Sounding the Alarm Round 2: Protecting Democracy in Ukraine
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Sounding the Alarm Round 2: Protecting Democracy in Ukraine A Follow-up Freedom House Report July 2012 David J. Kramer Robert Nurick Oleksandr Sushko Viktoria Syumar Damon Wilson and Matthew Schaaf 1301 Connecticut Ave, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 296-5101 120 Wall Street New York, NY 10005 (212) 514-8040 www.freedomhouse.org With support from Freedom_house_report.indd 1 03.07.2012 15:54:35 Sounding the Alarm Round 2: Protecting Democracy in Ukraine A Follow-up Freedom House Report July 2012 Table of Contents I. Introduction................................................................................................................................................................ 2 II. Electoral Environment.............................................................................................................................................. 5 III. Civil Society.............................................................................................................................................................. 7 IV. Media......................................................................................................................................................................... 9 V. Rule of Law, Selective Prosecutions, and Corruption........................................................................................... 12 VI. Conclusion and Recommendations...................................................................................................................... 15 Appendix I ...................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Appendix II..................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................................................ 19 About Freedom House. ................................................................................................................................................. 20 — 1 — I. Introduction A little more than a year ago, Freedom House re- a follow-up special report on Ukraine and sent the leased its first special report on Ukraine, Sounding the same American assessment team – David J. Kramer Alarm: Protecting Democracy in Ukraine. That report,1 and two independent analysts, Robert Nurick and as the title suggested, warned that Ukraine was head- Damon Wilson3 – back to Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Lviv this ing in the wrong direction on a number of fronts: con- past April to have another look at the situation. This solidation of power in the executive branch at the ex- year, two highly respected Ukrainian experts joined in pense of democratic development, a more restrictive the assessment mission – Victoria Syumar and Olex- environment for the media, selective prosecution of ander Sushko. Their participation provided invaluable opposition figures, worrisome instances of intrusive- Ukrainian insight into developments in their country ness by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), widely and removed the sense that this year’s report is simply criticized local elections in October 2010, a pliant an outsider’s look into Ukraine. During the mission, Verkhovna Rada (Ukraine’s parliament), an erosion of the American-Ukrainian team met with a wide range basic freedoms of assembly and speech, and widening of government officials, Verkhovna Rada deputies, corruption. “Ukraine under President Yanukovych,” political opposition figures, civil society actors, and last year’s report warned, “has become less democratic journalists;4 unlike last year, their meetings included and, if current trends are left unchecked, may head President Yanukovych himself. down a path toward autocracy and kleptocracy.” All members of the A year later, most of those assessment team share a key concerns remain, and common commitment in some cases the problems While we are not advocating to Ukraine’s success. We have grown considerably embrace the vision of an worse, especially in the area sanctions at this particular point, independent, sovereign of selective prosecution of we hope the very possibility of U.S. Ukraine with strong opposition figures and cor- sanctions being applied would democratic institutions, ruption. The mayoral elec- a prosperous free market, tion in Obukhiv in March serve as a wake-up call to the and consistent rule of law, was widely criticized for its highest levels of the Ukrainian embedded in Europe and a alleged rigging and fraud and government that they are on the partner of the United States bodes badly for the upcom- wrong path as well as Russia. It is in the ing Verkhovna Rada elec- context of this vision for tions. The term “familyiza- Ukraine, a vision shared by tion” was commonly used by government and opposition interlocutors, implying that leaders alike, that we offer President Yanukovych’s family has not only benefit- this report and register our concerns. The trajectory ted personally from his presidency (see the section of policy and events in Ukraine today regrettably below on corruption) but is increasingly at the center threatens to lead the nation away from, rather than of power and governance. Freedom House’s ranking toward, this vision. of Ukraine in its Freedom in the World 2012 report The assessment team concluded that, whereas remained in the Partly Free category with a negative most areas we considered in last year’s report have trend; the same assessment can be found in Freedom worsened, as noted above and in this year’s report, civil House’s just-released Nations in Transit. 2 society appeared more animated and less dispirited Against this backdrop, Freedom House, with support this year compared to last. The Verkhovna Rada from the Open Society Foundations’ Ukrainian arm, elections scheduled for October offer a critical test the International Renaissance Foundation, undertook for the government to demonstrate its commitment to democratic principles. The media situation is 1 For last year’s report, Sounding the Alarm: Protecting Democracy in Ukraine, see http://www.freedomhouse. org/report/special-reports/sounding-alarm-protecting- 3 The views of Nurick and Wilson reflected in this report are democracy-ukraine. their own and not those of their institutions. 2 For key findings from Freedom in the World 2012, see http:// 4 See Appendix I for a full listing of the interlocutors with www.freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world and for whom the team met in Ukraine. All conversations were Nations in Transit 2012, see: http://www.freedomhouse.org/ conducted under the Chatham House Rule, meaning that report/nations-transit/nations-transit-2012. none of the comments reflected in this report are attributed. — 2 — not as bleak as the trajectory a year ago would have former interior minister Yuri Lutsenko, and former suggested, though still cause for concern. Moreover, acting defense minister Valery Ivashchenko5 – the government has supported useful legislation and allowing them to participate in the upcoming and approaches dealing with the non-governmental Verkhovna Rada elections (if they so choose). It also (NGO) community, access to information, and open includes a Verkhovna Rada election this October that government. meets the OSCE’s standards. And it includes a vibrant civil society and media to act as checks against unwise Western engagement, both with the Yanukovych government policies. government and Ukrainian society, remains critical. It should include encouraging and rewarding good We offer recommendations at the end of this report on performance and aggressively pushing back against how to improve the situation for civil society, media, backsliding on democracy. From this perspective, the elections, selective prosecutions and corruption. Ab- reaction of the international community, especially sent improvements in these areas, however, talk about the delay by the European Union in December 2011 the possibility of sanctions against Ukrainian officials, in signing the Association Agreement, including the limited to only private discussions among politicians Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement and foreign policy leaders at this point, is bound to (DCFTA), because of the treatment of opposition expand. Legislation moving through the U.S. Con- figures, sent a very strong signal to the Yanukovych gress focused largely on Russia that would impose administration. Similarly, the fact that many a visa ban and asset freeze against officials involved European leaders opted not to attend the Euro 2012 in gross human rights abuses, could, under the lat- soccer tournament co-hosted by Ukraine and Poland est Senate version of the bill, also be applied to other was a clear message. So too, was the cancellation of countries, including Ukraine. 6 Support for such appli- an East-Central European summit in May 2012 that cation of the legislation in the case of Ukraine is grow- Ukraine was planning to host in Yalta after a number ing among experts and parliamentarians in the West of European leaders opted not to attend that either. and even among some Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada The onus is on the Ukrainian government to regain deputies. That Ukraine and sanctions are increasingly the trust and confidence of the Europeans. Western mentioned in the same sentence is a reflection of the leaders need to be