• Українська
  • Русский
  • English
Where there is no law, but every man does what is right in his own eyes, there is the least of real liberty
Henry M. Robert

Power vs. People 

1 December, 1998 - 00:00

Rising Utility Bills: For and Against

 

  The Constitutional
Court started hearings on November 24 in the President vs. Parliament case,
challenging the constitutionality of the Verkhovna Rada's moratorium on
housing, municipal, and public transport rate hikes.

According to Vladyslav Nosov, the President's Permanent Representative
to the court, the law was enacted in response to the Cabinet's attempt
to institute a 100% increase in housing and utility rates and is to be
regarded primarily in terms of competence - in other words, whether Parliament
had the right to pass a law infringing on the rights of enterprises rendering
housing and utility services without recompensing the inevitable losses.
And the latter are estimated at some Hr 800 million that should have been
envisaged in the budget program as such compensation and which the Verkhovna
Rada did not do.

"This is faulty logic," The Day was told by parliamentary committee
chairman Yevhen Marchuk. Below is an account of what Mr. Marchuk had further
to say on the subject.

"The President's submission to the Constitutional Court with regard
to the constitutionality of the Verkhovna Rada's moratorium on housing
and utility rates was programmed by the logic of political developments
in Ukraine.

"The Chief Executive is not only unable to ensure timely redemption
of arrears on social payments (and the moratorium is effective until such
redemption is made), but also tries to use the Constitutional Court to
neutralize Parliament's attempt to secure citizen's constitutional right
to timely wages and salaries.

"The President's allegation about Verkhovna Rada's is exceeding its
powers can only cause raised eyebrows. Any lawyer will easily refute it.
Suffice it to refer to Article 48 of the Constitution which reads that
every citizen has the right to have sufficient livelihood for himself and
his family. The Guarantor of the Constitution must adhere to the Fundamental
Law and not pester the Constitutional Court with irrelevant and immaterial
referrals. Of course, one might interpret Mr. Kuchma's action as his desire
to use it to help Ukraine receive the EFF loan. The memorandum signed by
Premier Pustovoitenko and NBU Governor Yushchenko with IMF is known to
contains a clause requiring the populace to pay 100% higher housing and
utility fees. However, Presidential Adviser Anatoly Halchynsky - and the
President - had to recognize the need to make corrections in this document
due to the financial crisis. Apparently, social protection of the populace
should be uppermost in the government's mind, and that EFF must be adjusted
precisely to this end. Yet the President's motive is somewhat different.

"First, the Chief Executive, pretending to combat "Parliament's social
expansion," tries to continue to ignore the legislature's decision, using
a well-tested tool, the Constitutional Court. The President's veto did
not work, so the next step was refer the case to court.

"Secondly, the thesis about Verkhovna Rada "exceeding its competence"
is being tried once again. This was a natural response by the President
to Parliament's attempt to strengthen its oversight over the executive.

"Thirdly, the President made it quite clear that he is for consistently
raising the housing and utility rates and he does not seem to worry about
people having no money to pay them. Here we have absurd logic. Costs are
planned to be further increased and everyone concerned is only too well
aware that arrears on housing and municipal payments will continue to grow.
In fact, the executive provide statistics showing that 40-50% of these
services are paid for monthly. So we raise the costs until they reach 150%
or 200% every month and then people will stop paying. We raise public transport
fares several times and people will stop using public transport. We might
as well stop eating and, in the words of Zhvanetsky (a popular Odesa humorist
- Ed.), ease the strain on the ground.

"This is faulty logic. Parliament imposed a moratorium, a temporary
ban, on increasing housing and utility fees until all arrears on wages,
pensions, and other social payments are redeemed. Parliament is not interfering
in the Cabinet's domain. Parliament is trying to make the executive fulfill
its direct constitutionally defined obligations. After all, no one is applying
to the Constitutional Court to hear the President for ignoring the requirements
set forth in Article 48 of the Constitution, saying that every citizen
has the right to sufficient livelihood for himself and his family, including
adequate food, clothes, and housing. Although maybe somebody should."

Compiled by Tetiana SHULHACH, The Day

 

 

 

 

 

Rubric: