Viche 2007 13

13, 2007

Oleksander Moroz: Opposition Has to Prepare for the Parliamentary Elections of 2011

The Verkhovna Rada of the fifth convocation wrote one of the
most dramatic pages into the state's history. One and a half year of activity was notable for a difficult political-constitutional confrontation. Moving is impossimble without the
comprehension of the passed way. The editorial staff addressed the Head of the
Parliament with the request to characterize the results of lawmakers' activity and to estimate political situation in Ukraine. A Thinker - is a master of questions.
Moroz - is a thinking politician

There are different attitudes to the events which started since the President's Decree had been issued on April 2. They are called a new coil of democracy development as well as crash of parliamentarism. But country is undoubtedly in the state of crisis. How would you estimate these events and their consequences for our country? Do you think political elite managed to find an optimal way out of the crisis?
I will start with the reasons which led to the artificially created crisis: they first of all consist in the irresistible desire of some institutions and political forces that lost the elections of 2006 to retrieve the absolute power.
Unfortunately in Ukraine a political struggle on the part of the President who has been used by these forces to gain revenge has turned into the fighting against the Constitution and the parliamentarism.
Political venture of issuing the President's unconstitutional Decrees' on early termination of Parliament's powers, appointing of temporary acting Prosecutor General, re-subordination of the internal troops, using of law machinery to gain political goals, subordinating legal system to one political force is aimed at the change of Parliament structure and of the authority in general.
After illegal acting of the State Security Department in the Prosecutor's General Office and illegal Orders of the Commander of Internal Forces, we managed to avoid power confrontation only thanks to position of the Parliamentary coalition and the Government, which acted exclusively within the frameworks of the Constitution and the Law, and also thanks to the consistent and responsible actions of the Minister for the Interior.
I can not comply with the statement of some politicians that the political crisis has been overcome with the date for the early elections being fixed. Notwithstanding the agreements achieved by the three the head of the State is violating some paragraphs of their Joint Statement, e.g. noninterference of power institutions with the legal system and the law machinery activity. All this arouses anxiety.
I repeated several times that early elections are possible provided there are legal grounds for that. All three President's Decrees are questionable from the legal point of view and they led to tensions not only in political life. Now we created an opportunity to observe the norms of the Constitution on termination of the Parliament's powers and on early elections under certain circumstances.
Yet the legitimacy and transparency of procedure of the opposition deputies' abdication raise doubts. Many of them wrote their applications on abdication under pressure and for another purpose- for strengthening of President's positions during validity period of the first Decree on early termination of Parliament's powers.
I'd like to remind that the decision taken by BYUT and Our Ukraine on the lists' zeroing is still being challenged in courts. It's clear that Our Ukraine and BYUT have to take some complicated legal steps. They do have time for that. Such a matter of principle as early termination of powers of the only legislative body can not be realized without legal purity.
I am convinced that in any case early elections can not be a means for settling systematic contradictions among the main political players; Parliament's composition in political sense will remain unchanged. Early elections on the contrary are jeopardizing for the unity of Ukraine, they may even split it for good as the last two pre-election campaigns (presidential and parliamentary) created a tension zone based on ethnic composition, language and territory principles.

Activity of the Verkhovna Rada of the V convocation must be coming to its end. In spite of which day the early parliamentary elections take place we have grounds to say that the elected representatives of the people didn't cope with their task which they have been laid upon by our society as they couldn't express the general state will (this is exactly the function which should be executed by different political forces in the Parliament). What are subjective and objective reasons for the crisis in parliamentary activity in your opinion?
Termination of the present Verkhovna Rada activity is a moot point. The Parliament will continue its work until all legal nuances, which I have already mentioned, aren't settled.
There is no crisis in the parliamentary activity. What inefficiency of legislative work can we speak about when since the beginning of the present cadence most of the draft laws have been voted for by the constitutional majority? It is clear that the efficient work of Parliament is not convenient for some political forces and institutions as if positive tendencies in the economics and the social sphere proceed to take place people will just forget about them. That is why the President's institution and the opposition want by all means to impose their rules of play and to establish a dictate of minority.
I will repeat once again this is not a crisis. This is the struggle for power, unwillingness to detach power from business, attempts of separate political forces to meet their mercantile personal interests or corporate business interests by any means through the power instruments.
I think that the opposition forces which couldn't cope with the power which they were holding in their hands and which initiated this absolutely unnecessary public uproar must realize that they have to convince the voters of their position appropriateness during the next elections to the Parliament in 2011.

People have established a firm conviction that the more the power is absorbed in its own problems the better it is for the economics as there are less unjustified interferences in it. This characterizes public attitude to the authority not in the best way. What is the initial reason for public pessimism? And how can we overcome the abyss between those people who elect the authorities and those who execute it?
The deep-laid reason for public disappointment with the authority is demonstrative neglecting of daily interests of common people by the officials, imposing of absolutely unnecessary, conflict ideas such as the need for NATO entering. People are tired of political instability, of continuous fighting within the authorities, intrigues. They need order. Results of the sociological researches prove this.
The abyss between those people who elect the authorities and those who execute will become smaller only if the process of reorganization of the state government based on local implementation of political reform will proceed.
Therefore we need to consider in the nearest future in the Parliament the draft law on amendments to the Constitution on local authorities' reformation. Such amendments should be sent to the Constitutional Court for conclusion to be able to pass a new edition of Constitution in general at the beginning of September.
This draft law improves activity of not only representative authorities but it also settles contradictions which arise for today within the top echelons of power.

In the opinion of political scientists every election deepens country splitting. It gives an impression that mutual neglecting of regions, language and religious groups is beneficial for political parties which use it in the process of fighting for power. The reasons of split (real and imaginary) are well-known. Which values can unite the multi-faced Ukraine? And what consecutive steps of their implementation do you see?
 The main value is the rule of law, securing public freedoms, decent living standards. To provide them we need all the authorities to act in compliance with the Constitution and the Laws, democratic standards should be implemented not in word but in a real life. Then all the artificial contradictions will disappear and the basis for speculations on the so called split along the East-West line, ethnic and language issues will disappear as well.