The Crimean parliamentary taskforce, which is exploring the possibility to amend the Crimean Constitution, has already held two meetings. Aside from the declared purpose of such amendments, there is a discernible element of pre-election maneuvering in this matter, as Crimean politicians are yet again trying to capitalize on the so-called language question.
The issue of the need to amend the Crimean Constitution was broached last week at the meeting of the Association of Local Governance Bodies, held with the participation of the Ukrainian parliament speaker, Volodymyr Lytvyn. According to his Crimean counterpart Borys Deich, the Crimean parliament would like the Constitutions of Ukraine and the Crimea to grant the autonomy’s parliament the right of legislative initiative and grant the Crimean parliamentarians a five-year mandate instead of their current four- year mandate, since the Ukrainian parliament members will have a five- year mandate when last year’s controversial constitutional reform becomes effective in Ukraine as of Jan. 1, 2006. The Crimean deputies also seek to further specify the constitutional provisions concerning property in the Crimea, and introduce local Crimean taxes. In what is believed to be the most contentious issue, the Crimean parliamentarians seek official status for the Russian and Crimean Tatar languages. Notably, in individual draft amendments this status is termed as “republican status.”
That individual Crimean parliamentarians want to combine the question of extending their mandate with the resolution of major political issues is due to the start of the 2006 election campaign, experts say. According to Serhiy Velizhansky, member of the coordinating board of the Transparent Government movement, “As soon as politicians start discussing the Russian language, it is a sign of looming elections.” Velizhansky thinks that politicians who are trying yet again to capitalize on the Russian language and thus win over voters have no respect for people. As he put it, ever since the Constitution was endorsed in 1998, abolishing the official status of the Russian and Crimean Tatar languages in the autonomy, the Crimean parliament had ample time to either reject this provision or have the Constitution amended over the past seven years. Ironically, it is not in the interests of pie-in-the-sky parliamentarians for this issue to be resolved, Velizhansky believes. After all, if it is resolved, they will have nothing else to capture the attention of Crimean voters with during the election campaign. It therefore appears that the parliamentarians who motioned for these issues to be resolved do not believe that their initiatives will be supported by the top decision makers. But this does not matter ahead of the elections. What matters for them is to make their demands public, says Velizhansky.
Crimean parliament speaker Borys Deich believes that the proposed Constitutional amendments would enable the Crimea to expedite the resolution of many problems in the autonomy’s interests. Individual Crimean parliament members claim that the Ukrainian parliament presently ignores Crimea’s initiatives. “The parliament of the Crimean Autonomous Republic has sent 53 proposals and critical comments concerning individual Ukrainian laws, but most of them were never placed on agenda for consideration in the country’s parliament,” Deich said. As he put it, already in April 2005 the Crimean parliament endorsed a resolution to introduce a five-year mandate for the Crimean parliamentarians instead of the current four-year mandate, which was done in connection with the constitutional reform that will become effective in Ukraine as of Jan. 1, 2006. “We endorsed a corresponding draft of the Ukrainian Justice Ministry, but the Cabinet of Ministers never submitted it for consideration in the country’s parliament,” Deich said.
Speaker Deich says that in this connection it is necessary to determine the mechanism of amending the Crimean Constitution. The Constitution of the Crimea is a law of Ukraine, which was endorsed simultaneously by the Ukrainian and Crimean parliaments. Under the currently standing provision, it may be amended only jointly by the two parliaments. The taskforce has been charged with drafting specific proposals to be considered during parliamentary hearings in the Crimea in late November. This question will be further considered at the December session of the Crimean parliament, after which the Crimean parliament speaker will pass it on to the Ukrainian parliament. To coordinate the positions of Ukrainian and Crimean parliamentarians on these issues, Anatoliy Hrytsenko, deputy head of the Crimean government and member of the Crimean parliament, has proposed forming a joint taskforce to oversee the process of amending the Crimean Constitution, and manage the passage of corresponding enactments. Hrytsenko pointed out that the most important thing for the Crimean parliament is for the Ukrainian Constitution to incorporate a provision granting the Crimea the right of legislative initiative. This done, the proposals of Crimean parliamentarians would no longer gather dust in Kyiv, and critical decisions would be made in the autonomy in an expedite manner.
