Playing games with society against the background of war

The law on lustration will be presented to the Venice Commission by none other than Serhii Kivalov. Several journalists broke the news last week. “I do not know if Kivalov will present this law,” said Maryna Stavniichuk, former Venice Commission member and adviser to the President of Ukraine, in her comment to The Day. “But I do know that a representative of a country who is a member of the Venice Commission, in this case a representative of Ukraine, never presents any draft laws. He can only voice his opinion, comments, or explanations.”

However, in this case the main question is, how come Kivalov is still representing Ukraine in the Venice Commission? Although, according to the procedure, this position is filled for four years (Kivalov was appointed in 2013), there is a possibility of early termination of powers. But for some reason the president, who has jurisdiction over such matters, would not use the opportunity to remove an odious politician from such a respectable body.

“Certainly, it is abnormal, and I agree with those who are critical about Kivalov’s participation in the Venice Commission,” said political scientist Volodymyr Fesenko in his comment to The Day. “But when it comes to concrete individuals representing the country in international institutes, it is the procedure that has priority, and not revolutionary methods.”

The text of the law on the lustration of the government was submitted to the Venice Commission by the PACE Monitoring Committee. “There is indeed an intention to postpone lustration,” wrote media expert Viktoria Siumar in a social network. “This time, with help of the PACE Monitoring Committee. Here’s how: Yulia Liovochkina, sister of Serhii Liovochkin, is a member of the Monitoring Committee from Ukraine. She has a ‘special contact’ with the socialist head of the Committee, which the Party of Regions ‘was establishing via a special cooperation agreement,’ in order to lobby its interests in Europe… I hope that Bankova Street will not play at the games of Liovochkin, Tihipko, and their ilk, and will realize that otherwise people will hold their own lustration, street-wise.”

Indeed, games with society against the background of war can have a very sad outcome. Especially when new problems overlap the old, unsolved ones. The battery of Nestor Shufrych in Odesa offers yet another occasion to ponder on several things. Firstly, how correct and efficient is the popular method of lustration, with the help of a garbage can? Secondly, is our legal system capable of  solving similar cases on legal grounds? Thirdly, how adequately do politicians assess the situation, especially after the last year’s events?

Pondering over Shufrych’s bumps and bruises, at the background of daily murders and harassment in Donbas, looks flawed at its mildest, from the viewpoint of the victims from the region. But society’s anger is nothing but a natural response to the absence of reforms in the country, to what has happened to Crimea and Donbas, to the window-dressing which left the old system intact.

So, are the people right? “Generally speaking, it is the system that should be dumped in the garbage can instead of individual politicians, for it will not change the core of the system,” said renowned Ukrainian sociologist Yevhen Holovakha. “Otherwise there arises a threat of ochlocracy. It is impossible to solve all the problems by means of such actions. We must not live by medieval standards. Yes, we indeed used to have a similar ancient tradition, but you cannot resort to it in the 21st century. That is why the government’s reform program should not be limited just to the economic transformations package. These transformations should concern policy as well: extension of representative democracy and finding the means to overcome ochlocratic tendencies as   unpromising tools in political struggle, which could bring Ukraine to ruin.”

The core of the system has not changed so far, indeed. Even the post-Maidan bureaucrats are beginning to sense it. The former acting prosecutor general and current advisor to the President of Ukraine Oleh Makhnitsky was cake bombed by unidentified persons at his own press conference. As a reminder, the public opinion accuses Makhnitsky, member of Svoboda party, of financial misappropriation in office.

Back to Shufrych. There is another important aspect to this situation. “Behind all domestic discussions about humaneness and responsibility, caused by the events in Odessa, the party of Shufrych is spreading professionally written English-speaking statements concerning the lawlessness of the junta. Not for us, and even not for Putin,” writes Serhii Koshman on his Facebook page. “Obviously, the task is broader: to discredit everything happening in Ukraine in the eyes of the global community. And this is a no-holds-barred policy. On the one hand, this is washing dirty linen in public, and on the other, another round of the global civilizational information war. So next time, before punching someone in the nose, one has to think once again about the consequences in the English-speaking information field.”

Popular anger, which has natural causes, is exploited by everyone who finds it convenient under certain circumstances: the assaulters, the victims, and the third parties, Russia in particular. Meanwhile, only one thing has to be used in a situation like this: the law. “Law always gravitates towards justice,” commented Oleh BEREZIUK, chairman of the Ukrainian Legal Society NGO. “When the law-enforcement bodies and the judicial system will not work, people start taking the law into their own hands. We urgently need to reform the security and courts. When they start working, when people see that criminals get punished, no one will even dream of mob law. Sadly, we have seen no transformations in the law-enforcement and judicial systems. All the participants of the Revolution of Dignity had hoped that the change of government will bring new people with it, who will implement reforms for the good of society, but so far we have seen nothing of the kind. Hence the mob law.”

Now, what arguments has the government for the discontented, especially those who dump bureaucrats in garbage cans? Somehow Kuchma has become a peacemaker who signs dubious deals in Minsk, perpetuating the chaos and violence in Donbas. On top of this, Kivalov holds an official post. Aren’t these and many other things enough to ignite the wrath in society?

“All these games, politicians’ positive attitudes, as well as the inactivity of law-enforcement bodies, ultimately add to the chaos and anarchy which tend to undermine the situation during the election campaign,” emphasizes Fesenko. “Unless it is stopped, it can have a very bad outcome. Certainly, some politicians feel threatened by this, but this process must be gradually neutralized and brought under control.”