How politicians react to political failures

Natalia Korolevska’s legal action against sociologists has no precedents. The leader of “Forward, Ukraine” party did not like the data presented by the nationwide survey of public opinion, conducted by the Democratic Initiatives Foundation, jointly with the Kyiv International Sociology Institute. According to the data that was published on October 8, Korolevska’s party is supported by 2.1 percent of voters and does not clear the electoral threshold. Korolevska thinks that the data do not reflect the actual state of affairs, that is why, in her lawsuit, she appeals for the court to protect her “business reputation” and obligate sociological companies to “refute the inadequate information.” Moreover, the party has submitted an appeal to prohibit the Democratic Initiatives Foundation from publishing any data regarding “Forward, Ukraine.”

The time frame of Korolevska’s claim examination is shocking too. The appeal was submitted on October 11, and on October 12, the Kyiv City Commercial Court resolved to start the proceedings in the case. On October 16, head of the Democratic Initiatives Foundation Iryna Bekeshkina wrote on her Facebook page that they had “just received summons to court from Korolevska, which is going to take place on October 25, 2012.” Thus, the time of the trial is already known. “It is remarkable how swiftly Korolevska’s appeal was considered: it was submitted on the 11th, and on the 12th the court resolved to open the case and informed us about it. Is this swiftness typical of the Commercial Court? I don’t have a slightest idea. Oh well, I guess we will just have to prove that we are what we are worth,” Bekeshkina emphasized.

The response from the sociological community was immediate. The statement of the Sociological Association of Ukraine, which was published after Korolevska started the lawsuit, reads: “Court trials against science and scientists are not that widely spread, but some cases have been registered throughout the course of history. Let us remind of the holy inquisition’s trial of Giordano Bruno, legal action against Charles Darwin’s evolution theory, Soviet trials of biologists, historians, and ethnographers. The Ukrainian academic community was shocked to find out that this sad tradition is continued, and that some are trying to assess scientific research through the Code of Civil Procedure.”

However, the statement also read that “Ukrainian reality is constantly infected by pseudosociologists’ impudent attempts to manipulate the voters’ consciousness,” but “genuine sociology bears no responsibility for any ‘activity’ of such centers.” “We extend full support to our colleagues and insist on the impermissibility of any attempts at curbing the freedom of academic opinion,” the Association summed up.

The renowned Ukrainian sociologist Yevhen HOLOVAKHA says this Korolevska’s lawsuit is just another case of pressurizing the active part of society.

How can you comment on the situation? What does it mean?

“More and more Ukrainian politicians are trying to blame their professional failures and problems on parties that have nothing to do with them. Can you imagine what would happen if each politician appealed to court after learning about their ratings? This is a ridiculous situation, especially considering the fact that it took the Court only one day to review the lawsuit. To me this looks like the continuation of pressurizing public institutes. No sooner had the scandal around the law on slander subsided than we had this. Public institutes that can demonstrate the state of society are under attack.

“In a case when we conduct public surveys, sociology is a mirror, in which politicians see their own reflections. If they do not want to see them, the society will be blind. I have always said that the mass media and sociology are basically the same. We both reflect public opinion and reveal the general picture of social life, though we use different methods for that. That is why we are being pressurized, these forces just want to blindfold the society. And there is nothing more to it. If they passed the law on slander, your paper would also be sued.”

What does Korolevska’s party count on?

“Let these political forces sort out their relations with whoever they want. I am not interested in their backstage activity. I only know one thing: if a politician sues purely professional organizations, it won’t end well. I repeat again, this is an attack on institutes that help the society see. These attacks can be conducted in various ways, like, for example, it happened in the case of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and historian Zabily, or the time when the whole academic board was summoned to the SBU, or through a lawsuit, the way it is happening now.

“It is known that there are a lot of false opinion poll centers that produce convenient poll results for certain politicians, Korolevska in particular (I refer to the materials published by Ukrainska Pravda). These centers have nothing to do with professional sociological organizations, they provide pre-arranged ratings. Despite these fake centers, sociological services that were sued by Korolevska employ experts with worldwide renown. By the way, somehow, nobody sues pseudosociological centers. This is the evidence of the fact that only the most professional sociologists are persecuted.

“Society has to watch this case closely, because if Korolevska gets what she wants, this will make it possible for anyone to start similar lawsuits. In this case, any politician will be able to say that the 3 percent of voter’s support, presented by the statistics, is mere slander, while the real number is 5 percent. It should also be mentioned that the party which sued sociological institution harms its own cause, because this is going to have a reverse effect on the public opinion.”