An Appeal for Balanced and Truthful Information from Renate Wohlwend

I would like here to fully endorse the position taken by my colleague, Hanne Severinsen and published on the Maidan website: (http://eng.maidanua.org/node/711).
Comments I made recently in a telephone interview to a Ukrainian journalist would appear to have been distorted in so far as they suggest a categorical tone and that I am taking sides in the present issue. Since these comments were reported and embellished in various publications (including the newspaper “2000″ and the official site of the Party of the Regions), I would like to stress that any other opinions and statements regarding the present situation in Ukraine made in those publications did not originate from me. I would also suggest that the conclusions and general tone of all of these publications bore little resemblance to what I did in fact say.
I would like to take this opportunity to call on all Ukrainian journalists to be extremely careful during this volatile time and to ensure that they accurately and fairly represent opinions expressed. It is also vital that they clearly state their sources.
In any democracy it is vital that the public have full and impartial information about events which directly impinge upon their lives.
It is always to be regretted when politicians and the media endeavour to influence public opinion by distorting information and making vague and unsubstantiated remarks regarding the position of people outside Ukraine.
I would therefore support the suggestion made by Maidan that all future interviews with any public figures should be agreed in writing before publication.
I would also assure the Ukrainian public that while we are concerned for a peaceful and constructive outcome to the present situation, it would be quite improper and inappropriate for us to take any sides.
Please bear these comments in mind when reading any statements made in the coming weeks. I would respectfully suggest that any further distortions of what I or any other official has said should lead you only to draw conclusions about those making such irresponsible claims.
Renate Wohlwend
PACE Monitoring Committee Co-Rapporteur

MINISTRY OF JUSTICE HAS PREPARED THE LEGAL OPINION WITH REGARD TO THE RESULTS OF LEGAL EXAMINATION OF DECREE OF THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE “ON PRE-TERM ABATEMENT OF AUTHORITY OF THE VERKHOVNA RADA OF UKRAINE”

Following interpellation of the Cabinet of Ministers, the Ministry of Justice has prepared the Legal Opinion with regard to the results of legal examination of Decree of the President of Ukraine dated April, 2 the year 2007 N 264 “On pre-term abatement of authority of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine”

The full text of the Ministry of justice Legal Opinion

The Council or Europe – Parliament Assembly has called on Ukraine to adopt a full parliamentary system in line with European Standards

“It would be better for the country to switch to a full parliamentary system with proper checks and balances and guarantees of parliamentary opposition and competition.”

The PACE: Explanatory memorandum presented to the Assembly meeting held on April 19 by Mrs Severinsen and Mrs Wohlwend, co-rapporteurs on Ukraine raised concern about the inevitable conflict of power under Ukraine’s Parliamentary-Presidential system between the Parliament and the President.

The report states: “The failure to establish clearly defined and law-based institutions to guarantee in practice separation of power, democratic rights and freedoms, by providing for an effective system of checks and balances is at the very heart of the political struggle that has unfolded in the country over recent months and sparked into an open crisis upon the dissolution of the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) by the President of Ukraine on 2 April 2007″

As co-rapporteurs of the Assembly’s Monitoring Committee, we are deeply concerned about the political and legal implications of President Yushchenko’s decision and the constitutional, institutional and political crisis that has unfolded thereafter. Even more worrying is the fact that the crisis has paralysed many already seriously ailing institutions which should be guaranteeing democracy, rule of law and human rights
…
The undecided question on competencies and limits of different branches of power first led to a considerable confusion over the formation of the majority coalition and the new government following the March 2006 legislative elections, and has ever since evolved into an incessant tug of war between the President and the Prime Minister.
…
The parliamentary–presidential system opted for by the Ukrainian lawmakers in 2004 has an in-built structural problem: it can work smoothly only if the presidential and parliamentary powers represent the same political vision. Cohabitation works in the case of highly mature democracies, which is not the case in Ukraine. Largely because of this structural cohabitation dilemma, all established European democracies apart from France (Also Cyprus) have opted for the fully parliamentary form of governance.

What we have also seen since the establishment of the current parliamentary majority coalition and the formation of PM Yanukovych’s government is the struggle to move towards a fully parliamentary system, which in the existing constitutional order has been perceived by the opposition as usurpation of power by the majority.

Although Ukraine understandably has its own historic reasons to avoid the accumulation of power into the hands of one political force, it should nevertheless consider in the course of future constitutional amendments whether it would not be better for the country to switch to a full parliamentary system with proper checks and balances and guarantees of parliamentary opposition and competition.

Dear Dr. Kuzio,

“A plague o’ both your houses! (Mercutio)”

NOW is NOT the time to argue over domestic economic or ego based issues, as what awaits Ukraine in future is “the buffer zone”*!

It is NOT a zero sum game. Both of you complement one another even though on opposite sides of the fence and ‘cooperative-collaboration’ would expand influence and expertise. The world is big enough for the both of you. Please, negotiate a way to work together unless it has already gone past the tipping point.

Signed,
Truth teller as I see it.

——-
*(‘Buffer zones often result in large uninhabited regions (similar to nature reserves, although without tourism) which of themselves are somewhat unique in many increasingly paved/developed, crowded parts of the world.’)

http://www.gwu.edu/~ieresgwu/news/index.cfm?ann_id=25386