Constitutional Court to Rule Against President's Decree

By Online Editor -
Ukraine's Constitutional Court to rule Presidents 26 April decree unconstitutional

Source: ITAR-TASS

On Tuesday, Judge of the Constitutional Court Stephan Garish noted that the court will recognize unconstitutional the April 26 presidential decree on the dissolution of the Supreme Rada. “Proceeding from the tone of discussion and issues discussed by judges of the Constitutional Court, it seems to me that this decision is ripe for a long time ago. Under these conditions the outlook is clear. I think that this court will not recognize the presidential decree as lawful,” believed Garish, who has been recently appointed as a judge of the Constitutional Court by presidential decree, but has not assumed his office yet."

The ruling by the constitutional court has been widely expected as the President has limited authority under Article 90 of Ukraine's constitution to dismiss Ukraine's Parliament.

Viktor Yushchenko, Ukraine's President, has gone to extraordinary efforts to try and prevent judicial review of his decree dismissing Ukraine's democratically elected parliament.

It is now expected that the President will agree to an Autumn election as proposed by Ukraine's Governing Coalition. The president will have legal authority to dismiss Ukraine's Parliament in October following the mass resignation of members of the opposition. The president will only have the authority to dismiss the parliament under Article 90 section 3 of Ukraine's Constitution.

Victor Yushchenko will be under pressure to resign so as to allow for joint parliamentary and Presidential elections to be held in October or November this year.

Yushchenko has usurped power and authority of the state where he had no authority.

In doing so he has brought Ukraine into disrepute and had undermined Ukraine's constitutional order and rule of law. All of which is in direct breach of his solemn oath.

He has no other alternative but to offer his resignation and if he so decides seek reelection and renewal of his mandate.

Whether for the president or against the president does not matter, once the court rules, the fact is that the president has acted against the interests of the state.

There could not be a more serious charge that warrants the president's impeachment.

Rather then face a long and drawn out impeachment trial the president should resign in order to restore pubic confidence in the office of the president

Comments

Bijoy said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Wed May 23, 08:54:00 am EEST
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dissecting the vote: Zakarpattia and Ternopil

By Online Editor -
Two interesting outcomes in the final round vote that have not been widely discussed in the English media is the outcome in Zakarpattia and Ternopil. We are not sure if it has been been discussed in the Ukrainian media 1. Viktor Yanukovych was the highest polling candidate in Zakarpattiia previsoully Our Ukraine/Yushchenko were the highest. (See 2004,2006 and 2007 election results ) District 74 місто Берегове (Beregove - a Hungarian community located near the border) 2. The other interesting observation is that Yanukovych actually went backwards between the first round and the second round in Ternopiil.  In the first round Yanukovych received 6354 (0.26% of the national vote) in the second final round, with less number of candidates, Yanukovych recorded only 5370 (0.21% of the national vote)  Why Yanukovych went backwards in the second round is any ones guess but we think this  would make interesting reading.
<Additional Information>

Averting a Post-Orange Disaster - Andreas Umland

By Online Editor -
"As Ukraine's economic, social and political crisis sharpens, more and more Ukrainians may question the wisdom of conducting a costly presidential election when the Ukrainian state is almost bankrupt--if not on the brink of collapse." Constitutional Reforms and Political Stability in Ukraine by Dr. Andreas Umland Source: Harvard International Review June, 2009 After several years of impressive economic growth and encouraging political change, Ukraine has recently entered troubled waters. The democracies west of Ukraine are institutionally consolidated and internationally embedded enough to circumscribe the political repercussions of their so far relatively mild economic contractions. While being hit almost as hard as Ukraine by the world financial crisis, Russia has managed to build considerable financial reserves thanks to the enormous cash inflow into her state budget during the years of rocketing energy prices, allowing her to soften the social repercussions of the eco
<Additional Information>

History repeats: Victor Yushchenko interferes with Ukraine's judicial process.

By Online Editor -
The Kyiv Administrative court has issued a injunction suspending the Presidents decree dismissing Ukraine's democratically elected parliament. In what is reminiscent of events unfolded last year, Victor Yushchenko has again interfered with the independence of Ukraine's judiciary . In April 2007 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe ( PACE ) passed a resolution in consideration of a report titled Functioning of democratic institutions in Ukraine . (Items 13 and 14) stated: “The Assembly deplores the fact that the judicial system of Ukraine has been systematically misused by other branches of power and that top officials do not execute the courts’ decisions, which is a sign of erosion of this crucial democratic institution. An independent and impartial judiciary is a precondition for the existence of a democratic society governed by the rule of law." The associated explanatory report under the sub-heading of Pressure on the courts expressed concern that &qu
<Additional Information>