Kharkiv Said Yes to Bilingualism

According to Interfax Ukraine, in a non-binding poll among Kharkiv residents 81.56% of 533,000 persons voted for using the Russian language in city’s territory along with the state Ukrainian one. These figures were made public last Monday at a meeting of Kharkiv Electoral Committee to Elect the City Mayor. The desires of city residents were researched by polling on March 31 during the nationwide elections. They were to answer the question: Do you believe that the Russian language should be used in all spheres of Kharkiv city life along with the state one? Kharkiv City Council intends to turn to Verkhovna Rada with a declaration based on the results.

As reported earlier in December 1996, the Kharkiv City Council made a decision to use the Russian language in documents circulation inside the institutions of local government alongside Ukrainian. The decision was appealed by prosecutor’s office. However, the City Council refused to comply with the protest. Later legal organs considered the lawfulness of Kharkiv deputies’ decision. In February 2001 the Supreme Court of Ukraine ruled that the City Council exceeded its authority by making such a decision on bilingualism. However, at its next session the City Council once again refused to execute the court’s decision. In April 2001 Kharkiv City Council deputies turned back to this issue in connection with a declaration from Kharkiv oblast prosecutor. However, the session decided not to cancel its previous decision but conduct a non-binding poll on the official use of the Russian language. Simultaneously, Kharkiv deputies turned to the president of Ukraine and Verkhovna Rada requesting them to “secure immediate ratification” of the European Charter on Regional Languages, which would de facto legalize the initial city council decision.

COMMENTARY

Oleksandr LAVRYNOVYCH, State Secretary of the Ministry of Justice:

What if 80% Kharkiv residents said they wanted to live in Great Britain? What effect or significance would it make for Ukraine? Here we should distinguish two sides: the legal one and political pie-in-the-sky aimed at achieving personal goals by some figures using certain sentiments of Kharkiv residents. From the legal standpoint there are no consequences here; this referendum doesn’t affect anything. But there is another, political side of the matter which is emphasized. It is understandable that it was done to gain additional popularity from people who do not recognize their native language and use another. This delicate subject requires a more balanced approach, not attempts to solve it by means of a referendum or other administrative methods. I don’t suppose anybody in Kharkiv experiences problems with using his native language, mainly Russian. But the fact that one lives in the state of Ukraine puts certain obligations on him/her in case he/she applies for a job in governing bodies or other spheres where using the state language is compulsory. Even if there are several official languages, which has been repeatedly discussed in Ukraine, this doesn’t mean that you can choose one of them; you are supposed to know all. Bilingualism means mandatory command of two languages for all officials. Many forget about this. A citizen can speak any language or none; this is his right, which reflects only on his own future, way of life, and career. No law or standard act envisages compulsion in the language sphere. As regards those wishing to hold a post in management, this is a compulsory condition common for all countries. Ukraine will never be an exception.

What is going on today is just more speculation that, in my view, should be estimated both legally (in terms of the meaning of such actions) and politically (regarding those initiating such referenda). Ukraine secures the development of all languages of minority groups and gives an opportunity for free development of the Russian language, thus such actions are aimed at political destabilization. If the Charter on Regional Languages is ratified, city councils can revert to this issue. However, none of the European countries has ratified this charter in toto. If Ukraine does so, it will undertake great obligations, primarily financially: there will be dozens of cities where they will have to conduct all record keeping, education, and signatures in five languages, others where there will be two, three, or four ones. The Charter specifies the proportion of the population requiring using some language in public communication. Most states ratified the Charter only in part with strong reservations, European Union countries included.