zurück 
16.9.2015

Dokumentation: Dezentralisierung: Politischer Konflikt und gewaltsame Proteste

Die Ukraine-Analysen fassen in dieser Dokumentation einige Reaktionen auf die gewaltsamen Proteste anlässlich der Dezentralisierung zusammen.

Der ukrainische Staatspräsident Petro Poroschenko am 16. September 2015 (© picture-alliance/AP)


Bei Protesten gegen die Verfassungsänderung zur Dezentralisierung des ukrainischen Staates am 31. August 2015 griffen etwa 50 Bewaffnete aus einer Gruppe von 3.000 Demonstranten vor dem Parlament in der Hauptstadt Kiew Polizisten und Sicherheitskräfte an. Die Polizei ging mit Tränengas und Rauchbomben gegen die Demonstranten vor. Aus der Gruppe der Demonstranten wurde eine Handgranate auf die Sicherheitskräfte geworfen. Etwa 120 Polizisten wurden verletzt, drei erlagen ihren Verletzungen. (Die Beobachtermission der OSZE, die bei den Protesten direkt vor Ort war, hat am Abend des 31.8. einen Kurzbericht zu den Ereignissen verfasst, siehe http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/179251.)

Die gewaltsame Eskalation wurde in der Medienberichterstattung vor allem als Ausdruck der gesellschaftlichen Explosivkraft der geplanten Verfassungsänderung zur Dezentralisierung betrachtet. Die Ereignisse zeigen aber auch die Zerrissenheit der Regierungskoalition und die gestiegene Gewaltbereitschaft des rechtsextremen politischen Spektrums.

Die Dezentralisierung ist in Punkt 11 des Minsker Friedensabkommens vom Februar 2015 geregelt. Dort heißt es: "Carrying out constitutional reform in Ukraine with a new constitution entering into force by the end of 2015 providing for decentralization as a key element (including a reference to the specificities of certain areas in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, agreed with the representatives of these areas)” (siehe z. B. die Dokumentation des Abkommens in den Ukraine-Analysen Nr. 146 http://www.laender-analysen.de/ukraine/pdf/Ukraine Analysen146.pdf).

Anfang März setzte der ukrainische Präsident Petro Poroschenko eine Verfassungskommission ein, die sowohl ukrainische Politiker als auch internationale Experten umfasste. Eine der drei Arbeitsgruppen der Kommission war für die Dezentralisierung zuständig. Der Entwurf der Kommission zur Frage der Dezentralisierung wurde im Juni der Venedig-Kommission des Europarates zur Begutachtung vorgelegt. Die Venedig-Kommission begrüßte den Entwurf im Allgemeinen und machte nur zwei Verbesserungsvorschläge. (Das Originalgutachten ist online abrufbar unter http://venice.coe.int/files/CDL-PI%282015%29008-e.pdf.) Der überarbeitete Gesetzesentwurf zur Verfassungsänderung bezüglich der Dezentralisierung wurde im Juli vom ukrainischen Parlament zur Begutachtung an das Verfassungsgericht weitergeleitet, welches die Vereinbarkeit des Entwurfes mit der ukrainischen Verfassung feststellte. (Eine englische Übersetzung des vollständigen Gesetzesentwurfs findet sich unter http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-REF(2015)022-e.)

Der Gesetzesentwurf zur Dezentralisierung ging im August 2015 zur ersten Lesung in das ukrainische Parlament, wo es am 31. August zur Abstimmung kam. Dabei stimmten 265 Abgeordnete für den Entwurf, darunter die anwesenden Abgeordneten des Oppositionsblockes, der de facto als Nachfolger der Partei der Regionen des ehemaligen Präsidenten Viktor Janukowitsch fungiert. Aus der Regierungskoalition lehnten hingegen 71 Abgeordnete den Entwurf ab. Die Fraktionen der Radikalen Partei und der Partei Vaterland stimmten geschlossen mit Nein. Einen vollständigen Überblick über das Abstimmungsverhalten gibt die am Textende folgende Tabelle.

Da es sich um eine Verfassungsänderung handelt, muss in der zweiten Lesung eine Zweidrittelmehrheit der vorgesehenen (nicht der tatsächlich besetzten) Parlamentsmandate erreicht werden, was 300 Stimmen entspricht. Nach der knappen Abstimmung Ende August wurde die zweite Lesung auf Dezember verschoben.

Bei dem Gesetz geht es um die Dezentralisierung staatlicher Entscheidungsfindungen, d. h. die Übergabe von Entscheidungskompetenzen an die regionale und lokale Ebene, jedoch nicht um eine Föderalisierung, die Vertretern der Regionen auf der nationalen Ebene ein Mitspracherecht bei politischen Entscheidungen geben würde, etwa wie dies in Deutschland die Bundesländer über den Bundesrat besitzen. In der ukrainischen Öffentlichkeit wird die Dezentralisierung vor allem im Hinblick auf den bewaffneten Konflikt in der Ostukraine diskutiert und entweder als pragmatische Lösung oder als Ausverkauf an die Separatisten und Russland bezeichnet. Ersteres ist fraglich, da der Entwurf nicht alle Vorgaben der Minsker Vereinbarung erfüllt und die Vertreter der Separatisten am Entwurf nicht beteiligt waren. Letzteres ist zweifelhaft, da keine Autonomie für den Donbass vorgesehen ist. Vor allem wird aber in der Debatte wenig beachtet, dass die Separatisten offensichtlich nicht bereit sind, sich den Regeln der ukrainischen Verfassung – in welcher Form auch immer – unterzuordnen, da sie freie und demokratische Wahlen, die ihre politische Macht gefährden könnten, ablehnen. Ebenfalls wenig diskutiert werden die Folgen der Dezentralisierung für die politische Reformfähigkeit der Ukraine.

Ein weiterer inhaltlicher Punkt, der spaltet, ist die Frage der Präfekten. Die Präfekten sollen anstelle der heutigen Gouverneure auftreten und die Einhaltung der Verfassung und der Gesetze der Ukraine durch lokale Behörden überwachen. Sie werden in der Lage sein, Rechtsakte der Selbstverwaltungsorgane im Falle ihrer Verfassungswidrigkeit auszusetzen und Gerichtverfahren einzuleiten. Da die Präfekten vom Präsidenten auf Vorschlag der Regierung ernannt und entlassen werden, befürchten Reformkritiker durch sie eine "Usurpation der Macht durch den Präsidenten" und somit eine neue Welle des Autoritarismus. Im Gegensatz dazu argumentiert der Block Petro Poroschenko, dass die Dezentralisierung ohne Präfekten gleichbedeutend mit Separatismus sei. Darüber hinaus werden die Vorsitzenden der lokalen Selbstverwaltungsorgane nicht direkt vom Präsidenten, sondern erst nach der Entscheidung des Verfassungsgerichts vom Parlament und auf Vorschlag des Präsidenten entlassen, so der Block.

In den Augen der Reformgegner besitzt die Verfassungsänderung insgesamt nur wenig Legitimität. Sie werfen der Regierung und dem Präsidenten vor, dass die Verfassungsreform von außen aufgezwungen und in der Öffentlichkeit sehr wenig diskutiert werde. So fordert die Partei Ljaschko nach der Abstimmung in erster Lesung jetzt ein landesweites Referendum über den Status des Donbass. Dabei wird außer Acht gelassen, dass der Gesetzentwurf von mehreren beteiligten Seiten erarbeitet wurde und mehrere Stufen durchlaufen hat.

Das Abstimmungsergebnis zusammen mit der scharfen Rhetorik zeigt, wie zerrissen die Regierungskoalition bezüglich dieser zentralen Frage ist. Julia Timoschenko verurteilte den Gesetzentwurf in der Parlamentsdebatte als Landesverrat, der mit der russischen Führung abgestimmt worden sei. Die Fraktion der Partei Selbsthilfe beschloss, fünf Abgeordnete, die für den Entwurf gestimmt hatten, aus der Fraktion auszuschließen. Die Radikale Partei von Ljaschko war Mitorganisator der Proteste vor dem Parlament und erklärte nach der Abstimmung ihren Austritt aus der Regierungskoalition. Als einen der Gründe dafür nannte Ljaschko die Zustimmung des Oppositionsblocks zur Verfassungsänderung gemeinsam mit den Koalitionspartnern, was praktisch einer neuen Koalition im Parlament entspreche. Ebenso hat die Partei Selbsthilfe die Einbeziehung der Stimmen von ehemaligen Abgeordneten der Partei der Regionen scharf verurteilt. Die Regierungskoalition ist seitdem unter Einbeziehung von Präsident Poroschenko mit Krisengesprächen beschäftigt. Die Strategie der Koalitionsparteien dürfte dabei auch vom Ergebnis der Kommunalwahlen im Oktober abhängen.

Die gewaltsamen Ausschreitungen vor dem Parlament zeigen gleichzeitig, dass rechtsextreme Kräfte in der Ukraine zunehmend bereit sind, Gewalt gegen politische Gegner und die Polizei einzusetzen und u. a. aufgrund der Verfügbarkeit von Waffen aus den Kämpfen in der Ostukraine auch zunehmend bewaffnet sind. Im Sommer war es so bereits zu tagelangen Kämpfen zwischen Polizei und Vertretern des Rechten Sektors in der Region Transkarpatien gekommen. Im September wurde dem Rechten Sektor in Odessa die Entführung des Mitarbeiters eines Parlamentsabgeordneten und Angriffe auf Polizeibeamte vorgeworfen. Für die Gewalt vor dem ukrainischen Parlament wurden vor allem Angehörige der Partei Swoboda verantwortlich gemacht, die genau wie der Rechte Sektor bei den Wahlen im Vorjahr den Einzug ins Parlament nicht geschafft hatte. Die Staatsanwaltschaft beantragte die Verhaftung von insgesamt 18 Teilnehmern der Demonstration wegen Gewaltanwendung. Des Handgranateneinsatzes wird Igor Gumenjuk beschuldigt, der laut Aussage des ukrainischen Innenministers bei Swoboda aktiv war und bei einem Freiwilligenbataillon in der Ostukraine gekämpft hat.

Wir dokumentieren nach der Tabelle zum Abstimmungsergebnis die Stellungnahmen wichtiger politischer Akteure zur Dezentralisierungsdebatte und der Eskalation der Gewalt, und zwar von (1) Präsident Poroschenko, (2) Ministerpräsident Jazenjuk, (3) der Fraktionsvorsitzenden der Partei Vaterland, Julia Timoschenko, (4) der Partei Selbsthilfe und (5) der Partei Swoboda. Die hier wiedergegebenen englischen Fassungen stammen von den jeweiligen Akteuren und wurden (auch im Hinblick auf offensichtliche Sprachfehler) nicht redaktionell bearbeitet. Sie spiegeln den aktuellen Stand am Tage der Abstimmung wider.

Die Redaktion der Ukraine-Analysen


Quelle: Werchowna Rada der Ukraine, http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/radan_gs09/ns_golos?g_id=3462




(1) Präsident Petro Poroschenko: President’s Address to the Nation on the Constitutional Amendments Vote at the Parliament of Ukraine (31.08.2015)

My fellow Ukrainians!

Today the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine has approved constitutional amendments on decentralization in the first reading. This has finally happened after more than year-long discussions.

I am consciously undertaking steps to share my powers in favor of local communities and reinforce them with redistribution of financial resources. So that more money and more power for local communities corresponded with more responsibility and influence of local communities and citizens.

Decentralization fundamentally changes the political system of Ukraine. It paves a way to the European model of self-governance, and it is also part of my peace plan. Today’s vote has been uneasy but a sound step toward peace.

Understandably, some people in Moscow are quite anxious because they did not get what they want. The Internet and newspapers are full of headlines such as "The Kremlin did not like constitutional amendments”, "Russia’s Foreign Ministry criticizes Ukraine’s constitutional reform” and "Russia-backed militants are angry that Kyiv did not consult with them on constitutional changes.”

Just recall what circumstances we were under one year ago. They wanted not only federalization, but a confederation where a dozen of Ukrainian regions would be connected to Russia more closely than to the rest of Ukrainian neighbors. Then they dreamt about their proxies taking key decisions in foreign policy, vetoing Ukraine’s integration in the European Union and NATO. But a meager line about the peculiarities of local self-governance is the only thing they got. Does anyone think that it was easy to achieve? We should glorify Ukrainian soldiers and thank Ukrainian diplomats for this.

What would happen if the Verkhovna Rada did not vote for constitutional amendments? The fate of a pro-Ukrainian international coalition would be significantly undermined. Potential extension of economic sanctions that hurt the aggressor would not be on the table. The grim picture of having Ukraine struggling against the aggressor alone would become a real threat.

My fellow countrymen!

It is very sad that some members of the parliamentary coalition attacked the President and the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of their own country instead of directing their burgeoning energy to counter the external enemy. They have also launched a campaign against our closest allies—the United States, Germany, France and the European Union.

I do not claim they are agents of Moscow. Some decided not to take a responsible stand, but instead took a pose that is cynical and dangerous for the country. Some acted not as statesmen, but egotistic politicians that do not see ahead of the local elections on October 25.

How can you call events that unfolded near the Verkhovna Rada other than a stab in the back?! It was an anti-Ukrainian action for which all organizers, all representatives of political forces without any exception must carry full responsibility. I will personally control the fulfillment of this, as I had a meeting with all heads of law enforcement and gave clear orders of conducting a transparent investigation and bringing both the organizers and perpetrators to justice. They have attempted to storm the Parliament. They have thrown a grenade. They have targeted a serviceman of the National Guard in his heart and killed him! They have wounded around 120 servicemen and police officers –many of whom took part in the Anti-Terrorist Operation, some of them are decorated with state awards.

Thanks to the diplomatic efforts last week, including my direct involvement during the visit to Brussels, it has been three days in a row when not a single shot from the heavy artillery was fired on the frontline. It has been three days when not a single Ukrainian soldier was killed in action. On the other hand, someone kills defenders of the homeland here in Kyiv for the sake of advertising their party banners and several seats in a district council.

Whose plans did the so-called patriots fulfill today? The answer is obvious.

My fellow countrymen!

Today’s vote on constitutional issues of national importance has naturally united non-affiliated MPs but—and I am saying this with all responsibility—constitutional changes have to unite the parliament; it does not mean changes in the parliamentary coalition. Do not trust the speculators on this subject. Despite events in the Parliament today, the current coalition will continue to function, because it is crucial for the national interests of Ukraine! Other options are not considered at all. This is my solid position.

Today, Ukraine confirmed its reputation as a reliable partner and strengthened the image of the country that fulfills Minsk agreements in contrast to Russia. If Moscow does not reconsider its position, individual sanctions against those involved in the annexation of Crimea and the occupation of areas in Donetsk and Luhansk regions will be extended this fall. Similarly, sector sanctions will be extended in early January of the next year.

Today’s vote is not final, but it will provide a huge room for maneuver for the Ukrainian diplomacy. The final decision by the end of 2015 will need 300 votes. My fellow countrymen, I assure you this will depend on the developments in eastern Ukraine and whether Russia adheres to the Minsk agreements in the next months.

The draft constitutional amendments do not foresee special status for particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions. This, in my view, is just a cliché that certain political parties employed as election strategy, an element of the dishonest information campaign against the Constitution and against the president.

Moreover, we are crossing out a clause that allows an illusory opportunity for special status in Article 92 of the Constitution of Ukraine. This was done in order to eliminate any kind of legalistic ways to prevent the emergence of numerous fiefdoms.

Speaking on the peculiarities of local self-governance in certain districts in Donetsk and Luhansk regions, it is defined by a particular law. This law has been approved twice by the previous and the current Parliament. Its timeframe—three years, and one year passed already. Most articles of this law are suspended. They can be enforced only after the fair elections on these territories according to the Ukrainian law and the OSCE standards. And only after the withdrawal of Russian troops and weapons from the territory of Ukraine, as well as the restoration of control over the entire Ukraine–Russia border. Is anyone against this?

Therefore, these constitutional amendments mean not the loss of territories but the opposite. They provide us with a chance and opportunity to settle and return Ukraine’s sovereignty over the de facto occupied territories via political and diplomatic means.

We will definitely win through a combination of strengthening our defense capacities and political and diplomatic efforts.

Glory to Ukraine!

Quelle: the Presidential Administration of Ukraine, http://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/zvernennya-prezidenta-shodo-golosu vannya-u-verhovnij-radi-zm-35891

(2) Ministerpräsident Arsenij Jazenjuk: Statement by Prime Minister of Ukraine Arseniy Yatsenyuk (31.08.2015)

First of all, I would like to express condolences to the family of Ihor Debrin, who was killed by mobs, I emphasize—by mobs—in clashes near the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

All the wounded will receive both moneyed and medical assistance: all our soldiers, all law enforcement officers, the National Guard officers and persons who have suffered as a result of a crime committed by certain political forces.

These political forces haven’t come to defend the Constitution, but to rape the Constitution and Ukraine. And, actually, they are worse than Russian gangsters and terrorists in the East. Those don‘t hide that they are at war with Ukraine. However, these hiding behind the slogans of patriotism and love for Ukraine are destroying Ukrainian statehood.

The recent crime committed under the flags of different political forces, including under the flags of the Freedom political party must be investigated and punished.

As a citizen of Ukraine, I demand, under Article 348 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, a life sentence for the person who threw the grenade, resulting in the death of an enlisted member of the National Guard of Ukraine.

Also I appeal to all political forces, I emphasize, to each of them and, in particular, to the political forces in the coalition, with a demand to publicly condemn this crime, those politicians and the political forces who have caused the destabilization of the country, an insult to the Ukrainian Constitution, the murder of a young man and the injury of dozens of Ukrainian soldiers.

The cynicism of this crime is also in the fact that when the Russian Federation and its thugs are trying to destroy the Ukrainian state and they fail to do that at the front in the East, the so-called pro-Ukrainian political forces are trying to open another front inside the country.

We are united inside our democratic coalition, we are united with the President, the Government and all responsible citizens of the country in our efforts to prevent the victory at both first and second fronts. The only victory proves possible at our front—preserving Ukrainian statehood, fighting against Russian terrorism and introducing changes in the country.

The organizers, instigators and perpetrators of this crime shall be held answerable.

Now we are to have a meeting with the President of Ukraine and, I believe, there must be established a joint investigative team of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Security Service of Ukraine, the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, which should bring to justice everyone responsible for this crime and to do everything to prevent such a situation in the future: when a person thinking about how to undermine the foundations of national statehood and reputation of Ukraine in the world would be aware he would be punished.

Quelle: Information and Communication Department of the Secretariat of the CMU, http://www.kmu.gov.ua/control/en/publish/article?art_id=248445695&cat_id=244314975

(3) Fraktionsvorsitzende der Partei Vaterland, Julia Timoschenko: Constitutional changes aren’t the road to peace (31.08.2015)

Batkivshchyna faction leader Yulia Tymoshenko says that the president’s proposed changes to the Ukrainian Constitution involving decentralization in their current version will not strengthen local communities or bring peace to Ukraine.

"We must admit today that, unfortunately, this is not the road to peace and not the road to decentralization. This, unfortunately, is a totally different process that deceives us and forces us to lose territory,” Yulia Tymoshenko said today from the podium in the Verkhovna Rada during debates on the first reading of the relevant draft law.

The Batkivshchyna faction leader believes it is unacceptable that the process of changing the Constitution took place without considering public opinion and without unity in parliament, as well as under conditions of aggression by the Russian Federation in Ukraine.

"There is dissent in the Verkhovna Rada. People who stood together on the Maidan are shouting ‘shame!’ in each other’s faces. The country’s moral authorities are saying this is a betrayal of Ukraine, the Constitutional Court too. Those that voted for Yanukovych’s dictatorial powers voted ‘yes’. Those that are the conscience of the Constitutional Court issued a dissenting opinion, which we weren’t even given in the parliament hall,” she said.

"Reforms aren’t built on such strife. The formation and development of the state aren’t built on such strife,” Yulia Tymoshenko said.

The Batkivshchyna leader said that her faction does not support the constitutional changes that were passed in the first reading. "Our aim by voting no is to return the peace talks to the proper path that will give peace, not the illusion of peace. We as government people must work for the national interests of Ukraine, for peace and an end to the war,” she said.

The Batkivshchyna faction leader also believes these changes to the Constitution go against the national interests. "Does anyone doubt that in the geopolitical lobbies this Constitution was agreed with Russia? There is no doubt! But look, Russia is publicly disagreeing with them, knowing that we will be forced to pass it. This means that we are being occupied piece by piece. Putin doesn’t need Donbas, he needs war and destabilization in Ukraine,” she added.

"I know that Batkivshchyna will do the right thing today and vote ‘no’, thus starting a new process of talks, new negotiations on changes to the Constitution and the correct, effective and honest path to peace,” Yulia Tymoshenko said.

Quelle: http://www2.tymoshenko.ua/en/news-en/constitutional-changes-aren-t-the-road-to-peace/

(4) Partei "Selbsthilfe": 7 threats of the amendments to the Constitution proposed by the President (28.08.2015)

1. Offered not by the people of Ukraine but imposed from the outside.

Politicians have no right to amend the Constitution if the people don’t know and don’t understand the proposed changes. These changes were designed hastily behind the scenes. In the working groups one text of amendments was discussed, and then the absolutely different one, developed by a mythical "secretariat”, was introduced to the Parliament. These changes were designed not by the people of Ukrainian, not by their legal representative, but by the Presidential Administration under the pressure from the outside and for the convenience of everybody but the very Ukrainians.

2. Approved by those judges of the Constitutional Court who blessed the usurpation of power by Yanukovych.

Consideration of the Constitutional Court was unprecedentedly hasty and of a purely biased and formal character. Despite the fact that changes to the Constitution of Ukraine affect the rights and obligations of every citizen, there were no appropriate hearings in the Constitutional Court, none of the citizens, scientists, experts or deputies could even express their opinion.

3. Will not lead to the promised decentralization.

"Samopomich” supports decentralization; however, the proposed changes do not give the communities more powers. On the contrary, the central power will be immensely represented in cities and towns and will be furtherly strengthened through the powers of the President to strip the mayors and councils of their powers. Nowhere in the democratic countries the head of a state controls the local government, either through his representatives (prefects) or by terminating the powers of mayors and councils. Therefore, adoption of the proposed changes will significantly worsen the situation with the local government, and without a strong local government the country will be once again trapped with authoritarianism.

4. Grant a "special status” for the occupied Donbas and undermine the sovereignty.

They are trying to convince us there is no special status for Donbas in the Constitution and the provision "On special procedure of local government in some areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions” is just a "formality” and a "necessary conditions of peace”. But this is just another name that does not change the essence. A separate law "on special procedure of local government” will let the "leaders” of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions influence the appointments of judges and prosecutors, create the so-called people’s militia units ostensibly to maintain order.

Such privileges can be called "the peculiarities of local government”, not "the special status”, but actually this does not change anything; either the war has not ceased to be a war just because it is called the anti-terrorist operation.

In addition, one should understand that "some areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions” are the occupied territories, therefore any powers given to them are the powers given to the occupiers. Making these changes to the Constitution will turn the war waged and supported by Russia into a conventional civil war, in which Ukraine as a party will never be able to seek support from other states.

5. Pave the way for the legalization of the militants and bringing the terrorists to power.

De facto, the changes to the Constitution legitimize "the Minsk Agreement”, and if the Verkhovna Rada adopts them, the next step will be the amnesty for the Russian military and the separatists for which the Parliament will vote. The international partners are already talking about the importance of holding elections in the occupied territories along with the all-Ukrainian local elections, those on October 25. However, nobody mentions that a cynical condition for holding the local elections in Donbas is amnesty for serious criminals. This is a tough requirement of the item Nr. 5 of the Minsk Agreement, and the appropriate steps have already been taken! This refers to the so-called amnesty law (bill Nr. 5082 from September 16, 2014), according to which such serious crimes as terrorism financing, initiation and conduct of war, torturing, hostage-taking, and looting will be absolved.

6. Are introduced during the armed aggression of Russia against Ukraine.

According to the second part of Article 157 of the Constitution of Ukraine, it is prohibited to amend the Constitution under the conditions of a martial law or a state of emergency. We shall recall that the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by its Resolution Nr. 129 of January 27, 2015 recognized the Russian Federation as an aggressor state. In the circumstances of armed aggression against Ukraine and actual occurrence of the combat operations on the territory of our country—any amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine are unacceptable. It would have been wise to impose a moratorium on amending the Constitution of Ukraine in time of the armed aggression of Russia against Ukraine.

7. Amendments to the Constitution will not save us from the aggression of Russia, but will allow it to conquer us from within.

It was to make us change our Constitution that Russia started the war with Ukraine. The Kremlin strives for a special procedure of the local government in the occupied territories to conquer us from within. That is why Russia has made our international partners agree to such changes that are beneficial to everybody but the very Ukrainians. Western partners who insist on the necessity of amending the Constitution, as a condition of the Minsk agreements do not give an answer to a simple question—why Ukraine must be the only party to comply with the Minsk agreements, and what will be the response of the West in the event of further violations of the agreements on the part of the Russian Federation? The proposed changes will not tame the aggressor, but will bring it closer to a "legal” way victory.

Quelle: http://samopomich.ua/en/uk-7-zahroz-zaproponovanyh-prezydentom-zmin-do-konstytutsiji/

Fraktionsvorsitzender der Partei "Selbsthilfe", Oleh Beresjuk: "Samopomich” believes that the responsibility for the events at the Verkhovna Rada lies primarily with the Security Service and the Interior Ministry (31.08.2015)

The tragic events at the Verkhovna Rada are the result of a crisis of the executive power and the criminal negligence of the law enforcement. This was stated by Chairman of the "Samopomich” faction Oleh Bereziuk.

"At the Parliament there were in the main the people who care about the country, because the Constitution is the property of the people, not the politicians, the parliament or the president. However, among those people there were also provocateurs. At whose order were they working—is a rhetorical question. But the duty of the law enforcement agencies is to anticipate such events. The Security Service and the Interior Ministry should have prevented this before by revealing provocateurs,” he stated.

The Chairman of the "Samopomich” faction is convinced that after today’s events at the walls of the Verkhovna Rada, the Security Service and the Interior Ministry leadership should resign.

The MP stresses that what happened isn’t the result of the events of one day, but of the systemic criminal negligence.

Quelle: http://samopomich.ua/en/uk-u-samopomochi-vvazhayut-scho-vidpovidalnist-za-podiji-pid-vr-lezhyt-v-pershu-cherhu-na-sbu-ta-mvs/

(5) Partei Swoboda: Statement of "Svoboda” concerning the act of terror near the Parliament (31.08.2015)

Authorities are entirely liable for the act of terror near the Parliament, which caused in dozens of injured people. Protest actions of Ukrainians were provoked by ruling coalition together with pro-Russian "Opposition bloc” namely by including to the agenda of the Parliament and voting in the first reading the amendments to the Constitution, that establish the special status of Donbas and are the actual capitulation to the Kremlin.

Exactly the internal-security forces first attacked the activists, thus provoking numerous fights. At the same time internal-security forces failed to take appropriate measures to counteract the provocateurs. Obviously, the use of an explosive device thrown by unknown to internal-security officers is well-planned provocation against Ukrainian patriots.

We demand the resignation of the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Arsen Avakov, whose criminal inactivity led to the tragedy. We refer to the representatives of the Parliamentary coalition with the demand not to vote in the second reading for the proposed project of amendments to the Constitution.

Quelle: Press Service of Svoboda, http://en.svoboda.org.ua/news/comments/00015051/
Nach oben © Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung Zur klassischen Website von bpb.de wechseln