Update: Return to 1996 Constitution strengthens president, raises legal questions

The next elections will be whenever convenient to Yanuk and POR. He now controls all the courts and the judges will rule however he asks them to.

Welcome to my club!

Thank you comrade Putin. Without my KGB comrades from Moscow, I would not have been able to pull the wool over the eyes of the gullible Ukrainians. Next I will put up statues in your honor in Kyiv. Then we can conflate Kyiv with Moscow!

Then we can conflate Kyiv with Moscow!

Then we can conflate Kyiv with Moscow!

Then we can conflate Kyiv with Moscow!

Then we can conflate Kyiv with Moscow!

fortunately europe will distance itself from this dictatorship.

Ukraine is an embarrassment. What a bunch of losers

Sound decision by the court.Rada violated procedures to amend constitution in 2004.The amendments created incoherent power structure.Claims this creates a dictatorship are over reaction, Ukraine is not Belarus and never will be.The economy is number 1 priority.

LOL

Why would anyone want to live in Ukraine after this?

Look at the emblem of the Ukrainian Prostitutional Court -

there is a book. It is empty.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MkbiuJCuROI/TKWa91ncaII/AAAAAAAABPw/jlgdcV_g6Sc/s1600/7438.jpg

Just like the heads of the hand-picked chimps in robes that infest the Prostitutional Court.

They will write whatever the mafia in Yanukonvikt's Party of Regions tells them to write.

Why bother with hand-picking chimps in robes?

It's much faster and easier for Jaba the Hut Yanukonvikt to issue judicial decrees himself. That way, you don't have to waste any time pretending that there is actually a court in Ukraine.

ell he is only follwiing in Yushchenko';s footsteps. lets not forger that Yushchenko also advocated a return to a presidential dictatorship If anyone is to blame for the events confronting Ukraine today it is Yushchenko. His polcies and actions detroyed the notion of democracy in Urkaine before it even was given a change to take root.

Yanukovich is acting independently of Yuschenko...and being a hypocrite...reversing the powers he insisted on back in the day when it suited him...he is a piece of work...and should be prosecuted for treason against Ukraine.

you would if you could, shame you got kicked out !

That's ridiculous- Yanuk is not following in Yush's footsteps. He's doing exactly the oppostie.

Yushchenko was the main cause for political instability in Ukraine. He espoused the words of democracy yet his actions and policies consistently opposed Ukraine becoming a democratic state and he advoicted also that Ukraine restore presidnetial rule. Yushchenko was wrong in 2007, he was wrong in 2009, rejected in 2010 as is Yanukovych today.

Ukraine was much better off in 2006 when Yanukovych was Prime-minister with apprpopiate day to day checks and balances of the praliamentary system. No Ukraine is back to the Kuchma era where absolute power is in the hands of the president.

Make nor misrepresentations. Yushchenko has set in train the events confronting Ukraine today, Yushchenko continually opposed Ukraine's democratic development., His actions unconstitutional dismissing Ukraine's previous parliament back in 2007 undermined Ukraine's political stability and transition form a presidential autocracy to a parliamentary democracy.

Yanukovych was democratically elected as Prime Minister following Yushchenko's refusal to support the formation of an Orange governing coalition within days of winning the parliamentary elections. Yushchenko;s action dismissing Ukraine;s parliament destroyed trust or confidence in democratic values. made worst by Yushchenko's illegal interference in the independence of Ukraine's Constitutional Court in order to prevent the the Conditional Court form ruling against his decree. Instead of facing reelection back then Yushchenko continued to undermine political stability in Ukraine byu seeking to engage Ukraine in a war with Russia and when that failed he attacked his own by opposing Yulia Tymoshenko.

The European venice Commission should have spoken out back in 2007 but failed to do so, preferring to remain silent as democracy and rule of law were being raped. when Yanukovych was elected President he systematically went about securing power and restoring the balance but he has not gone one step further, Where as before he supported the parliamentary model now he has sought to dismantle it.

The Venice Commision have remained silent before when justice was denied is no longer in a position to speak out. They have already been compromised by their silence back in 2007.

Ukraine may never regain the opportunity to establish and develop a true democratic state. a state modeled on European values or European democracy. Killed off by a bee keepers sting and resentment for democracy itself.

Yanukovych can no longer claim he was elected to office in accordance with the powers granted him under Ukraine's constitution. His actions today are no better then Yushchenko's actions back in 2007.

Yanukovych and his party should have taken steps to amend the Constitution not destroy it. Yanukovych has shot himself in the foot, He no longer has the right to claim he was elected under the authority of Ukraine's Constitution. The people of Ukraine voted for him on the understanding that the President had limited power. Now that he has assumed more power then the people of Ukraine bestowed on him it amke him a illegitimate president.

QUOTE :Oleksandr Lavrinovich said there would be no parliamentary elections in 2011. "The powers of the current parliament are determined by the constitution that was in effect at the time of its election."

Does that not also apply to Yanukovych?

QUOTE"“The court does not have the right to rule on provisions that are part of the constitution being unconstitutional,” said Party of Regions MP Serhiy Holovaty, a former minister of justice. “The current parliament and president were elected on the basis of the amended constitution, and so the amendments regarding the parliament should remain in effect until the next parliamentary elections due in 2012.”

QUOTE"“The court does not have the right to rule on provisions that are part of the constitution being unconstitutional,” said Party of Regions MP Serhiy Holovaty, a former minister of justice. “The current parliament and president were elected on the basis of the amended constitution, and so the amendments regarding the parliament should remain in effect until the next parliamentary elections due in 2012.”

Does this mean that the Parliament was elected for a four year term of office and we can expect fresh Parliamentary elections in 2011?

This will mean whatever I tell the Constitutional Court what it should mean!

I tell the Constitutional Court what it should mean!

I tell the Constitutional Court what it should mean!

I tell the Constitutional Court what it should mean!

I tell the Constitutional Court what it should mean!

I will return the 30 pieces of silver that you paid me to betray Ukraine if you decide 5 years (or longer) instead of making the next Verkhovna Rada election 4 years!

Why should I have the Speaker of the House from your stupid obsolete party of Judas when I can put someone from the Party of Regions as Speaker of the House?

The pigs return to the trough! nyom nyom nyom. Life is good! Peasants back to your fields. Ukraine is the Animal Farm!

Dare I say... Good riddens? Really that revision to the constitution was a mistake from the beginning thank you Kuchma... I just wish yushenko had done this 5 years ago. He may have been a more successful president.

Yanukovych's Ukrainian teleprompter reading has gotten much better. Good job, Victor. Now go teach your stubborn prime minister!

Didnt Yanukovich, and the government e.g. Kuchma, reduce the presidents power when he was prime minister before the 2004 elections took place because of a fear that the opposition or yushchenko would win the election and get rid of the oligaric that was effectively steeling money from the ukrainian gas trade and getting billions of dollars off rents and a corupt government. Just think it is a little too convient that now that the 'old' reigme is now in power the presidental powers have been restored now that the 'threat' of a pro european integration government, that would over time reduce or threaten the power of the oligaric regimes within Ukraine, has been extinguished for the moment with ukrainians loosing all confidents in the ability of yushchenko and tymoshenko.

Its now a question of legitimacy.

In 2004 Yushchenko was elected on the clear understanding that the President's authority would be limited and that in 2006 the then new parliament would be elected pursuant to the provisions of the amended constitution.

The decision of the Constitutional court has now brought into question the legitimacy of Yanukovych's president. Yanukovych, like Yushchenko, was elected to office under the authority of the amended constitution. Yanukovych can no longer claim a mandate. The people of Ukraine did not vote for him to have absolute power, they votes for him under the expectation that he would act under the authority of the Constitution as existed when he was elected.

Ukraine is now facing a major constitutional crisis as both the parliament and the office of the president can not be considered to hold a legitimate mandate from the people of Ukraine.

In order to restore legitimacy and their respective mandate both the Parliament and the president should now face re-election in order to restore authority. Something that Ukraine really can not afford to do but now must do. Such is the paradoxical situation that Ukraine now finds itself in.

too right!

Elmer, Yushchenko tried to implement pretty much the same outcome and you supported his anti-democratic stance. the fact is the amendments made to ukraine;s Constitution were a step in the right direction. Yes there was/is room for improvement. The president should have much less power and should be appointed by the parliament. Any one who has been closely monitoring the events surrounding Ukraine over the last decade will know that the issue of Ukraine becoming a Parliamentary democracy has been hotly debated. in 2003 proposed amendments fell short by five votes from being adopted. The amendments agreed to in 2004 were pretty much in line with the proposals put forward in 2003. The Constitutional Court itself had previously upheld the 2004 amendments as being valid. Yushchenko tried to dismantle the provisions of Ukraine's Constitution and he consistently mised and abused presidential authority indermining political stability and confidence in Ukraine in order to pursue his political agenda. well he has succeeded. to a large extent the events that are unfolding are a direct consequences of Yushchenko's anti democratic policies and actions. Ukraine was much better off in 2006-7. Yushchenko's action dismissing Ukraine's previous Parliament set in Te scene for current events. Yushchenko's unconstitutional interference in Ukraine's Constitutional Courts to prevent the Courts from overtraining his decrees was a direct attack on Ukraine's democratic rights. Yanukovych for all his faults is just applying the same tactics as Yushchenko died. But with more professionalism and force. Both have failed Ukraine.

Tymoshenko should have also spoken out and held her ground in supporting democratic reform and the strengthening of Ukraine's parliamentary democracy. the only leader in Ukraine who understood the meaning of democratic rule of law and the role of parliament was Oleksandr Moroz. Yushchenko made sure he was sidelined before he obliterated all the gains that were made during the Orange revolution. Yushchenko killed off all hope, aspirations and ambitions. Yanukovych just finished his work.

Whoever you are -

1) The fact is that the "political elite" in Ukraine, of whatever color, whatever block or party, has for 20 years had a stranglehold on Ukraine's government (including the judiciary) for the benefit of a few oligarchs in and out of government.

2) Kuchma and his thugs did not want any other thugs to have the same amount of power as Kuchma had - so, when it looked like Yushchenko was going to win, the powers of the president were watered down, so that Kuchma and his thugs could protect themselves. That did not change the stranglehold of the "political elite" on government, especially because of the party list system.

3) Yushchenko espoused the right ideas - separation of "beezniss" from government, among others. He also tried to create a "round table" with the Donetsk Mafia, so that people could talk with each other, as they do today on the Savik Shuster show, instead of kill each other, as was done before.

4) Yushchenko disbanded Parliament when the Party of Regions was buying up parliamentary deputies in order to reach a 300-member veto-proof majority, which could then turn over anything Yushchenko tried to do.

Yushchenko was fighting corruption. It didn't work, because Ukraine is just a big stinking cancer ball of corruption, from top to bottom - including the people in the everyday conduct of their lives.

Yushchenko got rid of a judge, Susanna Stanik, because ol' Susanna's mother mysteriously received millions of dollars worth of land, while ol' Susanna was a sitting judge who was going to rule on some constitutional issues.

That's fighting corruption. It was overturned, because Ukraine is a big, rotting stinking cancer ball of corruption.

5) Tymoshenko understands democracy to be herself as a "benign monarch," or a "benign dictator" - just like Yanukonvikt. I hope she finally comes to the realization that democracy is a system of government with checks and balances, so that noone, not even the vilest and wiliest crook - and there are plenty of them in Ukraine - can usurp government for private benefit, so that noone can deprive the people of their rights, and the right to good government.

Her challenge was valid and noble - "let's create the best government in the world."

Noone took her up on that challenge. Instead, Ukraine is a sewer filled with gangsters, who, like Chechetov, who makes the rounds of the political talk shows, are good at shouting down democracy and shouting down people - sovok style.

6) Moroz maybe understands democracy today. When it counted for him to take honest action, he sold himself to the Party of Regions for a speaker position.

The pissing and shitting contest between Yushchenko and Tymoshenko did not help at all.

Moroz selling out to the Party of Regions did not help.

We are past that.

The issue is how to deal with the dictatorship of Jaba the Hut Yanukonvikt, Kolesnikov, Firtash, Boyko, Khoroshkovsky, and the rest of the Donetsk mafia gangsters that infest Ukraine.

And whether Ukraine can still be saved as a true democracy, or whether it is doomed to simply fall apart after turning into Firtashia.

And I hope that Tymoshenko and Moroz and Yushchenko finally got something through those thick Ukrainian skulls of theirs, and finally learned something.

Ukraine is potentially facing the biggest constitutional crisi since April 2007. It is now in a state of uncertainty as to its legal status. There are many questions that arise from this decision that have not been addressed. The Opposition should be responding by mass public protest but they are themselves in a state of disunity. There is no dissenting voice, no opposition and no challenges to what is a Constitutional Court sponsored coup.

Rule of law is non existent and anarchy and the will of the President is the only force that is stopping Ukraine from complete collapse.

This is nothing new for Ukraine. the people of Ukraine are use to living without a government in control or under a dictatorship. They themselves have lost all faith in the political system and political outcomes. The "West" and they European community have abandoned Ukraine. They have failed to speak out when they voices were needed to be heard.

Yes I agree Yanukovych should have acted by seeking amendments to the constitution as opposed to throwing out the baby with the bath water.

But since when has process outweighed the outcome, or the outcome effecting the process. IN the end without respect for rule of la or constitutional order there is only anarchy. Rule by Presidential decree only. Just the way Yushchenko wanted it. The only difference Yushchenko thought it should be him not anyone else that calls the shots.

Ukraine is now paying the price of Yushchenko's betrayal. Democracy and rule of law no longer exist, if it ever did exist. There is no respect or confidence in the political process all they can do is hope and pray that the President will act reasonably and in other is best interest. There is no certainty of outcome. The system and the courts have failed Ukraine.Its past president have failed Ukraine. Ukraine is in state of perpetual anarchy where only the Presidential decree remains.

You mean Yanukovich's betrayal...and Kuchma's

Yanukovych, the bandit, is the legacy that Yushchenko's treachery has given Ukraine. Both slimeballs should be in prison. Waiting for the REAL 'Orange revolution ' to begin!

What was really needed is an amendment that allows the people to dissolve the current government with a no confidence vote instead of the government/president being able to do it.