Friday
05 march 2010
12:47
Yanukovych loath to back up Yushchenko for premierPro-Yanukovych lawmakers wipe feet on Constitution
Ukraine Constitution says a ruling majority can be formed only by factions, not individual lawmakers. March 4, Party of Regions-dominated Verkhovna Rada passed the first reading of the law allowing separate lawmakers to form a majority, despite the earlier Constitutional Court ruling to the contrary. This is viewed by many as a constitutional coup d’etate. Why should Yanukovych start his rule by wiping his feet on the main law of the land? The only lawful option is to call the early parliamentary elections, UNIAN’s Masha Mishchenko quotes experts as saying.Olexandr Barabash, election law expert:
“Yesterday, I read up on two past Constitutional Court rulings defining a coalition and membership of factions. They put it clearly: a ruling majority is formed by factions with the number of lawmakers being at least 226 [a parliamentary majority of 450 lawmakers]. So, what’s been done by Rada lawmakers indicates that they do not care at all about the constitution.
As CC rulings are integral part of the Constitution, they have blatantly violated the law.
Personally, I have never supported the party discipline of faction members obliging them to vote with their faction. This kind of discipline contradicts the nature of a lawmaker’s representative mandate. Lawmakers represent their voters, not parties.
In democratic countries, lawmakers never abide by the party decision to support this or that motion.
The situation can be changed by introducing open nomination of candidates for parliament and, respectively, the support of candidates by voters. Unfortunately, with the current system in the Rada, lawmakers are slaves of their party bosses, not representatives of their voters.
Viktor Musiyaka, one of the authors of the current Constitution:
Given its composition, the present Verkhovna Rada cannot operate effectively. Therefore, early parliamentary elections are needed.
I’ve been continuously lambasting the regime for violations of the Constitution in the past 7 years. Yushchenko bended the Constitution a hundred times, same as parliament and the cabinet.
Yesterday, Verkhovna Rada violated the Constitution for the umpteenth time. In another telling example, VR postponed the May 30 local elections.
Can we ever become a law-abiding country? Or will corruption erode the branches of power?
Now, about the efforts to hatch up a new ruling majority. I don’t see any essential difference between the old BYT coalition and the current anti-constitutional mob.
Although I am an opponent of the imperative mandate [obliging lawmakers to vote with their factions] I think, the party discipline must be supreme. It’s like a whip for lawmakers. If lawmakers were elected to the legislature on a party ticket, they must abide by the party choice. All defectors should be dropped from the Rada.
A defiant lawmaker in the British parliament, for instance, becomes a person without any political future. There is a tacit understanding about how the turncoats are to be treated.
The proportional representation electoral system violates the constitutional right to be elected. This right can be ensured only by the introducing the first-past-the-pole system.
Ihor Koliushko, head of the Center for Political and Legal Reforms:
Changing the procedure of forming a coalition by allowing individual lawmakers to cross the floor runs counter to the Constitution. It is the unconstitutional way.
If the new law is signed by the president, it can be appealed against in the Constitutional Court.
I think, the way to deal with inner-party corruption is to give up closed party election rosters. This will give voters a chance to impact the lawmakers which will make it to the legislature and stop lawmakers from crossing the floor.
Comments
Add comment
Top-5
- BYUT decries procrastination by Ukraine foreign ministry regarding German and Canadian doctors’ examination of Tymoshenko
- Kharkiv mayor denied UK entry visa due to his criminal past
- Both Rybakov and Zabzaliuk have to take fall for defection scandal, Portnov says
- Zabzaliuk passes exposing audio recording to prosecution
- Russia rudely violating WTO rules by banning cheese import from Ukraine
zmolo.com
It's not necessary.
If you watch the political talk shows in Ukraine, the "political elite" all talk about "working for Ukraine," and "working for the good of the people."
Why don't they just do it, instead of trying to jerk each other around with forming a new coalition?
If Yanukovych has some legislation that he thinks is a good idea for the good of Ukraine - why doesn't he just request the Parliament to deliberate on it? In fact, he can do so very publicly.
The reason they want to mess with a new coalition is:
1) it gives them an excuse to do nothing - except jerk each other around
2) it's a power grab by the Party of Regions, which wants to grab all of the ministerial posts, and the entire government, so they can rob the country for the benefit of Akhmetov, Kolesnikov, Yakoonovych, Azarov and Ganna German.
The proportional representation electoral system violates the constitutional right to be elected. This right can be ensured only by the introducing the first-past-the-pole system.
END QUOTE
What total BS. This is a false statement and shows an extraordinary lack of understanding of electoral systems.
Yes there are issues with the Party list system but that is not a problem with Proportional Representation per-say.
As Single Transferable Vote - Proportional; Representation voting system provides individuals with the right of direct representation whilst maintaining proportional representation according to the voters chose, A first past the post system to the contract does not provide democratic representation. One Reason why Britain is currently considering ditching it. Fort Past the Post voting is out of date. It was design for the 18th Century not the 21st Century. It is not the system that has caused Ukraine's fraction problems but the politicians themselves. The system can only provide a means of equal representation. A first-past-the-post voting system would destroy and sense of equality or fairness. It must be rejected outright. A Single Transferable proportional representation voting system ensures that individuals are elected according to the voters expressed intentions. First past the post voting systems do not reflect the will of the people.
All other comments by the so called expert I fully sup[port including the comments about Yushchenko's non compliance with Ukraine's Constitution.
A voting system should not be designed to bring about a particular outcome of representing. It must be equitable ab d fair and reflect the diversity of the electorate. If it fails to do so then it will never be accepted as a basis for democratic rule.
.
Ukraine's new President, Viktor Yanukovych, has sought to bypass Ukraine's constitution by passing legislation that seeks to side step Ukraine's Constitutional Imperative mandate provisions.
In what is seen as a test of will and integrity Yanukovych and his party wants to allow individual MP's, not factions, to decide the makeup of Ukraine's governing coalition thus allowing small groups of MP's to be poached and agree to a formation of a new coalition in order to avoid fresh parliamentary elections.
Article 83 of Ukraine's Constitution states:
...
According to election results and on the basis of a common ground achieved between various political positions, a coalition of parliamentary factions shall be formed in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine to include a majority of People’s Deputies of Ukraine within the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine
...
The proposed rule change is designed to allow renegade members of Our Ukraine -Peoples Self Defense bloc to breakaway from their faction to support the formation of a new coalition with Party of Regions and the possibility of Viktor Yushchenko being appointed Ukraine's next Prime Minister..
In 2007 Yushchenko dismissed the previous Parliament which was lead by Victor Yanukovych arguing at the time that the governing coalition was in contravention to Article 83. Now it appears that he has had a change of heart and is prepared to forsake Ukraine's Constitution.
Bloc Tymoshenko and other members of Our Ukraine-People's Self Defence bloc have rightly argued that the proposed legislation is unconstitutional and has vowed to challenge the law in Ukraine's Courts and appeal to the International community and the Venice Commission to help uphold Ukraine's Constitution. Something they did not do back in 2007 .
This will be Yanukovych's a test of will and process and the legitimacy of the new government.
Members of parliament in Ukraine are elected on the basis of a party/factional bloc lists and not as individuals. By seeking to allow individual MP's to decide who will form a government will leave the parliament in tatters and a state of anarchy with individuals members of parliament acting alone and contrary to the wishes of a majority of their own faction.
Any government appointed under these conditions will not have legitimacy until Ukraine's Constitutional Court has ruled on the legality of the proposed law. It is difficult to see under what circumstances the Constitutional Court can support the proposed new law which should only be enacted via a Constitutional amendment and not regulatory legislation.
This will also be another test for the Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe and the Venice Commission who in 2007 remained silent as Ukraine's past President, Viktor Yushchenko, breached Ukraine's Constitution in dismissing the previous parliament in order to force fresh parliamentary elections. Elections which elected the current parliament. PACE also turned a blind eye to Viktor Yushchenko's illegal interference in the operation and independence of Ukraine's Constitutional Court. The Court never ruled on the question of legality of Yushchenko's actions.
Expediency is no excuse for actions that are unconstitutional. If Yanukovych can not form a new coalition in accordance with Ukraine's Constitutions then he should either seek to amend the Constitution or hold fresh elections. In 30 days time he will have the authority to act and seek a mandate for reform.