Consumer Testing of the Future Constitution

Virtually nobody knows the formula for laundry detergent. Still, our lack of this knowledge does not prevent us from conducting our own customer testing of the product. The nationwide discussion of the constitutional reform is nothing but a chance to conduct a public expert examination of the draft reform for the system of our nation’s governance. Not being experts in the constitutional law does not prevent us from being citizens. This is why consumer testing of the future constitution would do no harm. It would actually help, in part, by defining what really are the major goals of the political groups authorized to make legal changes in Ukraine’s political system.

The discussion has just begun, but one can already state that politicians are displaying various attitudes toward the reform. Their first comments are evidence that our political sphere is continuing to function in the mode of opposition and struggle of the interests of various financial-industrial and regional groups.

In fact, this is not bad, only natural, because the economic and political environment has changed. Unfortunately, our society has not yet become structured in terms of social and political interests, and the lack of such structure leads to abnormal symptoms of stagnation in all spheres of social life. There are many reasons for this, and one of them is that reforming the economy and politics is going by and for itself, separate from the lives of ordinary people. Neither we nor our interests influence the course of political battles even to protect our minimal social needs. Rather, they are used by competitors in political games as an argument to pressure each other.

The existing structure of legislative power in Ukraine results quite naturally in certain branches of industry and financial-industrial groups becoming the main participants in political conflicts. In such wars ordinary people play the role of some electoral meat thrown in at protest meetings and pickets. Considering the way of forming the deputies’ corpus, the generals of the majority often join the ranks of the combatant, taking advantage of their powers to benefit one region or another. The budget scandal has to some extent lifted the veil from the so-called “civilized family of deputies,” as Verkhovna Rada Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn said, and shown the most unsavory forms of implementing regional interests.

To put it simply, the deputies we elect in majority districts also try to do something for the regions. But their effectiveness is in direct proportion to their posts and powers, casting some doubt on the scrupulosity of their methods. Let’s not speak about fair distribution of the budget pie. We cannot have 27 heads of budget committees simultaneously.

The struggle of interests of various financial-industrial groups leads not only to positive changes in the economy but also rather negative transformations in the regions’ social sphere. While society is becoming differentiated into rich and poor, the regions are acquiring the status of either promising or dying. The regionalization of politics thus becomes something abnormal. Poor regions gradually lose the chance to be fully represented in Ukraine’s legislative branch.

Such processes cannot go on forever. The next stage in the disappointed regions might be uncontrolled, spontaneous, and protest forms of federalization. The question of is it good or bad to have a federation has long been discussed. But while our politicians cannot work out a consensus, let us look at our northern neighbor.

The Russian Federation has paid dearly for its regions’ legislative autonomy. The Chechnya War is perhaps one of the heaviest lessons in Russia’s modern history. Many conclusions can be drawn from it, but only one of them is beyond any doubt: the level of the regions’ freedom should always correspond to the level of their responsibility for the quality of people’s life and form the common interests in the country’s development. In the reform suggested by the president a mechanism for establishing such a common identity is implemented by means of a bicameral parliament in which every region will have equal power.

What will be the mechanism for protecting the territorial integrity and preserving the nation’s unity is far from an idle question. Creating this mechanism is intended to make it possible to create opportunities for the comprehensive and full-fledged functioning of the institutions of local self-government and to bring about equal conditions for the development of all Ukraine’s regions. So far, the situation looks depressing. I read two information releases. One of them presents the regions’ territorial representation in Verkhovna Rada, the other — data on investment in regional development programs. The picture they form appears quite interesting. For instance, Kirovohrad oblast has two deputies and occupies lower positions in terms of investment attractiveness, while Kyiv oblast is excessively rich in its representatives and heads the list of the volume of investment.

This is no mere coincidence. From the perspective of solving this problem, the main thing about discussing the presidential draft for constitutional reform is not whether we need a bicameral parliament but the principles and rules according to which it should be formed, and effort should be made to avoid such disproportion. The task is set out quite clearly in the draft: a transition from war between regions to equal opportunities.

It is often said that the constitution reform is needed only by those who are going to take part in it. Is this really so? Probably not. Even the most preliminary consumer testing demonstrates that we, ordinary people who are unable to make contact with the politicians, are the ones who need it most. The reason is quite simple: politicians can meet the needs of industry and regional financial-industrial groups, making the whole social sphere of the regions take a back seat. Today the Constitution fails to provide any opportunities to change the situation to the benefit of the society. Thus, the time has come for the society to change the Constitution itself.