Things heading to anarchy – Azarov
DOES THIS APPLY TO THE PRESIDENT'S DECREES ALSO?
Source: UNIAN
The government’s decree, allowing not to fulfill illegal court rulings, may cause anarchy in the state, Party of Regions lawmaker Mykola Azarov believes.
“The current authorities keep on creating terrible precedents for the state. The regular decision of the Cabinet of Ministers, allowing state power bodies not to fulfill court rulings, may cause legal impunity in the state. In my opinion, the Prosecutors’ Office, the Supreme Court, and the President, must give an assessment to this decision of the government”, M.Azarov claimed.
He is convinced that nobody has a right to neglect court rulings. “Court rulings are obligatory to fulfill. It concerns not only citizens, but also different organizations, first of all, state agencies, which must serve as an example of law-abiding”, he stressed.
M.Azarov emphasized that if anybody does not agree with a ruling, he may appeal against it. “But, not to fulfill court rulings is nonsense. If we strive to build a legal state, we have no right to neglect court rulings, as it is a way towards anarchy”, he said.
As UNIAN reported earlier, on January 23, the government adopted a resolution, allowing not to fulfill evidently illegal court rulings.
In his turn, Justice Minister Mykola Onyshchuk stressed that the decree clearly sets out that in such cases, state bodies should immediately appeal against these rulings in court.
Source: UNIAN
The government’s decree, allowing not to fulfill illegal court rulings, may cause anarchy in the state, Party of Regions lawmaker Mykola Azarov believes.
“The current authorities keep on creating terrible precedents for the state. The regular decision of the Cabinet of Ministers, allowing state power bodies not to fulfill court rulings, may cause legal impunity in the state. In my opinion, the Prosecutors’ Office, the Supreme Court, and the President, must give an assessment to this decision of the government”, M.Azarov claimed.
He is convinced that nobody has a right to neglect court rulings. “Court rulings are obligatory to fulfill. It concerns not only citizens, but also different organizations, first of all, state agencies, which must serve as an example of law-abiding”, he stressed.
M.Azarov emphasized that if anybody does not agree with a ruling, he may appeal against it. “But, not to fulfill court rulings is nonsense. If we strive to build a legal state, we have no right to neglect court rulings, as it is a way towards anarchy”, he said.
As UNIAN reported earlier, on January 23, the government adopted a resolution, allowing not to fulfill evidently illegal court rulings.
In his turn, Justice Minister Mykola Onyshchuk stressed that the decree clearly sets out that in such cases, state bodies should immediately appeal against these rulings in court.
Comments
The Parliamentary Assembly in it's resolution dated April 19 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. Hence the urgent necessity to carry out comprehensive judicial reform, including through amendments to the constitution.
The Assembly reiterates that the authority of the sole body responsible for constitutional justice – the Constitutional Court of Ukraine – should be guaranteed and respected. Any form of pressure on the judges is intolerable and should be investigated and criminally prosecuted.
...
The Constitutional Court has failed to produce judgments, thus failing to fulfill its constitutional role and to contribute to resolving the crisis in its earlier stages, which undermines the credibility of the court.
There is an urgent need for all pending judgments, and in particular the judgment concerning the constitutionality of the Presidential Decree of 2 April 2007, to be delivered.
If delivered, the latter should be accepted as binding by all sides."
The associated explanatory report under the sub-heading of Pressure on the courts expressed concern that
"Several local courts have made decisions to suspend the Presidential Decree only to then withdraw them, allegedly under pressure from the presidential secretariat." (item 67)
In emphasis the report (item 68) stated
"This is a worrying tendency of legal nihilism that should not be tolerated. It is as clear as day that in a state governed by the rule of law judicial mistakes should be corrected through appeal procedures and not through threats or disciplinary sanctions"
On April 30, on the eve of the Constitutional Court's ruling on the legality of the president's decree dismissing Ukraine's parliament, President Yushchenko, in defiance of the PACE resolution of April 19 intervened in the operation of Ukraine's Constitutional Court by summarily dismissing two Constitutional Court Judges, Syuzanna Stanek and Valeriy Pshenychnyy, for allegations of "oath treason."[4] His move was later overturned by the Constitutional Court and the judges were returned by a temporary restraining order issued by the court. [5]
Ukraine's Constitutional Court still has not resolved or ruled on the legality of the President's decrees.
Power of Words
by Editorial , Kyiv Post
Jan 31 2008, 02:09
http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/editorial/28283/
Once again, Yulia Tymoshenko alarmed Ukraine’s business community with a seemingly startling statement. Once again, she claims she was entirely misunderstood.
Tymoshenko reportedly told a Jan. 23 press conference in order to defend Ukraine’s customs service, tax administration and other state organs, her government “passed a special resolution which gives the freedom and right, on the basis of the Constitution, to deliberately not execute criminal court verdicts” which freed certain businesses from taxes and custom duties.
The vague statement sent a shock through business and legal circles. After all, the hope with Tymoshenko’s return to government was that she would reinforce the rule of law. Now here she was seemingly undermining it by interfering in the judicial branch of government.
At a meeting with business investors the next day, a lawyer asked her to clarify her statement. Though she stated clearly “we will exclusively act within the limits of the Ukrainian Constitution’s legislation,” it remained unclear to those leaving the meeting just how that was going to happen. The prior day, Justice Minister Mykola Onischuk offered clarification on the matter. The tax and customs organs should immediately turn to the appellate courts to file complaints against unjust court rulings, he said.
“No one made a decision to take an evaluation upon themselves on the justness or unjustness of verdicts that took legal authority. Verdicts which took legal authority are supposed to be carried out. Regarding doubts on their execution, then the appropriate means within the state’s processional defense of interests are supposed to be used,” Onischuk said.
Or in plain English, take it to the courts.
The incident is reminiscent of Tymoshenko’s first tenure as prime minister, when she stated “The government is to review the legality of the privatization of more than 3,000 enterprises ...” The statement sparked criticism from tycoons, investors and even President Viktor Yushchenko when he sacked her. They ignored her following sentence, “Nobody today can state the number of properties that will be returned to state ownership.”
Tymoshenko has a tendency to make strong statements that can cause a stir. Political insiders don’t think it’s intentional. It’s just Yulia being Yulia. And while part of her popularity certainly lies in her passion, her close advisors and handlers are best advised to make sure there’s someone nearby to explain the true intentions behind a searing initiative or bellicose statement. Tymoshenko has done a lot to regain investor confidence lost in 2005. It would be a shame for a few words to erode those gains. If Tymoshenko and her staff can’t prepare the wording of sensitive statements, then at least provide adequate explanations.
Such irresponsible comments does little to enhance For-ua's already tainted reputation of being bias.
Every person opposed to the political point of view of the editors or moderators is banded from commenting on the For-ua.com English forum. With Moderators such as Gene Nelson and Thomas Martinez there is little wonder for-ua in serious decline.