Media intimidation continues
Evidence of governmental pressure on freedom of speech in Ukraine seems to continue to be abundant. Earlier this year, journalists in a number of cities have been interrogated by the militia, apparently following their stories of the defacing of posters bearing a greeting from Yanukovych. Journalists in Lviv, Odessa, Kostopil and other towns report that during interrogation they were threatened and their personal belongings were seized.
Opposition members from the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Freedom of Speech and Information have already risen in protest; demanding that the Prosecutor General’s Office take measures to secure the legitimacy of militia actions and protect the rights of journalists in the country. The opposition members claim that the militia officers infringed the journalists’ rights to free receipt, generation and distribution of information as guaranteed by the Article 34 of the Constitution and Article 5 of the Law of Ukraine: On Information. Despite frequent allegations, police categorically deny that they have violated the law and put pressure on journalists and mass media in general. Whether due to pressure or obscurity, it is getting increasingly difficult to enforce freedom of speech in Ukraine.
People First Comment: The infringement of legal, constitutional and human rights by supposed authorities is something that should ring alarm bells for anyone interested in the democratic state and future of Ukraine. This case however, smacks of more than merely overzealousness on the part of the militia, who claim to have been investigating a series of acts of vandalism against private property, and in fact tells much about the attitudes and character of Ukraine’s empowered regime.
The private property in question (which was in fact paid for by the taxpayer) was part of a campaign of well-wishing to the public from their “benevolent” ruler. As such the defacement, though crude, was less about vandalism than it was about protest; defacing the regime leader as a way of rejecting his authority. Either the regime leadership, or someone that wishes to please them, is out to set an example of how raising such a challenge will be met: with the strong and crooked hand of the law.
Essentially, it does not matter whether the targeted journalists were connected to the poster protest acts or not: the idea is simply to present an intimidating show of force; to deter others and foster a culture of self-censorship – one of the oldest tricks in the authoritarian handbook. If Ukraine’s regime is indeed resorting to Spanish inquisition style, guilty by accusation, actions to propagate an authority based on fear, then Ukraine is heading for dark times indeed. Centralization of power combined with ruthless suppression of dissent: tried, tested and violently rejected countless times throughout history – perhaps someone should let the regime know how this story always ends; it’s unlikely to be the despots who live happily ever after.
Corporate raids: Letting pirates kill economy
As Viktor Zanfirov, deputy prosecutor general of Ukraine, recently noted: it is much cheaper to seize a business than to buy one. It seems the institution charged with fighting corporate raiders is waving a white flag of surrender. The apparent reasons being: the lack of a developed stock market, the lack of a clear legal definition of “corporate raid” all complicated further by rampant corruption in the courts, law enforcement bodies and administrative institutions.
The authorities are beginning to recognize the extremely adverse effect of corporate raiding on Ukraine’s investment climate.
Andriy Klyuev, former deputy prime minister and current secretary of the Council of National Security and Defense of Ukraine, has called for the preparation of a draft law on corporate raids for the parliamentary session on April 1. Experts however see the exercise as futile as current raids are performed in disregard of the existing laws, usually through bribery of law enforcers and judges, falsification of documents and forceful seizure of business objects.
Between 2009 and 2011 there were 189 officially recorded crimes related to corporate raiding. In 2011, 49 judges were fired for their involvement in corporate raids, while the prosecutor’s offices opened cases against 15 judges, however only five of them received guilty verdicts.
People First Comment: Let’s stop beating about the bush… A ‘corporate raid’ in Ukraine means legitimized piracy. It is piracy by people that have enough money and political clout to override the justice system, corrupt judges and law enforcement officers in order to steal businesses from their rightful owners. Just because the masked raiders have official looking badges and uniforms does not mean they are any less criminal. They simply hope to mask their criminality with a veil of authority. It’s an old story and one that was common in the Capone era of 1930s America, Nazi Germany when the brown shirts stole from the Jewish population and latterly in Mafia controlled regions of Italy.
However what is interesting is that few of these stolen companies ever survive more than a few years under the ‘new’ ownership. The raid takes the heart out of the original management, after all who wants to work hard for somebody that contributes nothing and takes the lion’s share of the profits. As a result the dynamism and enthusiasm that created the company evaporates and the company dies.
This type of criminality is however common to societies in decline. Initially the bandits took what every state assets they could plunder but few have the acumen or ability to manage such assets so as they decline the bandits move on to organizations that are more successful in a second wave of plunder. Traditionally these periods come to an end when the bandits start fighting amongst themselves or when the government reasserts its authority, though when that might happen in Ukraine is anybody’s guess.
The going rate for people’s deputies?
Exposure of an intended backroom deal suggests that going rate for political allegiance is less than 500 thousand dollars. Campaigning for the autumn parliamentary elections is not yet underway, but political scandals between the regime and the opposition are already stirring public opinion. In early February Roman Zabzalyuk, a deputy from opposition Bloc of Yulia Tymoshenko, announced that he had been paid $450,000 for joining the pro-government parliamentary group “Reforms for the Future”, which he did in December 2011; he claims to have only joined the group to investigate rumors of bribery.
On being accused of bribery, Ihor Rybakov, leader of “Reforms for the future”, immediately demanded Zambalyuk return the money; however, BYUT instead elected to redirect the transfer of Hr 3.6 million ($450,000) to the Okhmatdyt National Children’s Hospital. The authorities’ response has been largely cursory: Volodymyr Lytvyn, Chairman of Verkhovna Rada, referred the case to the Prosecutor’s General Office, where Viktor Pshonka, Prosecutor General of Ukraine, announced that there would be no investigation; in his opinion the case constituted a moral, rather than legal, issue.
Whilst the involved parties might decided to take up their case in the courts, nothing can be done to repair the damage done to the parliamentary institution itself; at least the “dirty” money will now go towards saving the lives of infants.
People First Comment: It is not often that DW is able to heap praise on a member of Verkhovna Rada but in this case we have to congratulate opposition Deputy Roman Zabzalyuk for his foresight, bravery and wisdom in giving his ill-gotten gains to a worthy cause. This is a clear case of bribery. Bribery is internationally accepted as an act of corruption but not according to the Prosecutor General’s office.
Let us consider the facts. 1) The corruptor, in this case, is the leader of a political faction that supports the regime. 2) The corruptor is a People’s Deputy and therefore it would require a parliamentary vote to remove his immunity from prosecution before he could be prosecuted. 3) this is highly unlikely as he is a supporter of the regime and thus his corruption is being protected by the regime’s majority in Verkhovna Rada.
From this, any first year law student would be able to conclude that the Prosecutor General’s Office in Ukraine, the supreme authority in upholding the law of the land are freely admitting that they do not have the power or the authority to enforce the law upon the Government or those that support them. In other words despite the assurances of the President that the Prosecutor General’s office are fighting corruption it is with the caveat that they are not to include corruption within the government and parliament. Again it is one law for the rich and another for everybody else.
Governmental reshuffle: no new cards
Yanukovych’s rapid reshuffling of top governmental positions demonstrates his view that diversity of opinion is irrelevant when enacting a process of national reform; whereas consolidating allies into positions of power, remains top of the agenda. The pro-Moscow lobby seems to be flavor of the month: for example, Ihor Kalinin (former KGB) the newly appointed head of the Security Service of Ukraine, and Dmytro Salamatin, who was recently appointed Minister of Defense.
At the same time groups close to the regime leader appear to be becoming more and more powerful: Valeriy Khoroshrovsky, former head of the SBU, was recently promoted twice, first to the position of Minister of Finance and later to that of first vice prime minister.
Experts note that recent actions have also directly benefited billionaire Dmytro Firtash, presidential chief of staff Sergiy Lyovochkin and Energy Minister Yuriy Boyko, as we as a wider group known as “the family” due to their close ties to the President; a member of this group, Yuriy Kolobov – current deputy head of NBU, might well soon occupy the office of Minister of Finance.
Other individuals who appear to be receiving favor include: Andriy Klyuev, former vice prime minister and one of the favorite candidates for the prime ministerial position, has been appointed secretary of the Council of National Security and Defense and given the authority to reform the council as he sees fit. The former head of the Council of National Security and Defense, Raisa Bogatyryova, has been appointed minister of health and vice prime minister of the government of Ukraine; experts believe that she is close to Rinat Akhmetov.
Despite the many changes in staff at the highest level there are only the same old faces to be seen – as a result we can hardly expect them to breathe new life into the failing government of Ukraine; Yanukovych meanwhile, must have some agenda behind all these reshuffles.
People First Comment: It doesn’t matter how many times you shuffle the pack the cards are still the same and nothing will change. Successful government can only happen when the party in power actually has a plan and a budget for what they want to achieve. In plain terms it’s called an election manifesto and it is a key part of any democratic process. Party of Regions does not have a manifesto, or a plan, in fact they don’t even have an ideology therefore moving people around is a bit like a game of chess against yourself. In this case the President may well have appointed some highly competent people to these vital security roles, the question is whom are they securing as both are specialists in regime security as opposed to national defense.
The appointment of Kalinin and Solomatin and the moving of Bogatyryova however tells a second and more powerful story in that both the former are personal friends of the President and not members of Party of Regions whilst the latter was seen as the representative of Rinat Arkhmetov within the senior echelons of power, moving her to the Ministry of Health is not a sideways move but a simple demotion out of the Presidential sphere. This has all the hallmarks of a consolidation of power around the President and says a great deal about the Presidents relationship with his party and the other factions within it. This administration seems highly competent in losing friends as the relationship with Russia and the EU testifies. If this pattern is being repeated within his own party then Mezhigiriya is beginning to look more like a fortress than a country estate however the regime should take great care lest the fortress becomes a prison.
Viktor Tkachuk is chief executive officer of the People First Foundation, which seeks to strengthen Ukrainian democracy. The organization’s website is: www.peoplefirst.org.ua and the e-mail address is: [email protected]
