On
Aug. 8, President Viktor Yanukovych signed the law despite the public outcry
and the deeply negative general response from the people. The new law
contradicts Article 10 of the Constitution, which names as Ukrainian the only
state language, by providing an option to use other languages for official
purposes as well as in court if it is spoken by a minority group of over 10
percent of the population of any given region.
The
compulsory Ukrainian language dubbing of cinema movies has been cancelled. The
share of Ukrainian language materials in the media has been reduced from 50
perent down to 25 percent.
By
signing the law Yanukovych initiated rebellion, especially amongst local
authorities. The first and second presidents of Ukraine, Leonid Kravchuk and
Leonid Kuchma, have claimed that the new law fails to promote the national idea
and independence of the state of Ukraine.
When
signing the law, Yanukovych acknowledged that it was not perfect and pledged to
introduce changes in September. Video evidence shows the governing Party of
Regions adopting the law in parliament by violating voting procedures, whilst
the reports and opinions of specialised expert committees have been plainly
ignored. The party line is that they are delivering on their election promises,
one of which is the restoration of the status of the Russian language in
Ukraine.
Immediately
after the ratification of the Law the regional administrations of Odesa,
Donetsk, Lugansk, Dnipropetrovsk, Kharkiv, Zaporyzhia, Mykolaiv and Kherson
decided to effectively grant the Russian language official status by making the
use of Ukrainian in business, court and state institutions optional.
At
the same time the languages of national minorities, Bulgarians in Odesa region
and the Crimean Tartars, have been rejected – despite the fact that these
minorities account for over 10 percent of the local population. Since the very
start of this legislation the governing authorities have taken a double
standard approach: giving priority to Russian language exclusively. Also the
implementation of the law requires the allocation of more than $2 billion from
the state budget, which Ukraine does not have.
The
language controversy created by the new law has further divided Ukraine.
Russian-speaking Ukrainians have been labelled as supporters of pro-Russian
integration. Meanwhile Moscow immediately attempted to capitalise on the
language chaos in Ukraine, reporting that they would grant financial support
for the development of Russian in Ukraine.
Imperfections
in the Law have resulted in many different interpretations and implementations across
the various Ukrainian regions, further adding to the destruction of the
national legislative environment. In reaction, Lviv City Council have accused t
Yanukovych of attempting to destroy Ukrainian sovereignty and have made a
corresponding public statement to the people of Ukraine. A deputy from Lviv
City Council has reported that the current government of Ukraine is on course
to destroy the Ukrainian national identity entirely, threatening the
eradication of Ukrainian culture through the ‘Rusification’ of education,
science, culture and social sectors. Deputies from Lviv believe that the
current situation over the national language is preparation for the integration
of Ukraine with Russia, and the subsequent language genocide of the Ukrainian
nation.
Lviv
City Council also appealed to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to clarify
separate provisions on the language policy and questioned the legitimacy of the
decision of some eastern regions of Ukraine to give Russian the status of
official regional language.
Prior
to that the city council of Ternopil asked the Constitutional Court of Ukraine
to declare the language law illegal and decided that the law would not see any
implementation in Ternopil Oblast. They have also called on all other city
administrations to refuse the language law. Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast has also
declared the new law illegal and sent a corresponding statement to the
Constitutional Court of Ukraine. Perhaps predictably, western Ukraine has
largely rejected the new language law whilst eastern Ukraine was quick to grant
Russian the status of official language, despite the Constitution.
It
is possible that the government did not expect the new legislative initiative
to have such an impact; it may have been conceived as an ambitious pre-election
stunt by the governing party. But the current government will need to act
quickly to prevent the destruction of Ukrainian national identity.
A
working group, headed by the Kravchuk, was specifically set up by the president
of Ukraine to revise the Law “On The Principles of State Language Policy.”
The
latest revision does not provide official status to any minority language and
offers only to endeavour to protect such languages that are spoken by over 30
percent of the population of any region.
Another
change added by the working group is that the final decision to support
minority languages can be made only by the parliament of Ukraine. The members
of this group also report that the Constitution is the only document to
establish the basics of national language policy and that any new law cannot
serve as a superior regulation. It is hoped that the new revision of the
language law will restore the currently diminished share of Ukrainian language
content on television, radio and other media. Until then the language issue
remains the main frustration and dividing factor for Ukrainians on both sides
of the Dnipro River.
According
to sociologists, the Party of Regions has lost 5 percent voter share as a
result of the language law. Only the Communist Party of Ukraine has gained
among the Russian speaking electorate, claiming an additional 0.2 percent. In
general, instead of winning more votes the authors of the law have considerably
damaged the electoral prospects of the governing political party. Instead the
ratings of the United Opposition and the nationalist party Svoboda have
increased by 2 percent. By signing the language law the president of Ukraine
shot himself in the foot. He has proved his inability to evenly represent both eastern
and western Ukraine as well as his unwillingness to stand for the national
identity of Ukraine to which a common language is central.
People
First Comment: Is it any wonder that
the rule of law in Ukraine appears to have totally failed the people when the
highest executive offices in the land regularly ‘adjusts’ the Constitution
simply because it does not suit their purpose.
Imagine President Barack
Obama standing before the American people and in his State of the Union address
telling them that he had decided to repeal the Bill of Rights or tear up the 5th
amendment simply because it did not suit his purpose… He would be immediately
impeached and at least thrown out of office. But not in Ukraine.
The Ukrainian
Constitution is a fundamental document of state voted on by a majority of the
people. It may not be perfect but it is
the law to which all Ukrainians living in Ukraine or holding a Ukrainian passport
are subject including the President, the government and the Deputies of
Verkhovna Rada. It is the basis of the
Ukrainian nation and the national identity. It can only be amended by the will
of the Ukrainian people either through a national referendum or by a properly
constituted and independent Constitutional Court. It cannot be changed by a self serving club
of businessmen simply to serve their
political ends. This regime has no right
and no authority to amend any part of the Constitution without putting it to
the people for a national vote thus this new language law is illegal despite
any fancy spin the regime chooses to use.
The regime claims that
it is only complying with European minority language directives but this is
frankly poppycock. The architects of the
law have been more than a little selective in their choice of sections from the
European directive and have not taken into consideration the Constitution which
sets in stone the fundamental supremacy of the Ukrainian language despite the
fact that it may well currently be spoken by a statistical minority which is
hardly surprising after 340 years of suppression. Russian may well be the
majority spoken language just as English was in Wales before the Welsh language
was officially recognised but that is not the point. We live in Ukraine and the Constitution
clearly states that the national language is Ukrainian.
What is more the way
this law is being interpreted is that rather than treating Russian like any
other secondary language local authorities and organisations are taking the
opportunity, again quite illegally to reassert Russian as the dominant language
as opposed to giving Russian and all the other minority languages in Ukraine a
legal status. This is most certainly not
what was intended in the EU Directive on the recognition of minority
rights. So one has to ask why this law
and why now?
In 2011 the People
First Foundation carried out national research into the priorities of the
people. The language issue didn’t fall
into the top ten, in fact under 25% considered it to an issue of any
significance at all therefore this current ‘crisis’ has been manufactured. Some put it down to the ignorance of the
regime, some as a Russian plot to eradicate Ukrainian whilst others point to a
general destabilisation and diversion in the run up to the Rada elections in
October. The law has, totally
unnecessarily, set East against West and in many cases neighbour against
neighbour and even brother against brother.
We believe this was deliberate.
In creating two camps
Party of Regions want to be able to appeal to the Russian speaking electorate
using fear and propaganda to build up a quasi-national movement in support of
their political agenda much as other highly questionable European regimes did
in the 1920’s. This is a cynical and
dangerous electioneering practice that undermines the whole principle of
democracy as it is nothing more than political manipulation. It clearly
illustrates that the regime and their party have little morality, concern for
the people or for the potential consequences of their action.
In response the
opposition will be forced to turn toward the Ukrainian speaking West for their
groundswell of support thereby exacerbating what is already a highly charged
situation that could easily split the country down the Dnipro River.
The office of the president
in any country is supposed to be a unifying force that represents the whole
nation. We have seen all too clearly in
the Middle East what happens when a regime sides with one side against
another. God forbid that it should
happen here.
In conclusion, there is
little left to say about the “opposition’s” position save that this is how they
are maintaining their objectivity at the moment.
