Ukraine is gradually approaching a new political reality. The recent parliamentary elections are another stage of the constitutional reform adopted by the so-called package vote in the heat of the late 2004 Orange Revolution. The political reform, which calls for a reduction of the president’s powers and an increase of the prime minister and parliament’s powers, was in fact passed without a public debate. Many political parties that were in favor of introducing a parliamentary-presidential system in Ukraine maintained that our country would thus come closer to European democracy. This is why not everyone can explain how the new political system will function in practice and what difficulties it will encounter.
Quite a few experts claim that the parliamentary system is less stable than the presidential one: it rarely happens that one party wins more than 50 percent of the vote and can form a government on its own. More often than not, the parties that have made it to parliament have to negotiate the formation of a coalition government, while it takes time and the ability to make deals and arrive at compromises to reach a consensus.
This was the first time that proportional representation parliamentary elections were held in Ukraine. Some observers predict that Ukraine may end up in a situation marked by recurring crises and poor, if any, governance. It will take a long time for a more or less stable party system to materialize.
Other analysts point to the advantages of the parliamentary model. For example, it provides a better antidote than the presidential model to the temptation of establishing an authoritarian system.
A lot of approaches to solving problems that arise when the parliamentary system is in the making can be found in neighboring Poland, which uses instruments to ensure long-term political stability. According to Jerzy Marek-Nowakowski, foreign affairs observer of the Polish journal Wprost, Poland introduced amendments to the constitution in 1997 to this end. At the same a 5-percent parliament entry barrier was instituted (not 3 percent, like in Ukraine). On the other hand, the cabinet and the prime minister saw their powers increased.
“It is now impossible to dismiss the cabinet unless a new governmental coalition has been formed,” the Polish journalist told The Day. (Ukrainian MPs should have known this before they fired their government.) The expert believes that the 5-percent barrier keeps at bay parties that cannot muster nationwide support. Under the constitution, there is only one category of political parties that does not need barriers — parties of ethnic minorities.
Marek-Nowakowski believes that Ukraine is capable, in theory and in political practice, of forming an Orange government. “They will gain about 250 seats, which is quite enough for a stable coalition. It often happens in Europe that ruling parties have a 2 to 3 vote majority in parliament,” the Polish observer noted.
Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in- chief of the journal Rossiia v globalnoi politike (Russia in Global Politics) is convinced that the Verkhovna Rada will be stable. He told The Day that the Ukrainian parliament is unlikely to be dissolved, and common sense will prompt the deputies to form a coalition based on a parliamentary majority.
At the same time, the Russian expert pointed out one negative feature: the complicated decision-making process in the new parliament, which “is not monolithic but split into warring factions.” He also noted that decisions made under a parliamentary system “are more durable because they have been made by the majority as part of a process to coordinate all interests.”
The Russian expert is convinced that Ukraine will benefit much more from the parliamentary form of government, which is governed by the necessity to consider various interests — those of the regions and business groups. “Sometimes you may resort to taking certain harsh actions, but then you will have to come back to tackling problems,” Lukyanov notes.
