Dear David J. Kramer, Damon Wilson and Robert Nurich:

As chair of the Ukrainian parliamentary commission that has investigated the 2009 gas agreement with Russia, I was somewhat at a loss after reading your July 15 open letter to the President of Ukraine (see “Mr President, time to stop digging yourself into a hole,” Kyiv Post, July 15).

On the one hand, it’s clearly a letter from friends of Ukraine who feel very strongly about what they are doing and saying. On the other hand, I can’t help but notice that you are being overly emotional on the issues you raise.

In your open letter to President Viktor Yanukovych, you were right to take note of the tangible progress Ukraine is making under his leadership in implementing a whole number of long-overdue and urgently needed reforms.

At the same time, you are worried that this progress can be devalued by “the slide […] in the areas of democracy and human rights.”

In your interpretation this “slide” is manifested in “selective prosecutions” against Yulia Tymoshenko, Yuriy Lutsenko and four other representatives of the previous Cabinet who just recently were in charge of the customs, energy transportation and state procurement.

In other words, despite ongoing investigations of over 400 representatives of the current Government (including a number of high ranking ones), charged on various accounts of corruption – you pick out six representatives of the former Cabinet and conclude that today’s government is selectively persecuting its predecessors.

The opposition claims all of “their” defendants are political victims and had nothing to do with the evil of corruption. Ukraine’s General Prosecutor’s Office claims the opposite. I am sure you will agree that in a constitutional democracy there is only one way to resolve this kind of argument – in a court of law.

However, the opposition doesn’t want to resolve it this way because the court is in their view “corrupt and nontransparent.” Indeed, the process is “nontransparent” because Yulia Tymoshenko publicly humiliates the judge and encourages her supporters in the court room to follow her suit in a live national broadcast during the proceedings.

Would any U.S judge tolerate such a behavior?

In the court room, Tymoshenko appeals for transparency and strict compliance with procedural norms. But I’ve been in the court-room.

And I’ve watched the live broadcast from there and I’ve seen wide coverage of the trial in Ukrainian media. My conclusion, shared by many, is that the defendant’s demands are properly satisfied by the court.

Now, let me invite you back to 2009, behind the closed doors to a room in Moscow where Prime Minister Tymoshenko negotiated a natural gas supply agreement worth billions of U.S. dollars for the whole nation.

Please note that senior officials and competent members of the Ukrainian delegation who should have been inside of the room were outside of it. Was she transparent? Did she comply with national legislation of Ukraine? The answer to both of these questions is: No.

For these and other substantial grounds, the conclusion of the parliamentary commission that I have the honor to chair is unambiguous. High treason was committed.

Personally, I was struck with the scale of Tymoshenko’s political and financial gambling in Moscow back in 2009. Our report is published online and I invite you to consider its findings with a focus on facts, not emotions.

I am confident the President Yanukovych and other senior officials are the last people on earth who would be interested in sending citizens to jail for political reasons. We all know what it would cost Ukraine in terms of international reputation.

Moreover, we are painfully aware of the criticism pointed at Ukraine these days.

We definitely don’t want Ukraine and the European Union to lose their current (maybe last) chance for a tangible rapprochement. Ukraine’s European future clearly shouldn’t be buried at this truly decisive juncture – no matter how hard. Tymoshenko’s allies urge the EU to do otherwise.

Precisely for these reasons, the trials of former Cabinet members should be fair, but the country’s legal system should not be hostage to the opposition’s whims.

By the way, in your comprehensive report on Ukraine published earlier this year by Freedom House, you rightly called upon the EU to “finalize agreements on free trade and association as quickly as possible.”

But just months later, you urge Ukraine’s President not to “leave the EU with no option but to suspend negotiations.” This change of attitude reminds me of another op-ed published by the Kyiv Post recently.

In a very similar spirit, its co-authors connected Tymoshenko’s case with the success of negotiations on Ukraine’s association with the EU.

And though we hear that Tymoshenko herself stands firmly against such linkage, we see her devoted supporters advancing this idea. Indeed, it is yet another illustration of the double game being played by dealers who are intent on holding about 46 million Europeans in Ukraine hostage to the fate of one politician.

I hope you will be consistent on this issue and the support prompt conclusion of the negotiations since bringing Ukraine even closer to EU is a goal we are all working hard to achieve.

Today, the simple truth is this: Tymoshenko’s fate is in the hands of the court. Nowhere in the democratic world will you find a situation where a criminal case gets opened or closed depending on a defendant’s claim that he or she is innocent or that he or she enjoys immunity from any persecution because of opposition’s status.

It can be won or lost depending on the attorney’s evidence and defender’s argument only.

On top of that, you cannot be oblivious to the fact that if the president followed your advice and interfered in the case at this stage it would be: (a) the strongest implication that independent judiciary in Ukraine is non-existent; and (b) a legal precedent making sure that things stay that way.

2011-07-22_29_24

As long as we see instituting the rule of law in Ukraine as our most important goal – wouldn’t such a move on the part of the president defeat the purpose?

To sum up, I would like to pick up on the metaphor you use so often these days when speaking about Ukraine.

It’s not the president who is digging Ukraine a hole. It’s those who, for some reason, pin down Ukraine’s destiny with the destiny of one politician implicated in a whole array of shady dealings that led to Ukraine’s political and economic travails.

In one point you’re absolutely right: they should stop.

Читайте об этом на www.kyivpost.ua

Inna Bogoslovska is a Ukrainian parliament deputy and chair of parliament’s commission to investigate the 2009 natural gas agreement with Russia.