That in not accurate. While Yanukovich was elected rather fairly he was elected into a different position as by 2004 constitutional President did not have much power. The amendment was passed after the Orange revolution and 90% of the legislators voted for it. He managed to use his limited power together with corrupt judges to overturn the constitution claiming there had been procedural errors 6 years ago and started to use by old 1996 constitution, that gave him very large powers.
It began to became clear that he is consolidating his power and there might be no more fair elections ever.
He was also impeached by legal parliament, who had given up on him. Also the 2004 constitution was restored. And new elections were scheduled.
posted on 03/02/2014 6:32:13 PM PST
Thanks for the background; so , he was using the Chavez model of having a phone, a pen and a judiciary in his back pocket, huh? Seems to be the way to go these days.
posted on 03/02/2014 6:37:52 PM PST
Now where have I heard of an unethical politician used their limited power with corrupt judges to consolidate power??? Oh, I remember, now the question is who followed whom, Oslimey or Yanukovich?
Seriously, thanks for clarifying.
posted on 03/02/2014 6:58:32 PM PST
So Yanukovich was basically doing in the Ukraine what Obama has been doing in the US ? Giving himself powers he was not entitled to have. Great. When do we get to riot ?
posted on 03/02/2014 8:32:25 PM PST
(The user name is sarcastic. Although at times it may not appear that way.)
The entire thing sounds like a mess. A modern ‘First Triumverate’ with three powerful Ukrainian politicians backstabbing each other for the last 10 years over hegemony. Yulia Tymoshenko, Viktor Yushchenko, and Viktor Yanukovych.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson