Ukraine’s ongoing political chaos has resulted in the specter of new parliamentary elections.

When the prospect of pre-term parliamentary elections surfaced last year, the Kyiv Post supported the move, arguing that elections and political battles were not a tragedy. They are a natural part of the democratic process. Today, with the prospect of early parliamentary and even presidential elections, we remain firm in our belief that, while costly and time-consuming, elections are still the best way to let people have their say in how the country is run.

But before rushing into an election campaign, Ukraine’s parliament needs to reinstitute direct representation in parliament, pass deputy-recall legislation, lift parliamentary immunity from prosecution and stop the campaign to weaken the presidency. These steps would be the best gifts the “situational” coalition of the Party of Regions and the Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYuT) could give the nation.

In the last two “proportional” elections, Ukrainians voted for parties and electoral blocs only. The “mixed” system of 2002 saw voters choose a person to represent their district and also voted for their preferred party or bloc.

The proportional system was supposed to help strengthen political parties in Ukraine. Instead it led to a reduction of the role Ukrainians play in selecting who runs the country. Members of parliament, not bound to any district, are not accountable to anybody but the leaders of their political parties.

Who gets put on or taken off a party list is decided by a small group of individuals and the depth of the pockets of the want-to-be member of parliament. This is not democracy, but a travesty. Direct representation should be entrenched in electoral law once and for all. The Ukrainian voter, already disillusioned with democracy, should be able to vote for and know the name of the person that represents his community on the national level. The voter should also know that he or she can fire the lawmaker that was hired by way of elections. Towards this end, legislators should also adopt legislation that clearly spells out a recall mechanism.

Secondly, BYuT and Regions need to stop the campaign to weaken the presidential post. Ever since Leonid Kuchma unilaterally announced constitutional reforms in 2002, the public has never been consulted about what kind of president they want. But people need to be consulted. Putin was the most popular politician in eastern Ukraine at the height of his presidency. That represents a large segment of the population that likes the idea of a strong head of state who takes personal responsibility for instituting order in the country. Multiple polls have also shown that voters want to elect their president directly, not by parliament. The 'weak president' reforms have done nothing but provide opportunities to destabilize the Ukrainian state. The scenario is programmed to keep political chaos alive in Kyiv for as long as possible with internecine feuding among the political elite. The reforms are being imposed top-down, Soviet-style, with no feedback from the larger public. Only a grassroots movement of civic activism on the part of “strong president” proponents has the chance to drive home a message to the constantly-infighting elite: Don’t touch the presidency, particularly at a time when separatism has reared its ugly head in Crimea.