[Aaus-community-list] Shadows of the Early Parliamentary Elections

[Kostyantyn Mykhailychenko]

[reposted with permission--RDL]


Research Update. Vol. 15, Ð 29/589, 4 September 2009

Shadows of the Early Parliamentary Elections

By Diana Dutsyk, UCIPR political observer

The fall political season started with the old 
song about the early parliamentary elections. On 1
September, 2009, on the first day of the 
parliament work, Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn, being 
a little
nervous about another blocking of parliament, 
said in a fit of temper, "The Verkhovna Rada must
work. You don't think so and blindly do what you 
are told? Then let's make a decision to cease the
work of parliament due to its self-dissolution." 
It took the idea of dissolution or 
self-dissolution of
parliament just a couple of days to capture 
political masses and to turn into yet another 
political
technology.

The President mentioned the VR dissolution and Mr. Lytvyn is not his ally

On 2 September, when MPs tried to comprehend the 
old new idea, the President called Volodymyr
Lytvyn and told him the Verkhovna Rada has to be 
a center ensuring the stability and dialogue in
politics and society, though instead, Ukraine is 
experiencing the political crisis. "If a majority 
is real, it
has to bear responsibility. If there is no such 
majority, under the Constitution in force, 
parliament has
to look for an answer in a respective 
reformatting of the coalition. If this is also 
impossible, another
step to overcome the crisis is, according to the 
Constitution, self-dissolution of Ukrainian 
parliament,"
underscored Victor Yushchenko in his comment 
after the meeting disseminated by the presidential
press service.

Yet, only on 3 September, Volodymyr Lytvyn was in 
a hurry to state he did not mention parliament
dissolution at the meeting with the President and 
emphasized there are no legal grounds for this. He
said they only exchanged opinions "about what the 
Verkhovna Rada has in its legislative portfolio,
what plans and what problems." "These plans are 
grand and problems are evident and
insurmountable," the Speaker thinks.

Victor Yushchenko would have to foresee V. Lytvyn 
will not be his ally and will not foster self-
dissolution of parliament, at least, because he 
is going to run for President as well and he 
needs a
personal platform for the start, i.e. the 
Speaker's office. Conversely, V. Lytvyn would not 
mind
winning round his opponents and playing the role 
of an arbiter, which, as he probably hopes, would
have given him additional weight in the eyes of 
society (the voters). Perhaps, that is why he put
forward an initiative to hold a special 
parliamentary session with the participation of 
the President and
the government, where he would propose to discuss 
Ukraine's further development. As of now, neither
the President nor the PM responded this proposal. 
And, probably, they won't. The entourage of either
V. Yushchenko or Y. Tymoshenko clearly 
understands this will give nothing and there will 
be no
consolidation until the end of the election 
campaign, even for the sake to meet acute 
challenges, and
therefore everyone will work for oneself.

Another issue is why the President decided to 
return to the idea of parliament dissolution. 
Experts say
at the current stage, this step will not be in 
favor of Mr. Yushchenko. Specifically, lead 
expert on
political and legal programs from the Razumkov 
Center Oleksandr Lytvynenko believes it is almost
impossible that parliament dissolves itself or V. 
Yushchenko dissolves it because it is not
advantageous for him to destabilize the political 
situation on the eve of elections (the Deutsche 
Welle,
02.09.2009). Nevertheless, some of Yushchenko's 
entourage guesses the simultaneous presidential 
and
parliamentary elections could give the President 
a chance to lead his party to parliament and get 
the
considerable number of votes, if not to be 
elected again. Yet, the President is a couple of 
months late
for this scenario.

Also, a reason why the President returned to the 
idea of parliament dissolution may be personal
apprehensions of V. Yushchenko that the PR and 
BYuT still might joint their efforts. As a matter 
of
fact, this sounds in his latest statements about 
a possible usurpation of power after the 
presidential
elections and that the current parliamentary 
crisis means "intrigues of the two forces" or 
rather
"intrigues of the two persons". Though, the same 
O. Lytvynenko notes over the nearest six months,
parliament will not dare to reshuffle the current 
coalition and therefore, leaders of the two 
largest
factions, who could set up a new formation, will 
be the main rivals at the presidential elections.
Another thing is evident: making statements about 
the usurpation of power and a threat to
democracy (though such risks really exist), 
Yushchenko's team wants to mobilize the former
orange voters.

Members of the PR cannot reach a consensus

Members of the PR, whose actions caused a wave of 
statements about early parliamentary elections,
seemingly hold different opinions on this issue.

"I back up the idea of holding new elections as 
soon as possible and I back up self-dissolution," 
said
MP from the PR Mykola Azarov on the air of the 
5th Channel on 2 September. Mr. Azarov
traditionally believes current power "leads the 
country to a calamity". Hence, to avoid it, "any 
means
are good, including self-dissolution or 
dissolution of the Verkhovna Rada, election of a 
new
parliament or government able to work," says the 
Chairman of V. Yanukovych's electoral
headquarter.

How strange it may seem but PR member Oleksandr 
Lavrynovych holds a completely opposite
position. At the session of the opposition 
government, the First Vice Speaker said there are 
no legal
grounds for parliament self-dissolution. "The 
Verkhovna Rada does not have powers to make a
decision about its self-dissolution though in due 
time, when draft constitutional changes were 
debated,
this issue was on the agenda as well. I think 
this (the opportunity for self-dissolution) shall 
be provided
for in the future," he emphasized. O. Lavrynovych 
is sure only the President can make this decision
now (Mr. Lavrynovych has probably forgotten under 
the Constitution, the President is deprived of 
this
right half a year before presidential elections). 
He also advised, "One should not be engaged in 
cheap
self-advertisement and say it is necessary to do 
what is impossible to do. This looks very cheap." 
We
can only guess whom this piece of advice 
concerned, whether Mr. Lavrynovych's party-mate 
Mykola
Azarov or Victor Yushchenko or someone else.

Opinions of PR members differ not only on the VR 
dissolution but also on the increase of minimum
wages, which actually is a reason for permanent 
blocking of the parliamentary business. For 
instance,
Minister of Labor and Social Policy Lyudmyla 
Denisova stated the Federation of Employers of
Ukraine presided by MP from the PR Yuri Boiko 
allegedly warned the government the passage of the
law on the increase of social standards in 
Ukraine might entail a 40-50% higher cost of 
produce of
Ukrainian enterprises
(http://www.kmu.gov.ua/control/uk/publish/article?art_id=238703800&cat_id=35884). 
Despite this
statement is not available on the Federation's 
site, another member of PR Anatoliy Kinakh, 
speaking
on the air of the "I Think So with Anna Bezulik" 
TV program (the 5th Channel, 03.09.2009) could not
either refute this information or explain 
different positions of PR members on this issue.

That is why one can agree with experts, who think 
the latest events in parliament are very 
convenient
for most parliamentary parties, since they allow 
MPs to base their PR campaigns on issues, which no
one is going to resolve.

BYuT is afraid of changes

BYuT members see the situation differently as 
well. "There is every reason to believe the 
Presidential
Secretariat and the PR are jointly preparing and 
attempting to commit another large-scaled fraud,
that is to block parliament work at first and 
then to dissolve the VR," said First Deputy 
Chairman of
BYuT faction Andriy Kozhemyakin. Of course, as 
one can guess all this is done for the only one
purpose - "to accuse PM Yulia Tymoshenko of 
everything". Mr. Kozhemyakin asserts, 
"Cooperation of
the PR, the Presidential Secretariat and 
Yushchenko himself" serves the purpose to block 
parliament
for almost a year "and thereby to deprive the 
government of the legal support to combat the 
crisis, to
cause substantial additional budget expenses for 
parliamentary elections and, as a result, to 
reduce
the country to the economic collapse."

Hence, Yushchenko says the PR and BYuT act in 
collusion to usurp power. And BYuT says
Yushchenko colluded with the PR to make 
Tymoshenko guilty. Who will the voters believe? 
Teams of
the key actors should consider that such a little 
schizophrenic circumstance might increase the 
apathy
and distrust of the voters, which will do no good to any political force.

We have already heard this

Speculative talks about parliament dissolution 
and the simultaneous presidential and 
parliamentary
elections are not new. Only in late 2008, the PR 
started to develop this idea. "If the matter 
concerns
elections, both presidential and parliamentary 
ones should be held simultaneously," stated V.
Yanukovych in December 2008 (the Inter Channel, 
21.12.2008). Moreover, answering a question
whether this means the PR will initiate the VR 
dissolution in spring, he said, "Certainly." The 
spring
passed in the blocking of the VR though 
notwithstanding talks and public consent with the
simultaneous presidential elections, nobody 
launched the dissolution mechanism. Though, the 
key
potential presidential candidates had and still 
have the great temptation to get it all (i.e. 
except for the
office of the President, a parliamentary majority and a guided government).

The fall came and the situation repeats. Only 
there are fewer chances for the VR dissolution. 
Today,
the President does not yet have the right to take 
such the step because the Constitution prohibits 
him to
dissolve the VR half a year before presidential 
elections. Nevertheless, first, the Constitution 
does not
provide for such the rule (though, it does not 
provide for a direct prohibition as well); 
second, the PR
that constantly blocks the Rada's work seemingly 
does not have the real desire to dissolve the VR 
(at
least, for the time being). This was indirectly 
confirmed by PR member Anatoliy Kinakh on the air 
of
the "I Think So with Anna Bezulik" TV program 
(03.09.2009). He said the PR did not formulate an
official position on dissolution/self-dissolution 
of parliament despite the opposition government 
was in
session the other day. Hence, this once again 
conforms PR members cannot reach a consensus on 
the
problem inside the party as it has been mentioned 
above. Politicians like Azarov and Yanukovych
probably dream of evening the score though 
businessmen-regionals assess the situation more
pragmatically. They want guarantees for 
themselves after the elections in exchange for 
money they
invested in the campaign but no one can give 100% guarantees today.

Hence, experts are unanimous parliament will 
exist but will not work effectively until the 
presidential
elections are over. Given the situation, the idea 
to dissolve the VR becomes kind of a shadow, which
political opponents will use to scare each other.

Yet, there are no guarantees the situation will 
change after the elections. Given the existent 
system of
power, a newly elected President (whoever will 
hold this office) will face the same problems as 
Victor
Yushchenko. And in this situation, there is, 
unfortunately, no sense to call political forces 
to sit at the
negotiating table or to convene a VR session with 
the participation of the President and the PM (as 
V.
Lytvyn proposed) and to formulate a consolidated 
position not only on acute economic but also on
strategic issues that could ensure the further 
development of Ukraine (and effective power is 
one of the
most important problems). Mantras about the need 
for consolidation have been heard for almost five
years. Needless to say, a way out of the 
situation is to change the electoral law, to 
amend the
Constitution concerning the division of 
authorities between branches of power and to 
combat
corruption. However, the logic of the fight wins 
and it means the crisis will continue.