“...You Switch It On, But It Won’t Work!”

Last week in the parliament followed an old and all too familiar scenario, with the representatives of four opposition factions, Our Ukraine, Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc, SPU, and CPU, blocking access to the rostrum and presidium. This time around, the opposition insisted on listening to the reports by chiefs of the uniformed services and the Minister of Education along with creating an ad hoc commission to look into the October 31 events in Donetsk that disrupted the congress of Our Ukraine. These proposals were put to the vote, but they found no support from the majority of people’s deputies. However, as has often been the case, the opposition deputies did not back down from their demands. At the insistence of Our Ukraine and Yuliya Tymoshenko Bloc, Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn announced a break that lasted over an hour and a half, during which time the deputies failed to find a middle ground. After the break, Speaker Lytvyn announced that faction leaders agreed to instruct the Committee on Legal Provision of Law Enforcement Activities and the Committee on Combating Organized Crime and Corruption to gather all information on the events in Donetsk. Mr. Lytvyn also suggested that the deputies defer the examination of this information until 6:30 p.m. that day and determine when and in what form the Minister of Internal Affairs, SBU chief, and Education Minister should present their reports. However, the opposition deputies rejected this proposal and resumed their blockade of the rostrum. After this Speaker Lytvyn closed the sitting, saying it was impossible to continue work.

Thus the opposition forces have added to their record yet another decisive operation aimed at obstructing a plenary session. Incidentally, they disrupted not a regular session, but a voting sone, which are now held on Tuesdays and Thursdays under the amendments to the rules. It will be recalled that the Tuesday before last the deputies, among other things, had to vote on the bill on the specifics of the procedure of consideration of bills on amendments to the Constitution.

Thus, yet again we are witnessing a split in parliament between the majority and opposition, which threatens to paralyze the legislative process in general and the budgetary process in particular. According to parliamentary majority coordinator Stepan Havrysh, now faction leaders must sign an internal agreement that would enable them to continue work in parliament. “The session hall is gradually turning into a political platform for those vying for the presidential seat,” he stressed. As he put it, political election technologies are embraced as a method of work in the session hall especially by those forces that have already started their election campaign. “We can’t expect that this situation will be taken off agenda,” he said, adding that it is not ruled out that the demands by opposition factions will become more frequent. Havrysh called the disruption of the parliamentary session a challenge and opined that it will be more and more difficult to reach a compromise with each passing day. In turn, Our Ukraine leader Viktor Yushchenko stated that work in the parliament is obstructed by the power, “which aims to replace the Verkhovna Rada leadership.” According to Mr. Yushchenko, the opposition “wants to show that the improprieties that are happening today are leading the country to a bitter end.” A public discussion of these issues can prevent similar things from happening in the future, the Our Ukraine leader is convinced. Opposition representatives also stated that the power is blocking the release of information on what really happened in Donetsk. Referring to the majority’s reluctance to vote and allow the chiefs of the uniformed services to report on the events in Donetsk, the opposition forces called it “a provocation carried into Verkhovna Rada.”

That the Donetsk scandal has been carried into the parliament along with the difficult cadre decisions that will be put to the vote in could destabilize the situation in Verkhovna Rada for a long time. Thus, a quick and judicious settlement of this conflict is in the interest of both the opposition and power.

The three days of parliamentary blockade threw Verkhovna Rada — both literally and figuratively — almost three years back to the times of the notorious velvet revolution. Literally, because parliamentary majority coordinator Stepan Havrysh said the majority was ready to employ a time-tested method, that is, to relocate to and continue working at the Ukrainian House. Incidentally, VR Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn categorically rejected this. Figuratively, because this may upset a very fragile balance that has existed since the majority and the Cabinet signed a political agreement on cooperation and mutual responsibility. Actually, nobody cherished any illusions about the strength of alliances struck by means of such gentleman’s agreements. All this shows again that neither the political system nor the political culture of this country has any levers that guarantee a trouble-free operation of the parliament.

Such things as the dismissal of Sviatoslav Piskun, proposal of the President to appoint the current First Vice-Speaker Hennady Vasyliev as Prosecutor-General, the obstruction of Our Ukraine’s congress in Donetsk, a Constitutional Court ruling on a political reform bill and the same court’s promise to pass a judgment soon on two more draft laws, gathered last week into a tight knot which the parliament was unable to undo. Experts believe that the appointment of Mr. Vasyliev as Prosecutor-General could trigger a series of other top-level office shake-ups, including the dismissal of the prime minister, for the replacement of one element in the agreement between the parliamentary majority and the “coalition government” may cause the whole system to go bust.

As to the political reform, it is, by all accounts, the crucial element in the parliament’s ability to survive. What is more, people’s deputies must make a far from simple choice: “either to carry out the constitutional reform and relieve the tension caused by a tussle for the president’s chair, or to continue vying for yesterday’s power,” Mr. Havrysh said last Friday. This makes dissolution of parliament, one of the scenarios being considered by experts today, a not so improbable development.

Meanwhile, as the opposition was working up an appetite and the majority was thwarting the attempts “to break its neck” (as SDPU (O) faction leader Leonid Kravchuk put it), the impression was that it is now in the interests of both sides to maintain the status quo rather than assess what will follow the disentanglement. Last Friday the Speaker ordered setting up an inter-committee task force to thoroughly look into the “Donetsk scandal.” Parliament seems to have set itself into motion. For how long? As the elections are looming, there are bound to be more incidents like the Donetsk scandal.