts des sich ausbreitenden Elends in der ukrainischen Bevölkerung, möchte ich ebenso von großer Armut an Weisheit bei einigen Mächtigen der Ukraine sprechen, die mit ihrer Gier rücksichtlos menschliche Existenzen zerstören und sich wie Bestien in Menschengestalt benehmen. Derartiges asoziales Verhalten ist nicht Ur-Bestandteil des ukrainischen Volkes und seiner reichen und vielfältigen Kultur. "Einer trage des andern Last, so werdet ihr das Gesetz Christi erfüllen", sagt die Bibel. Also können Entscheidungen der Staatsführung gegen das Wohl der ukrainischen Bevölkerung auch nicht im Sinne Christi sein.

Wäre es ungewöhnlich, wenn eine Opposition arm ist, weil Wirtschaftsführer und Regierung den Geldkreislauf blockieren?

Irgendwie hast du mich nicht verstanden. Ich halte es für ein Armutszeugnis, wenn Tymoschenko nur Leute auf die Straße bekommt indem sie ihnen Geld gibt. Aus Überzeugung gehen momentan nur die Anhänger von Swoboda auf die Straße und das sollte Tymoschenko peinlich sein. Aber ukrainischen Politikern ist ja nichts peinlich ....

Was kann eine Opposition tun, wenn der Staatspräsident alle Macht an sich reißt? Oder wenn das Verfassungsgericht die Verfassung des eigenen Staates missachtet? Wären dir Massendemonstrationen lieber, bei denen die TeilnehmerInnen wie in Russland, brutal zusammen geschlagen werden?

Massendemonstrationen lassen sich nicht zusammenprügeln ... so viele Polizisten hat kein Staat. In dem Falle würden nur noch andere Methoden greifen. Mein Argument war aber ein anderes: Die Opposition in Person von Tymoschenko hat den Mund dermaßen voll genommen in Bezug auf ihre eigenen Störpotentiale, dass es einfach lachhaft ist, was am Ende wirklich passierte. Tymoschenko hat mehr damit zu tun ihren eigenen Laden zusammenzuhalten, als sich ernsthaft mit oppositioneller Arbeit zu beschäftigen und den Regierenden zur Gefahr zu werden. Im Gegenteil können die Regionalen sich momentan nur selbst schlagen, denn wie die Umfragen zeigen, kann Tymoschenko nicht von den Fehlern der Regionalen (Gaspreiserhöhung, Rentenalter, allgemeine Arroganz beim Umgang mit Gesetzen) profitieren.

Die Tatsache der weit verbreiteten Geldknappheit, der fehlenden ärztlichen Versorgung und der mangelhaften Infrastruktur in weiten Gebieten des Landes, zeigt mir eher eine Armut an Verantwortung des Staates gegenüber der Bevölkerung auf.

Ich wiederhole noch einmal: Gab es seit der Unabhängigkeit eine Regierung, die diese Probleme ernsthaft angegangen ist? Alle ohne Ausnahme haben vom sowjetischen Erbe gezehrt und nichts oder nur wenig unternommen, um wenigstens den Standard zu halten.

Anscheinend möchtest du dich mit deinem Armutszeichen für die Opposition, auf die Seite derer begeben, die sich Unterdrückung, Ausbeutung und Entrechtung auf die Fahnen geschrieben haben.

Die jetzige Opposition hat sich in den Zeiten, in denen sie an der Regierung war, genauso die Taschen vollgestopft, wie die jetzigen Regierenden. Da gibt es keinen Unterschied, allenfalls in der Rhetorik und die ist für den Wahlkampf ...

Solch ein Vorgehen hätte weder etwas mit Menschlichkeit noch mit christlicher Nächstenliebe zu tun. Angesichts des sich ausbreitenden Elends in der ukrainischen Bevölkerung, möchte ich ebenso von großer Armut an Weisheit bei einigen Mächtigen der Ukraine sprechen, die mit ihrer Gier rücksichtlos menschliche Existenzen zerstören und sich wie Bestien in Menschengestalt benehmen. Derartiges asoziales Verhalten ist nicht Ur-Bestandteil des ukrainischen Volkes und seiner reichen und vielfältigen Kultur. "Einer trage des andern Last, so werdet ihr das Gesetz Christi erfüllen", sagt die Bibel. Also können Entscheidungen der Staatsführung gegen das Wohl der ukrainischen Bevölkerung auch nicht im Sinne Christi sein.

Was hat die Bibel mit den ukrainischen Realien zu tun? "Ur-Bestandteil des ukrainischen Volkes" das klingt gelinde gesagt krude ...

Newsletter for the international community providing views and analysis from the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko – Batkivshchyna





Page 1 Tymoshenko Urges Opposition to Unite as Ukraine Lurches to Dictatorship

Page 2 The Court Decision and What it Means

Page 3 Caught on YouTube

Page 4 Tax Code Debacle

Page 5 Complaints Mount Over Election Irregularities

Page 6 YES Ignores Threats to Ukraine’s Democracy





Click here to be removed from the newsletter distribution list
For further information contact taras{ät}byti.org.ua





Tymoshenko Urges Opposition to Unite as Ukraine Lurches to Dictatorship

Ukraine is lurching towards dictatorship and the opposition must unite to protect democracy. That was the uncompromising message to opposition parties from Leader of the Opposition Yulia Tymoshenko. Her impassioned appeal came after the Constitutional Court (CC) annulled reforms undertaken during the Orange Revolution in order to give President Viktor Yanukovych even greater powers.

The bombshell decision by Ukraine’s CC declared that constitutional amendments, passed in December 2004 (and enacted in March 2006), were unconstitutional due “to violations of constitutional procedures in their examination and adoption.” The ruling effectively reverts Ukraine to its 1996 constitution, taking power away from parliament and placing it in the hands of the president – putting Ukraine on a par with presidential systems in former CIS countries such as Belarus and Uzbekistan where executive power is vested in one person.

In an open appeal, Ms Tymoshenko described the CC ruling as a “usurpation of power” returning Ukraine to “Kuchmaism” and giving Mr Yanukovych the “rights of a dictator.” She said “it displays anti-constitutional madness on the part of our authorities, who have decided that the law means nothing in Ukraine. This is a political nuclear weapon, personified in an inadequate leader who is claiming for himself the powers of a dictator."

The court ruling will give the president powers to appoint government ministers and nominate the prime minister. He also has the right to dismiss the government without consultation and to cancel any government resolution or act.

Ms Tymoshenko called upon “pro-Ukrainian forces” to unite and reject past conflicts. She said that the time is now to unify democratic forces, as in 2001-2004 when Ukraine was faced by President Leonid Kuchma’s authoritarianism.

Thomas Markert, Secretary of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, expressed bewilderment at the CC’s ruling. “It was surprising to learn that the constitution had been declared invalid after six years of being in operation (and being applied by the Constitutional Court itself). This is unusual,” he said.

Following a telephone call with Ms Tymoshenko, US Senator John McCain, said he was "saddened and concerned" over the move to strengthen the president’s powers, saying the move by the CC had reversed years of progress in the country.

"I am saddened and concerned that today's ruling by Ukraine's Constitutional Court could lead to a harmful centralisation of power and a weakening of democracy in Ukraine," said the US senator. He went on to say, “the court's action today has undone much of that progress and betrayed the promise of the Orange Revolution." He said that he encouraged Ms Tymoshenko “to continue working for greater democracy in Ukraine” and conveyed his support to her and her fellow reformers. “The United States must rally our transatlantic allies to support all Ukrainians who seek a strong, prosperous, and democratic future for their sovereign and independent country,” he said.

In calling for the opposition to unite, Ms Tymoshenko summarised the threat. “Either we fight as a nation, or we can forget about freedom and self-respect,” she said.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The Court Decision and What it Means

The Basic Facts:

· The Constitutional Court (CC) hearing on Friday, 1 October 2010, was called for by 252 deputies (MPs) loyal to President Yanukovych.

· 17 out of 18 judges agreed that law №2222-IV on changes to the constitution, adopted on 8 December 2004, was unconstitutional. The court stated that the 2004 amendments to the constitution were unconstitutional due “to violations of constitutional procedures in their examination and adoption.”

· The court directed lawmakers to restore the 1996 constitution which would reintroduce a presidential system.

· Declaring the 2004 reforms unconstitutional removed the need for a parliamentary vote to change the constitution. At least 300 votes would have been needed to makes changes.

· The 2004 constitutional reform, which came into force in March 2006, was made during the Orange Revolution. At the time it was supported by the Party of Regions in order to limit the power of the incoming Orange president by transferring more powers to parliament – in particular the right of the prime minister to name and parliament to appoint most of the cabinet ministers, and to limit the rights of the president to dismiss the Cabinet of Ministers.

· Before becoming the president in February 2010, Viktor Yanukovych personally stated that he strongly supported the 2004 reforms.

· In 2004, the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko did not support the legislation because it foresaw the potential for conflict between the two branches of power because of the hastily drafted provisions. It did however support the rationale of a democratic, transparent and accountable system where power is not invested in one individual.

By reverting to the 1996 constitution the president acquires the following powers:

· He can independently nominate a candidate for prime minister.

· He can fire the prime minister causing the resignation of the entire government.

· He can dissolve parliament without the need for prior consultation with the chairman, deputies and heads of parliamentary factions if a plenary session was not held within 30 days of a regular session. Under the 2004 amendments he could dismiss parliament if a coalition and government could not be formed or if a plenary session was not held within 30 days of a regular session, however, prior consultation was required.

· He can direct the activities of the government not just by presidential decree but by passing presidential orders.

· He may cancel any acts of the government. Previously he had only the right to terminate acts temporarily with a simultaneous appeal to the Constitutional Court.

· He has the right to appoint and dismiss the head of the State Property Fund; heads of the Antimonopoly Committee and the State Committee for Television and Radio Broadcasting of Ukraine.

· He can form, dissolve and reorganise any body of the central executive.

· Law enforcement agencies are now fully subordinated to the presidential administration. He has the right without consultation to dismiss the Attorney General and appoint and dismiss the Head of the Security Service.

Nearly everywhere in Ukraine the clocks are being turned back. Nowhere is this more evident.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Caught on YouTube

Nearly everywhere in Ukraine the clocks are being turned back. Nowhere is this more evident than in the bully-boy tactics of the Tax Police. When Mykola Azarov was head of the State Tax Administration (1996-2001) he used the tax police as a repressive tool against businesses supporting the political opposition. Once again, the tax police are up to their old tricks. This time it was caught on film and uploaded on YouTube.

A six minute clip shows tax police firing rubber bullets during a confrontation with workers from Berdyansk's Raiagropromsnab (commercial agricultural depot). The incident took place on 24 September as workers tried to enter the building, a unit that was not even part of the investigation.

According to Raiagropromsnab spokeswoman Elena Nikitina, “The complex where the conflict took place is located on a 12-hectare plot occupied by some 20 enterprises. Tax agents fired on workers attempting to gain entry to the plant. Four workers were injured. Shots were fired only by the tax police agents."

The YouTube video confirms this was the case: that panicky tax policemen fired on workers, not the other way around. However, this did not stop the Berdyansk prosecutor's office on 29 September from opening a criminal case against the workers for impeding tax officials and causing them injury.

“Law enforcement agencies and the judicial system are in the president’s pocket,” said Oleksandr Turchynov, Deputy Chairman of the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko-Batkivshchyna. “This incident illustrates just how far we have sunk.”

On the same day that the Berdyansk prosecutor’s office opened its criminal case, tax police in the southern region of Kherson wounded left-wing mayoral candidate Vladen Hiryn during a raid. Mr Hiryn says that the raid by 10 tax police officers was politically motivated. He was injured and taken to hospital with wounds to the face and shoulder. His injuries were incurred when attempting to repel police officers from forcing their way into premises.

Who fired first? Well, for a start, only one side had guns. Four workers were taken to hospital after rubber bullets were fired. See for yourself. http://bit.ly/beUPsj



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Tax Code Debacle

Ukraine’s new Tax Code will be put to a parliamentary vote this week, despite heavy criticism of the document by the business community and no availability of its full text for public scrutiny. Many tax experts agree that contrary to the declared goal to alleviate and streamline the tax burden, the nitty-gritty of the new draft law will impose the opposite, and will especially impact small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

The ruling Party of the Regions has prepared the way for the successful promulgation of the draft law through parliament by forcing out the head of the Parliamentary Committee of Tax – a prominent member of Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko-Batkivshchyna, Serhiy Teryokhin.

“The second draft of the Tax Code arrived in parliament and has to get the full approval of the parliamentary committee and I, as the head of the committee, would never give it the go-ahead,” said Mr Teryokhin, explaining his ousting. Vitaly Khomutynnik, a deputy of the Party of the Regions, has already been voted in to replace him.

According to Prime Minister Mykola Azarov, the new code will include a single tax for entrepreneurs, and five-year corporation tax holidays for small businesses. VAT will be gradually reduced and administered automatically. Corporation tax will be reduced from 25 percent to 19 percent and penalties put in place for delays in reimbursing VAT.

But the SME sector remains skeptical. “What we have heard so far from Mr Kolesnikov and Mr Azarov indicates the authorities will keep safeguarding the interests of big business,” says Pavlo Zhovnirenko, a member of the SME Assembly of Ukraine. “If Ukraine’s big businesses feel patriotic about Ukraine, why don’t they move from the Virgin Islands or Cyprus and re-register in Ukraine to pay their taxes here? If the Tax Code was a proper document, it would have been offered for a public debate.”

Lower taxes should be welcomed, says tax experts, but the devil is in the detail. “The drafts of the tax code have continued the Ukrainian practice of significantly limiting expenses that can be deducted for tax purposes,” said
Sergiy Popov, a partner at KPMG Ukraine. “This means that although corporation tax might be reduced, the effective tax rate paid by a business will be much higher than the headline rate. What Azarov gives with one hand he takes away with the other.”

This view is exemplified by the way the so-called “simplified tax” payable by SMEs will be administered. Payments such as pension fund contributions, land tax and patents, will have to be paid on top, pointed out Irina Baibarza, a tax expert from the law firm, Arzinger. She anticipates that the law will have devastating consequences for SMEs in the services sector.

The government says the new Tax Code will be fairer to low-earners by introducing higher taxes for those earning ten times above the national average, whose housing, urban or rural, exceeds 100 and 200 square metres respectively. Bank savings in excess of UAH 200,000 will be taxed as well.

“We do not see any real reform of the tax system,” said Oleksander Turchynov, Deputy Chairman of the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko-Batkivshchyna. “All we see is another attempt to bend the tax rules to fit the needs of those in power. Nothing is being done to alleviate the burden on the poor.”

Mr Azarov said that he will insist the new Tax Code is in place by early 2011.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Complaints Mount Over Election Irregularities

The Ukrainian opposition presented a united front by signing a joint letter to President Yanukovych which was scathing in its criticism of his first six months in office. The letter, signed by nine of Ukraine’s opposition parties, claims the president and his entourage are attempting to imitate “Putin’s model” of centralised autocracy in Ukraine, while free and fair local elections are threatened.

The opposition also addressed foreign diplomats and European organisations, explaining that the authorities have set about “large-scale vote rigging” by exercising control over the majority of the Central Election Commission (CEC) and over the composition of the local election commissions. Needless to say, the ruling party takes the lion’s share.

The note followed a letter to President Yanukovych from four members of the CEC, warning him that a number of changes in the new election law will make it impossible to conduct fair, transparent and democratic elections.

One of the clauses “allows the final vote count on polling day to be endorsed by a simple majority of the election commission members of a constituency. It de-facto renders null and void the collegiality of such commissions,” says the statement signed by Hanna Usenko-Chorna and three other CEC members.

The election irregularities were also criticised by the European People’s Party (EPP), of which the Batkivshchyna and Rukh parties are members.

Last Thursday, the EPP issued a statement. “To our deep regret, despite our call on President Yanukovych and on the Ukrainian State authorities to ensure free and fair elections, the current political situation in Ukraine is deteriorating with each single day,” the EPP statement says.

The statement called for the authorities to stop interfering into the internal activities of Batkivshchyna by refusing to register its party branches in the oblasts of Kyiv, Lviv, Luhansk and Ternopil.

The opposition points out that it expects the local elections, due on 31 October, will see the return of mass fraud, as the new law allows procedural ambiguities for voters on sick leave to vote from home. Also, the law considerably limits the mandates of election observers and makes them vulnerable for expulsion from polling stations.

“These are undoubtedly signs of a politically motivated campaign against the opposition forces. If not remedied, it will have serious negative consequences for the EU-Ukrainian dialogue, and it will further undermine Ukraine’s European future credibility,” said the EPP.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



YES Ignores Threats to Ukraine’s Democracy?
Last week saw the seventh annual Yalta European Strategy (YES) summit, which is held each year in the Crimean port of Yalta. This year the theme was globalisation and the economic crisis. Despite international concern over democracy issues, the subject was not debated. It is odd that Viktor Pinchuk, the founder of YES, is keeping quiet about the threats to Ukraine’s democracy. These threats have, after all, a direct relationship to the ability of Ukraine to integrate into Europe.

This year’s YES programme did not include a single discussion on the threats to Ukraine’s democracy. The YES website touted the joining of Javier Solana, former EU High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy and former Secretary General of the Council of the EU, to the board. Other high profile attendees included President Bill Clinton and the IMF’s Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

Not invited to YES was Leader of the Opposition Yulia Tymoshenko. This was the first time the leader of the opposition had not been invited. This is not surprising as had she attended she would have drawn attention to the authoritarianism of President Viktor Yanukovych’s administration. Given the recent Constitutional Court’s decision, it seems bizarre that Mr Pinchuk and the seventh YES summit ignored the central issue facing Ukraine today.





Questions or comments? Email us at nlysova{ät}beauty.net.ua

Die neue Ausgabe ....

Darüber hab ich mich die letzten Monate ziemlich oft hier ausgelassen. Ich verstehe nicht wirklich, wie man diese Frau so verteidigen kann.
Übrigens hat sie mit ihren Machtspielchen mit Juschtschenko erst dafür gesorgt, dass Janukowitsch gewinnen konnte. Schon mal darüber nachgedacht?

Warum nicht? Welcher Vergehen hat sich der von dir genannte Personenkreis schuldig gemacht?

Darüber hab ich mich die letzten Monate ziemlich oft hier ausgelassen. Ich verstehe nicht wirklich, wie man diese Frau so verteidigen kann.
Übrigens hat sie mit ihren Machtspielchen mit Juschtschenko erst dafür gesorgt, dass Janukowitsch gewinnen konnte. Schon mal darüber nachgedacht?

Ganz so einfach stellt sich die Bewertung der Situation für mich nicht. Mag sein, dass du dich hier ziemlich oft hier ausgelassen hast. Um einen Zustand nachhaltig zum Besseren zu wenden, genügt es bei Weitem nicht, sich auszulassen. Außerdem verteidige ich Frau Tymoschenko nicht, weil sie hierzu selbst in der Lage ist. Vielmehr ist es erforderlich, das Geschehene aus der Vergangenheit heraus zu analysieren und zu ergründen, damit nicht der gleiche Fehler noch einmal auftritt, nämlich: Frontenverhärtung! Mit Staatspräsident und Premierministerin trafen zwei Sturköpfe aufeinander, die zum ersten Mal in der Geschichte der Ukraine eine große Chance zu weitreichenden Änderungen zum Wohle des gesamten Volkes hatten. Doch die Altlasten der Vergangenheit, wirtschaftliche Interessenkonflikte, fehlende Erfahrung in der Staatsführung, u.a. ausschlaggebende Umstände, verhinderten die konstruktive Zusammenarbeit zwischen den beiden Amtsinhabern.

Die Führung der Opposition zu ignorieren, bedeutet u.a., wichtige vetretende Teile des ukrainischen Volkes auszuschließen. Dies ohne einen wichtigen Grund zu tun, beinhaltet den Vorsatz, der Freiheit und dem Willen der einheimischen Bevölkerung keine Beachtung zu schenken. So wurde aus dem YES summit ein MAYBE summit, denn die Vertreterin andersdenkender Ukrainer hätte mit hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit, konstruktive Vorschläge eingebracht. Unter einer Präsidentendiktatur im demokratischen Gewande kann kein freier Geist existieren, und wenn, dann höchstens im Untergrund.