University College of Southeast Norway Faculty of Humanities, Sports and Educational Science Master’s Thesis Study programme: MHRMC900 Spring 2018 Marina Belajeva A Critical Discourse Analysis of the role of the lustration law on the process of democratization in Ukraine after the power shift in 2014 University College of Southeast Norway Faculty of Humanities, Sports and Educational Science PO Box 235 NO-3603 Kongsberg, Norway http://www.usn.no © 2018 Marina Belajeva This thesis is worth 45 study points ___ 2 Abstract The 2013 – 2014 Ukrainian revolution, which started as a non-violent demonstration for European integration, rapidly developed into a riot against corrupt government officials, human rights violations and power usurpation, which resulted in mass killings and full-scale war in the Eastern part of the country, which has escalated into prolonged conflict. One of the claims of the Euromaidan supporters was for the protection and cleansing from state institutions of corrupt high-ranking officials from the previous regimes through the ‘special, transitional public employment laws’ (David, 2015) referred to as lustration laws. The objective of this study is to conduct a critical discourse analysis of the lustration policies implemented in post-Euromaidan Ukraine in 2014 through the prism of transitional justice (TJ) literature and in light of the experiences of other CEE countries. A further objective is to explore the impact of the Ukrainian lustration law on the process of democratization in the country. Fairclough’s three-dimensional model is applied to one legal document in the form of the Ukrainian Law ‘On Government Cleansing’ and two non-legal documents in the form of newspaper articles in order to see what discourses prevail in the texts in the context of democratization and what social effects they might have. Keywords: Lustration, transitional justice, human rights, corruption, Euromaidan, discourse analysis ___ 3 Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3 Contents .................................................................................................................. 4 1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 6 1.1 Background information .................................................................................... 6 1.2 Research questions and purpose ...................................................................... 9 1.3 Significance of the study .................................................................................. 11 1.4 Limitations ........................................................................................................ 13 1.5 Organization of the study ................................................................................ 13 2 An overview of Transitional Justice .............................................................. 14 2.1 The notion of Transitional Justice ................................................................... 14 2.2 Key concepts related to Transitional Justice................................................... 17 2.2.1 Human Rights ....................................................................................... 17 2.2.2 Truth ..................................................................................................... 20 2.2.3 Justice ................................................................................................... 21 2.2.4 Reparations .......................................................................................... 22 2.2.5 Reconciliation ....................................................................................... 23 2.2.6 Democratization .................................................................................. 24 2.3 Models of Transitional Justice ......................................................................... 27 3 The process of transition in Ukraine............................................................. 30 3.1 Transitional Justice in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) .............................. 30 3.2 Background to the crisis: The political and historical context ....................... 33 3.3 Ukrainian lustration .......................................................................................... 34 3.4 The Law 'On Government Cleansing': revenge or a democratic transition? . 38 4 Methodology: Critical Discourse Analysis ..................................................... 42 4.1 Critical Discourse Studies ................................................................................. 43 4.1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................... 43 4.1.2 The critical element of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) .................. 44 4.2 Fairclough's Critical Discourse Analysis ........................................................... 47 ___ 4 4.2.1 The three-dimensional framework of Critical Discourse Analysis ..... 49 4.3 Analysis framework .......................................................................................... 52 4.3.1 Analytical tools ..................................................................................... 53 4.4 Sampling ........................................................................................................... 58 4.5 Data collection .................................................................................................. 60 4.6 Methodological challenges .............................................................................. 60 4.7 Ethical considerations ...................................................................................... 61 5 A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Law 'On Government Cleansing' ............ 62 5.1 Textual analysis ................................................................................................ 63 5.1.1 Law 'On Government Cleansing' No 4359 (Lustration Law) .............. 63 5.1.1.1 Tools .............................................................................................. 65 5.1.2 'Two understandings of Lustration' .................................................... 73 5.1.3 'Lustration is a discussion we have to continue' ................................ 75 5.2 Discursive practice ........................................................................................... 77 5.2.1 The discourse of 'good development' ................................................ 78 5.2.2 The discourse of 'conflict prevention' ................................................ 81 5.3 Analysis of social practice ................................................................................ 84 5.3.1 Historical context: Late lustration in Ukraine ..................................... 86 5.3.2 Transitional Justice: lustration as defensive democracy ................... 89 6 Conclusion .................................................................................................. 91 References ............................................................................................................. 95 ___ 5 1 Introduction 1.1 Background information The matter of the Ukraine crisis and the attempts of the Ukrainian government to frame events in Ukraine from 21 November 2013 – onwards as ‘crimes against humanity and war crimes’, coupled with the transitional justice (TJ) mechanisms applied in post-Euromaidan Ukraine, has had a growing influence on the political debate among the EU member states and great powers in face of U.S. and Russia. Ex-president Yanukovych’s refusal to sign the Association Agreement (AA) with the European Union (EU) on 21 November 2013 contributed to the violent protests known as the Euromaidan or the Revolution of Dignity. The protests were in response to widespread corruption, nepotism, and a tendency towards authoritarianism, which was associated with the Yanukovych regime and the Soviet era. The declared goal of the thousands of Ukrainians protesting was to orient themselves toward the European democratic practices, a high standard of living and quality of life and to become a member state. Yanukovych’s refusal to sign the AA, however, was perceived as a step that moved Ukraine closer to Russia’s sphere of influence. The demonstration began peacefully but tensions between protesters and police escalated, and the protests spread to other Ukrainian cities, causing multiple deaths and injuries. During the revolution, thousands of statues of Vladimir Lenin, the founder of Soviet communism, were destroyed, marking the revival of the process of decommunization. The power shift in state government in Kiev on 22 February 2014, resulted in protests in the Crimean Peninsula against the new political regime, following the successful accession of the peninsula to Russia. The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) condemned the act as an “illegal annexation”1 (UNGA, 2014). In parallel, both a negative attitude toward a new pro- 1 The term ‘annexation’ is used here to mean the occupation of a territory as a result of a unilateral declaration as though there was no question about its right to that territory it was my own ___ 6 European government in Kiev led by Turchynov2 from parts of Eastern Ukraine, and the willingness of people from Donetsk and Luhansk regions to hold a referendum on federalization3 evoked negative reactions in the Parliament of Ukraine - Verkhovna Rada (hereinafter Rada), so Ukrainian armed forces fighting on behalf of the government were sent