On April 27, President Viktor Yanukovych met with the jead of the Venice Commission and, according to the president’s website, stressed the need for the commission’s “expert assessment of our draft judicial reform.”

Despite these assurances, the law on the judiciary and status of judges was hastily passed by the ruling coalition then, despite a major campaign by human rights organizations, signed into law by the president on July 27.

In October, the Venice Commission’s expert assessment reiterated the main concerns repeatedly voiced by Ukrainian civic society, especially regarding the jeopardy to judicial independence.

We are now hearing that the commission’s recommendations will be “taken into account.”

Severin’s boundless optimism regarding such assurances is difficult to share.

The Oct. 31 local elections have been widely denounced, both by Ukrainian and Western commentators, as not meeting democratic standards.The results were stacked in favor of the ruling Party of the Regions via a disastrous law on the local elections which was once again hurriedly passed by the same coalition. Not that most Ukrainians had any chance of discovering this since the state-owned First National Channel, Inter TV – the channel owned by Security Service of Ukraine head Valery Khoroshkovsky and others presented a glowing fairytale about the government’s efforts to ensure free and fair elections.

The outrage over the dubious elections led to more effusive assurances and to an absolutely standard gesture.On Nov. 5, the president created a commission for the strengthening of democracy and affirmation of the rule of law. All we are told about this commission is the name of its head, Serhiy Holovaty, chosen presumably because he is well-known in Strasbourg and Brussels.

European integration includes an independent judiciary at all levels and elections whose outcome is not programmed by the ruling party. It is vital that the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) protects the country’s security and does not harass and intimidate members of NGOs, university rectors, students, and foreign journalists, as has been increasingly the case in Ukraine since Khoroshkovsky was appointed as its head.

There have, in fact, been consistent indications of conflict of interest with the SBU used in a court wrangle between Khoroshkovsky’s media holding and business rivals. Of even greater concern, however, is the fact that Khoroshkovsky is a member of the High Council of Justice which is responsible for appointing and dismissing judges.

It should be noted that there has never been any justification given for the High Administrative Court’s rejection on Aug. 12 of TVi’s attempt to force Khoroshkovsky’s dismissal from the High Council of Justice on the grounds that he lacks the legally required 10 years of legal experience.

The above are just some of the threats to Ukraine’s democratic development which will render European integration absolutely meaningless talk. This issue is not geopolitical – it is about Ukraine’s future as a law-based democracy.

With almost total control over television channels, it is understandable that the regime’s attempts to present any criticism as based on political opposition may convince some viewers. It is profoundly frustrating when European parliamentarians echo this entirely misleading binary divide.

Ukraine’s road to European integration cannot be travelled by empty assurances.

Halya Coynash is a member of the Kharkiv Human Rights Group.