sights & smell

supporters of ukraine’s presidential candidates clashed over control of key state institutions that could affect the outcome of the feb. 7 election between victor yanukovych and yulia tymoshenko.

the developments this week came fast, furious and were sometimes accompanied by violence. among them:

• parliament on jan. 28 dismissed interior minister yuriy lutsenko, who commands the nation’s 300,000 police officers and is seen as subservient to prime minister tymosheko;

• a scuffle – including use of smoke bombs or tear gas by police – broke out over control of ukraina state printing house, which prints election ballots for the nation, amid charges and counter-charges that extra ballots would be printed to rig the vote;

• the kyiv administrative appeals court, whose tymoshenko-friendly judges have sole jurisdiction over election-related matters, was under threat of hostile takeover from three party of regions parliamentarians.

it was unclear how the conflicts would shake out and what effect they would have on ukraine’s ability to conduct a free, fair and democratic presidential election on feb. 7. but the face-offs weren’t good omens.

serhiy taran, director of kyiv’s international democracy institute, said the battles under way suggest that ukraine is heading for a disputed election result, where control over the institutions being fought over, will – as in 2004 – play a critical role in deciding who becomes ukraine’s next president.

taran said it’s looking more likely that “the election outcome could be decided by the political force that succeeds in winning control over the judiciary and the central election commission.” for now, according to taran, the tymoshenko camp appears to have more sway over the court that will hear election disputes, while the yanukovych side has an upper hand in the cec.

as the battle for influence escalated, oleksandr chernenko, head of the committee of voters of ukraine, a non-profit organization, said that the two candidates are “looking for political advantage, not legal solutions” in their fierce confrontation.

chernenko predicted, that as in 2004, “a situation requiring a political – not a legal – solution to determine the election’s outcome will develop in the weeks following the feb. 7 runoff.”

the frontlines

a majority of verkhovna rada deputies – 231 – dismissed the controversial lutsenko, effectively making him a scapegoat for the recent chaos. lutsenko, in his second tour as interior minister since the 2004 orange revolution, has never been seen as a competent law enforcer. he rose to prominence a decade ago as an effective political critic of the authoritarian rule of former president leonid kuchma.

lutsenko compared his dismissal to “a gang trying to take over a village, and they needed to bump off the policeman first. i understand very well: if you fire the minister – the road to burglary is free.” but lutsenko hasn’t left entirely. after parliament’s vote, tymoshenko said lutsenko would continue to head the ministry as its first deputy minister.

lutsenko’s troops stormed into ukraina printing house early on jan. 25 to escort a tymoshenko ally into work as the new head of the plant. but a kyiv court overturned tymoshenko appointment, made jan. 18, and reinstated the previous director, valentyn muzyka.

early on jan. 25, yanukovych’s party of the regions said tymoshenko’s aim in changing the printing house leadership was to print an additional 1.5 million ballots, allegedly for ballot-box stuffing. her supporters denied the accusation and alleged yanukovych’s camp was, instead, plotting election fraud.

six deputies from the regions party, including olympic gold medal wrestler elbrus tedeyev, said they took over ukraina’s premises to prevent any extra ballots from being printed on top of the 37 million required for feb. 7.

later in the same day, interior ministry troops stormed into the building. videos of the melee, uploaded to youtube and broadcast widely on tv, show lawmakers directing their assistants to barricade the plant entrance and impede police, whose plainclothes force used crowbars and long metal poles to gain entry. there were conflicting reports over whether smoke grenades were used (lutsenko’s version) or tear gas (party of regions version). conflicting reports also surfaced over the extent and number of injuries.

lutsenko on jan. 25 said police arrested 22 people during the fracas for public disturbance and disobeying police instructions.

tymoshenko bloc deputy andriy portnov on jan. 25 said those responsible for latest conflict did no one a favor. “the stupidity of some government officials has no limits,” portnov said. “it’s necessary to establish who undertook to reshuffle management at the printing house before the runoff and to punish them.”

an emergency session of the national security and defense council convened by president victor yushchenko on jan. 25 directed the interior ministry to deploy interior ministry troops at the printing house and ordered the state security service to monitor the printing, storage and transportation of the new ballots to the nation’s polling stations next week.

the printing house resumed work on jan. 26, and valentyn muzyka, the long-term director of ukraina, was re-appointed to his job on jan. 27. he said his resignation was forced by acting finance minister ihor umansky, a tymoshenko subordinate.

yanukovych’s campaign manager mykola azarov, party of regions co-founder, accused tymoshenko and deputy prime minister oleksandr turchynov of provoking the clash in order to disrupt ballot paper preparations and delay the runoff vote.

“the police who raided the plant are responsible for cracking the heads of at least two printing house guards and breaking several hands,” azarov said hours after the fracas during a press conference in kyiv. “this was a blatant attempt by tymoshenko and her supporters to disrupt or postpone the runoff.”

but as things calmed down at the printing house, a new controversy flared at the kyiv administrative appeals court, which appeared this week to be targeted for a hostile takeover by the party of regions. its judges have all-important jurisdiction over election-related matters.

two deputies from regions took over the premises early on jan. 27 in an attempt to “control the court,” according to chief judge anatoly denysov. by mid-day, the number of deputies grew to three, including the ubiquitous wrestler tedeyev.

tymoshenko’s bloc released a statement saying the deputies “broke into the court’s database,” but this information was not confirmed by the judge. “i don’t think this is an attempt to pressure the court. but other judges might think that. i think this [can be qualified] as meddling in court’s affairs,” denysov told unian press agency on jan. 27.

denysov threatened to not come to work if the party of regions continues to interfere with his work. “this is ridiculous. my staff and i won’t come to work tomorrow if they remain,” denysov said. his threat apparently made the deputies leave the premises at the end of the day and not return the next morning.

valery bondyk, one of the regions deputies involved, had confirmed to the media that their actions were “election-related” and that the initial plan was to stay in court until all election lawsuits are finished.

denysov said he had informed the head of the organization for security and cooperation in europe’s election observation mission about the intrusion.

“let europe come to see how ukraine’s independent judiciary conducts itself during our election process. let them see with their own eyes what we have to put up with,” denysov was quoted by the unian news agency as saying. “rather than pressuring the court, these deputies are preventing it from functioning.”

the osce’s election observation mission on jan. 27 declined on comment on the shenanigans involving the ukraina printing house and interference by lawmakers into the courts. its representatives said an official interim report will be issued in a matter of days.

the election watchdog’s previous reports have said that uncertainty over control of ukraine’s courts may be used by the rival candidates to question the legitimacy of any decision on legal challenges to the election results. on jan. 28, the party of regions introduced legislation that would oust the court’s chief judge.