In a desperate attempt to regain relevance Yushchenko wants his version of the constitution to be put to referendum at the next Presidential election in which he hopes to control the agenda.

The devil is in the detail and there is no way the Constitution, without wide support, can be properly debated and understood. The time to debate reform has passed and most certainly should not be the main focus of the Presidential campaign.

The issues are complicated and require proper consideration as to the alternatives and impacts of the proposed changes. They can not and should not be considered as part of the Presidential election campaign as much as Yushchenko would like to have his proposed reforms the focus of the campaign.

Which ever candidate advocates one way or the other support or disagreement on Yushchenko’s model they will be judged not on the real issues confronting Ukraine but on the notion of President versus Parliament. What would happen if Yushchenko complied with the ruling of the courts and held a referendum during the Presidential election on the question of Ukraine’s membership of NATO?

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Under Yushchenko’s proposed Constitutional reforms the President would have absolute authority and control over Ukraine’s courts, the appointment of the government and even the parliament without proper checks and balances.

The President would have the right to dismiss Ukraine’s Parliament at any time if its not to his liking. Whilst parliamentary immunity is removed, immunity for Judges and the President remains in tack with the President’s immunity made absolute by making it impossible to impeach the President except only on conviction resulting from a deliberate intention of committing a crime – Breaches of oath and Ukraine’s Constitution no longer are taken into consideration as grounds for the President’s impeachment. Further more the only body that can impeach the President is Yushchenko’s proposed Senate of regions.

The structure of the Senate, based around Ukraine’s existing oblasts, would seriously divide Ukraine stretching it to breaking point by giving an unfair representational bias towards Western Ukrainian regions at the expense of Ukraine’s more populous Eastern and Southern regions. This disproportional representation would be a recipe for disaster fueling disunity and distrust exacerbating the tensions that already exist.

Yushchenko’s Senate will require national elections with one third of the Senate facing reelection every two years, along with the associated costs in holding an election. Senators will be elected by a undemocratic outdated first-past-the-post voting system with the same group of electors, who have the highest vote, electing all three regional representatives. The majority (50% or more) will go unrepresented. (Eg in 2007 in Zakapattia oblast Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine secured less then 34% of the regions votes but was still the highest polling party and as such would win all three Senate positions with only 152,000 votes. Whilst in Donetsk Party of Regions with over 1.7 Million votes would also only elect three senators)

What’s more Yushchenko seeks to grant himself a senatorial position for life, even if he is voted out of office he still will have a seat and salary in Ukraine’s Senate – For life.

When making an assessment of any proposed constitutional reform you need to ask yourself what would the effect of these changes be if the person you do not support is elected to office and holds absolute power without checks and balances to limit abuse of Presidential authority.

UkrToday

President Yushchenko announced consultations with political party leaders at 8am. The dissolution of the Rada was the one and only topic on the agenda.

Analysts thought the talks could’ve gone either way, but after just an hour of negotiations, the talking was over. And, according to the presidential administration, all agreed that another early election was inevitable.

But Nikolay Tomenko, a deputy from the Bloc of Yulia Timoshenko, wasn’t so sure

“Some say that we all happily agree with the president about early voting. I don’t know what the other parties think, but BYuT has been on the side of the majority of Ukraine’s population. We think that another early election is an absolutely anti-national step,” he said.

The reaction from the Prime Minister’s corner is not surprising. While the Party of Regions and the Communists seem more or less calm about a possible bail out – probably because they’re unlikely to lose their seats – the stakes are high for the Iron Lady of Ukrainian politics.

Ahead of the presidential campaign, which kicks off in less than a year, remaining at the helm is crucial for Timoshenko’s political future.

But experts believe this is something Yushchenko sees as a threat. And for some, this is what the crisis is really about.

Political analyst Mikhail Pogribinskiy said: “They’re fighting for the same electorate, but Timoshenko’s rating is 25 per cent and Yushchenko’s is barely 5 per cent. So he has to get rid of her and the only way to do so is through another snap ballot. It’s absolutely impossible that Timoshenko would again gain a majority with any other party and be re-elected as prime-minister.”

Observers say the only way Timoshenko can regain the initiative is to create an unlikely alliance with her political opponents – the Party of Regions. But both have already given clear indications that such a broad coalition would not happen.

So what appears to be another blame-game between the prime minister and the president could well be the only tactic left for Timoshenko.

Last year, political experts doubted until the very last minute that the Rada would be dispersed. But this time, nobody believes that any coalition will be formed. And the only question which remains for Ukrainian politics is: how long is left for the Rada.

The Ukrainian constitution says an early election must be held within two months following the decree to dissolve parliament. Some predict the dissolution of the Rada will happen this week. That’s because in order to ensure a higher turnout of voters, the fourth ballot in as many years must be held before Christmas and the New Year.

The Texas Congressman has generated a devoted following that many have called a revolutionary movement. Dr. Paul even organised his own Convention in Minnesota, attracting 18,000 people.

While he has officially dropped out of the race for the White House, his message is one for change but definitely not the type offered by Obama or McCain.

“Obama is not for change. He beats McCain into sending more money to Afghanistan. And they both want to send troops and more money into Georgia,” he said.

Ron Paul said he has rejected a plea from the McCain campaign to endorse him, though he did call the republican nominee ‘the lesser of two evils.’

Instead he’s rallied behind third-party candidates like Libertarian Ralph Nader, who took the opportunity to criticise media coverage of the election.

“It’s demeaning to the media, to the American people and to our status around the world to engage in trivia about political gaffs,” he said.

The third-party presidential candidates plan to hold their own debates parallel to those organised for McCain and Obama, in response to the media blackout on their campaigns.

The mainstream media has dubbed Nader a ‘Perennial’ presidential candidate and a spoiler for taking votes away from the main candidates.

Green Party Candidate Cynthia McKinney also took the floor to declare her independence from the current political order.

“The politics of today is politics of conformity and of control. And basically the two-party system represents just that,” she said.

A was message echoed by Charles Baldwin who’s running on the Constitution Party ticket.

”It’s a broken system. The two major parties have not only a monopoly but stranglehold a on the political process system that choking the lifeblood out of our country,” he stated.

The four candidates share the same views when it comes to foreign policy. They condemn U.S. intervention in Georgia and the decision to send a billion-dollar aid package.

”Have you ever thought when you send a billion dollar aid that maybe there’s someone hungry in the United States or who needs medical care?” Ron Paul wondered.

McKinney said it was totally inappropriate for the U.S. “to send so-called humanitarian aid on a naval ship”.She also called NATO’s eastward expansion a dangerous move that could stir another Cold War.

The third-party presidential candidates have no illusions about sitting down in the Oval Office next January. Their goal is to change the two-party system in Washington. They call it the ‘beginning of the realignment of American politics’

In the meantime. If you have a press release you would like to have published please forward a copy of your release and we will use that as part of our development.  When we are ready we will be posting updates to the various search engines.

Thank you,

Crikey Media Development Team