Days after a visiting Council of Europe delegation urged Ukraine to postpone a referendum on curbing parliamentary authority, President Leonid Kuchma vowed to proceed with preparations for the nationwide plebiscite.
The delegation from the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly, which visited Kyiv on Feb. 16-19, said it doubted the legitimacy of the April 16 vote and requested Kuchma to wait until the Venice Commission – the highest legal body in Europe – ruled on the issue.
However, Council of Europe officials said their impression after a meeting with Kuchma was that the president would not heed their request to cancel the referendum if the Venice Commission finds it unconstitutional.
‘Unfortunately, we did not get a promise that the president would follow this piece of advice,’ said Hanne Severinsen, who led the Council of Europe’s delegation to Kyiv. ‘[But] if the government decides to proceed with the referendum, it will be taking a step in the wrong direction,’ Severinsen told a news conference.
The referendum, ordered by Kuchma in January, includes questions on whether Ukrainians agree to vote no confidence in the current legislature, to give the president extra powers to dismiss parliament and to strip deputies of their immunity from prosecution.
Analysts have criticized the referendum because, referendum, depending on its outcome, the Constitution may have to be amended. However, under current legislation, the Constitution may only be amended by an act of parliament not a referendum.
Drawing parallels with the situation in neighboring Belarus, analysts also warned that holding such a referendum could be a precursor to authoritarian government in Ukraine.
The issue of amending the Constitution caused the Council of Europe delegation the most concern.
‘When countries want to change their constitution, they discuss it for a long time. It’s not something that you do in two months,’ Severinsen told a press conference on Feb. 18.
She said the Council of Europe would discuss the referendum at its April session, adding that the Venice Commission was expected to announce its ruling by that time.
But three days later, Kuchma said the referendum was a ‘vital necessity for Ukraine,’ indicating that he hadn’t been convinced by the Council of Europe’s arguments.
All the same, political observers say Kuchma may still cancel the referendum of his own volition – especially as a cooperative majority in parliament has recently been formed, making redundant his administration’s earlier plan to create a more cooperative legislature through amending the Constitution and holding fresh parliamentary elections.
As if signaling such a policy U-turn, senior officials have in recent days spoken increasingly of the need for the Constitutional Court to issue a ruling on the legitimacy of the referendum.
The court is scheduled to start examining on Feb. 29 two separate requests from opposition lawmakers to rule on the referendum’s legitimacy.
Parliament’s first deputy speaker Viktor Medvedchuk said Feb. 21 the Council of Europe delegation’s concerns about referendum’s legitimacy were ‘groundless,’ since Ukraine’s highest court was set to examine the issue.
‘The Council of Europe’s concern would be understandable had the Constitutional Court not planned to examine the referendum’s legitimacy,’ Medvedchuk said. ‘But the court’s chairman has said clearly that hearings will be held.’
If the Constitutional Court ruled the referendum unconstitutional, Kuchma would be ale to cancel the vote without seeming to have backed down under pressure from the West, analysts said.
The ample coverage given in the local media to the Council of Europe’s criticism of the referendum may indicate that this scenario may be played out, analysts say.
‘By showing that criticism on TV, they are hammering it home to us that the European community can influence what’s going on in Ukraine,’ said Viktor Nebozhenko, a political analyst. ‘After all, we’re planning to join them in another 100 years or so.’
Nebozhenko said the formation of the parliamentary majority meant that Kuchma’s need to hold the referendum was less urgent. He predicted that the referendum might either be canceled or transformed into a legally non-binding consultative vote.
