Ukraine parliament approves draft of constitutional amendments

Ukraine’s parliament on July 16 voted to initiate amendments to the Ukrainian Constitution that were submitted and endorsed by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. An amendment replaces state regional administrations with presidentially appointed prefects who are charged with overseeing the work of the regional and district executive committees to ensure they don’t violate laws. In which case, the president has the ability to dissolve such councils and appoint a temporary acting head for a term of no longer than a year.

 

The amendment drawing the most discussion was the creation in the occupied territories of Donbas what the president described as “a separate order of local self-governance.” This term replaced the commonly used term “special status” that had been previously used, including both versions of the Minsk accords.

 

Western leaders pressured Poroshenko and Parliamentary Chair Volodymyr Groysman to approve the “separate order” amendments. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francoise Hollande called both politicians on the eve of the vote, reported the liga.net news site, while U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland sat in the Ukrainian parliament’s visitors loge to observe the session. She and EU Ambassador to Ukraine Jan Tombinski met with parliamentary faction leaders during a break in the session.

 

The “separate order” drew the support of the Poroshenko Bloc, the People’s Front led by Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the Fatherland party led by former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, the Russian-oriented Opposition Bloc, and two groups of business interests. It was opposed by the populist Radical Party and the Self-Reliance party, which has positioned itself as the pro-Western opposition force. The measure was highly criticized by nationalists and volunteer battalion fighters as a betrayal of national interests.

 

The vote, which drew the support of 288 MPs (of the minimum 226), was only the start of the process of amending the Constitution. The draft is now directed to the Constitutional Court for approval, after which it will return to parliament for a first reading, requiring a majority vote of 226. If that’s done, MPs will have to adopt the changes in an autumn session in a second reading, requiring a 300-vote majority (out of 450 total votes).

 

Zenon Zawada: The basic conditions of the separate order are already known from previous legislation approved, including amnesty for the terrorists, even allowing them to serve in local law enforcement bodies. Local elections are supposed to be held on Oct. 25, yet the legislation didn’t mention whether the occupied territories would be organizing them, according to Donetsk MP Yegor Firsov. It’s unclear whether new conditions have been introduced to the separate order.

 

Much of the criticism, some of which borders on hysteria such as predictions of civil war, is based on the notion that the Russian-backed terrorists will be getting their own mini-state (a sort of Transnistria) from which they will continue to wage war on the central government. The Western governments are well aware of this possibility and we believe they are preparing for it with plans for heightened sanctions. In the meantime, creating the separate order offers yet another window for Putin to save face and back away from his Donbas debacle, lest he and his nation face even worse consequences.

 

Indeed few expect the Russian government will remove its giant arsenal that it has accumulated in Donbas should the separate order be established. Yet Western leaders see it as their obligation to attempt peace rather than risk an escalation, in order to prevent more deaths. The separate order should serve as the ultimate litmus test of whether Putin is capable of cutting his losses and backing down, or whether he’s completely lost touch with reality. Further concessions are worthy of being considered a capitulation if the Russian government fails to adhere to any more points of the Minsk accords after the separate order is established.

 

What’s particularly disappointing about this process was the lack of transparency and public discussion. As standard practice, the legislation was prepared behind closed doors, with details being occasionally leaked to the press by MPs involved. Then it was rammed through parliament, with international pressure, without so much as a public debate. Such procedures merely fuel the public’s paranoia that the government is betraying its interests.