You're reading: It’s 2012, Not 2004

Ukraine’s political opposition failed to galvanize enough public support to pressure authorities to rectify alleged falsification of the Oct. 28 parliamentary election. After assessing the prospects, the opposition has switched tactics.

Under protest, they will take their 40 percent of seats in the 450-member parliament. Opposition leaders now say they will mount a campaign to impeach President Viktor Yanukovych, but analysts called such a prospect unlikely.

Speaking before a thin crowd of a few hundred supporters in front of the Central Election Commission in Kyiv on Nov. 12, the leaders of United Opposition-Batkivschyna, Svoboda and Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform parties said they don’t recognize the elections as fair or valid.

Their shifting strategy is a far cry from the initial firebrand proclamations, voiced with much bravado days after the election. First the opposition called for the election to be cancelled because, they say, it was rigged. Then they vowed not to take their seats in parliament in protest.

Yanukovych, Prime Minister Mykola Azarov and their ruling Party of Regions have, meanwhile, dismissed international and national criticism that the elections were undemocratic.

“The opposition thought that it is 2004 now. Unfortunately, it is 2012,” Volodymyr Fesenko, head of Penta think tank in Kyiv,  said, referring to the 2004 Orange Revolution when massive peaceful demonstrations broke out after the rigged presidential election that declared Yanukovych the victor. The protests and a Ukrainian Supreme Court decision led to a re-vote that Viktor Yushchenko won handily on Dec. 26, 2004.

“The atmosphere is very different now, with a lack of trust both for the ruling party and the opposition,” said Volodymyr Fesenko, head of Penta think tank in Kyiv. “The [lack] of people outside the CEC was the main reason the opposition backed down.”

While crowds gathered in the thousands in the first days of the protest near the election body’s building, the numbers dwindled quickly with each vague and contradictory pronouncement from opposition leaders.

The opposition was also not able to prove in courts and to the CEC that election fraud took place in 11 election districts, particularly in Vinnytsya and Kyiv oblasts, let alone the nationwide fraud alleged by opposition leader Vitali Klitschko.

While those cases hit a dead end in the courts, the CEC has ruled that it is unable to establish the result of the vote only in five out of 11 disputed districts. Re-run elections are expected in these districts in anytime between January and March with no specific date being set up to date.

Moving on

As they enter parliament the three opposition parties vow to act as a united front to impeach Yanukovych and oust Prime Minister Mykola Azarov and Prosecutor General Viktor Pshonka.

But, given the alignment of forces in the new parliament, it is unlikely the opposition will be strong enough.

Together, the three opposition parties will have about 180 out of 450 seats. But the legislature will be controlled by the ruling pro-presidential Party of Regions and its allies.

The Party of Regions and their likely Communist allies together will get 217 seats. Independents will occupy 43 additional seats, many of whom are believed to be close to the Party of Regions and are expected to cooperate with them in parliament.

“It is hard to say how solid the majority of Party of Regions will be. Both them and the opposition have possibilities of luring in independents,” says Yuriy Yakymenko, political expert at Razumkov Center, a think tank.

Klitschko’s UDAR headquarters chief Vitali Kovalchuk said that the Party of Regions has started a campaign to lure the newly elected lawmakers. “Pressure and threats have already begun. We know about these facts,” said Kovalchuk, speaking to Liga business information website.

Half of Ukraine’s parliament was elected via closed party lists, while another was elected in single-mandate constituencies throughout the country.

“”Ukraine without Yanukovych’ has been central for the opposition campaign for a while now. And it would be strange if they would have abandoned the idea in parliament. What they will definitely do is register a draft law on impeachment in parliament,” says Yakymenko.

But the law’s adoption is unlikely, since it requires a simple majority and the president’s signature. If Yanukovych vetoes the law, it takes at least 300 votes to override the veto, an ever more unlikely option. Yet, such a law is a necessary prerequisite if the opposition hopes to follow through on its impeachment rhetoric. Even though the basics of the impeachment procedure are in the Constitution, it lacks many essential technicalities. Experts say separate law on impeachment has to be passed.

Currently, Ukraine’s Constitution requires a simple majority, then a constitutional majority and finally 338 deputies voting in favor of impeachment. Between the votes, the grounds for impeaching the president should be endorsed by a parliamentary investigative commission and the Constitutional Court.

“What the opposition is trying to do is to cover up their backing off with radical slogans and ideas like impeachment,” says Fesenko.

Meanwhile, leading opposition figure, jailed ex-Prime Minister Yuliya Tymoshenko is in the 17th day of her hunger strike. Serving a seven-year prison term for abuse of office, Tymoshenko went on hunger strike on Oct. 30, two days after the elections, after she issued a statement that said this was the only way she “could protest against the rigged elections” in prison. She has also reportedly demanded that the opposition refuse to enter parliament in protest.

As the opposition changed its course of action, they also have called on Tymoshenko to stop her hunger strike.

“Yulia, they don’t deserve your health!” shouted Tymoshenko’s right-hand man Oleksandr Turchynov of the Batkivshchyna party, followed by cheers from the crowd outside the CEC on Nov. 12.

Experts agree that Tymoshenko would have no choice but to end her hunger strike in order to not cause tension inside the opposition camp.

Despite criticism from disappointed protesters, experts say pragmatism prevailed in the opposition camp.

“Smart people in the opposition have known from the very beginning that too many risks are involved in refusing to enter parliament. Also, it was irresponsible to voters,” says Fesenko.

In parliament, the opposition is involved in political process and can have its say, including the boycott of legislation they oppose, experts said.

Another thing to focus on, experts warn, is to push for a new election law, so that the troubles of the parliamentary elections do not repeat in the 2015 president election.

Kyiv Post staff writer Svitlana Tuchynska can be reached at [email protected].