Yesterday, at a joint meeting of three of the five government committees, Mykola Azarov, over the course of 20 minutes, by a forceful decision seriously "trimmed" the President's powers. Viktor Yushchenko was forbidden to give instructions to the government. At the same time, according to Deputy Minister of the Cabinet of Ministers Oleksandr Lavrynovych, the President was left with the possibility of suspending decisions simultaneously with appealing to court. The reason for this, according to the official, was changes in the Constitution. It is very interesting that Viktor Yanukovych was not present at the meeting. The Prime Minister evidently deliberately left Mykola Azarov to "push through" the contentious decision.
We have already written about the gradual "trimming" of the President's powers by the new Cabinet of Ministers with a complete absence of reaction to such actions from the Secretariat. However, judging by everything, the government decided to speed up and begin interpreting the Constitution in its own favor as quickly as possible.
During a recent direct line, the head of the Main Directorate of the Civil Service of Ukraine, Tymofiy Motrenko, stated that as long as the Verkhovna Rada has not adopted legislative acts that contradict | the new system, the Constitution is in effect in Ukraine as a norm of direct action. It is, of course, difficult to disagree with this. However, the whole point is that the Constitution defines only the foundations of the functioning of the state machine.
Yes, indeed, Article 106 secures for the President the right to suspend the effect of Cabinet acts on grounds of non-compliance with the Constitution with simultaneous appeal to the Constitutional Court. But as for the President's instructions to the Cabinet of Ministers, nothing at all is said about that there. That is, the Constitution does not determine whether the President can give instructions to the Cabinet. Perhaps the essence of the Fundamental Law lies in such an interpretation, but that is not the government's business. These questions should have been answered by special legislative acts that the VRU must adopt under the new conditions — but so far they do not exist. And in general, the "trimming" of the President's powers by the Cabinet of Ministers in its own favor looks strange, even in the form of a parliamentary-presidential republic that Ukraine has become.
For many, however, the matter is not in legal nuances but in the political precedent. Viktor Yushchenko was unequivocally given to understand: matchmaker or not, don't meddle in others' affairs, be content with your law enforcement agencies and the humanitarian bloc partially secured for "Our Ukraine." At the same time, the President was "graciously" left with the right to appeal to court. Deputy Minister of the Cabinet Oleksandr Lavrynovych said as much: "We | are removing the President's right to give instructions to the government, and also leaving him the possibility of suspending decisions simultaneously with appealing to court." It sounds downright mocking — especially if one recalls one of the provisions of the recently signed Universal of National Unity: "We believe that the interaction of all bodies of power, political parties and their factions in the legislative body and bodies of local self-government, public organizations, people who have indisputable authority in society, in implementing the stated priorities into life will unite society."
Of course, Viktor Fedorovych's team can be understood. It is simply putting into practice Yulia Tymoshenko's pre-election message | — "nationwide elections of the prime minister." However, as has already been pointed out, the interpretation of the Constitution by bodies that have no right to do so can lead to very sad consequences.
Judging by the lack of reaction from the Secretariat and the silence of Roman Zvarych, the President has not yet decided how to react to such actions by the Cabinet. So far only MP Borys Bespalyy has spoken out, calling the decision "legal nihilism," Presidential representative in parliament Yuriy Klyuchkovsky, who also "lashed out" at the Cabinet, and Presidential adviser Mykola Poludenny, who quite logically wanted first to see the decision itself. However, let us note that so far this is merely the position of Viktor Yushchenko's entourage, and not the most influential part of it. The President himself, in principle, has three options.
First, to become an opposition to such actions by the Cabinet and try, partially, through interpretations favorable to him and the passage of legislative acts, to build up his influence. After all, Viktor Andriyovych cannot fail to understand that the government will not stop there, and the post of President risks turning into a symbol, in the most literal sense of the word. But at the same time, the President currently has no effective levers of influence, so he is unlikely to draw his saber and rush under a government tank.
There is, however, another option. Viktor Yushchenko will silently swallow the strengthening of the Cabinet and again talk about the need to unite the nation. What this threatens him with is also obvious. Christian analogies with the right and left cheek are not a very winning tactic in politics, especially when the counterpart is so strong.
Third, the President can try to play on what the Cabinet itself plays on — take advantage of "holes" in the legislation. Here, for example, is a wonderful body — the Secretariat. In the Fundamental Law it is prescribed as "another auxiliary body." Remember whom Leonid Kuchma used to restrain Viktor Yanukovych? Correct, Viktor Medvedchuk. Moreover, unofficial orders of the Presidential Administration were sometimes carried out in the localities to a greater extent than instructions of the Cabinet.
Of course, times have changed, and with them so has the legislation. But in Ukraine the law has never been the truth of last resort. Informal influence has always meant far more than formal powers. Yes, one can say that this is a step backward and that the Law must be the foundation of foundations in Ukraine. But such an approach is good when all participants in the political process observe the same rules of the game. At the same time, it is unlikely that the current composition of the government (as, incidentally, any other) will play by these rules — it is far too experienced in Byzantine politics.
That is, of course, one can observe all the rules and bow low to the opponent at the start of a duel. However, one must always remember: while you are bending down in a traditional highly moral bow, your counterpart may easily cut off your head. Why? Simply because he professes a different system of values and ethical coordinates.
(Incidentally, almost synchronously with the Cabinet's decision, the Communist Party of Ukraine announced its intention to propose to the Verkhovna Rada that amendments be made to the already adopted laws necessary for Ukraine's accession to the World Trade Organization. Whether the Party of Regions will support this initiative — we shall see in the future. For now it remains to be noted: another point of the Universal may soon be violated. This point, let us recall, envisages "the completion of work on Ukraine's participation in the activities of the Single Economic Space on the principles of multi-level, multi-speed integration, taking into account the norms and rules of the World Trade Organization"...).
So, in just one day, Bankova was given a palpable slap — and with both hands at that. And this is another alarming signal for Viktor Yushchenko. One can, of course, argue about what is strategically better for Ukraine: to have a live dog or a dead lion. But the fact remains a fact: if the President does not soon think about how to strengthen his influence, by 2007 he will envy the English queen with black envy.