{"id":4656,"date":"2019-05-27T07:24:00","date_gmt":"2019-05-27T04:24:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/"},"modified":"2025-07-18T14:42:03","modified_gmt":"2025-07-18T11:42:03","slug":"political-points-for-20-27-may-2019","status":"publish","type":"analytical-materials","link":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/","title":{"rendered":"Political Points for 20\u201327 May 2019"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_69_1 counter-flat ez-toc-counter ez-toc-transparent ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Sections<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/#62_peoples_deputies_addressed_the_Constitutional_Court_regarding_the_unconstitutionality_of_the_dissolution_of_Parliament\" title=\"62 people\u2019s deputies addressed the Constitutional Court regarding the unconstitutionality of the dissolution of Parliament\">62 people\u2019s deputies addressed the Constitutional Court regarding the unconstitutionality of the dissolution of Parliament<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/#Rivne_precedent_return_of_repressive_practices_against_participants_in_peaceful_gatherings\" title=\"Rivne precedent: return of repressive practices against participants in peaceful gatherings?\">Rivne precedent: return of repressive practices against participants in peaceful gatherings?<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"62_peoples_deputies_addressed_the_Constitutional_Court_regarding_the_unconstitutionality_of_the_dissolution_of_Parliament\"><\/span>62 people\u2019s deputies addressed the Constitutional Court regarding the unconstitutionality of the dissolution of Parliament<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>1. CPLR expert opinion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>On May 24, people\u2019s deputies of Ukraine\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/l.facebook.com\/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ccu.gov.ua%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2F3_3426.pdf%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR0dG8MaxmC7FRoTaz7t5HTDXm_oL2trfTn1_b28KD6WQ3lleyd1-FD5TqU&amp;h=AT2SHCKGoyFPne02_y5_cL0LNO2mKSYjQmwwfj2o9OSE5bKCUzy-PTQ3dXoVnQ50N5o-PbYR6Dsmh22kU4f\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">raised<\/a>\u00a0the issue of unconstitutionality of the Presidential Decree on early termination of powers of the Parliament and the appointment of early elections before the Constitutional Court. Experts of the Centre of Policy and Legal Reform support this decision and\u00a0share\u00a0the position on the unconstitutionality of the\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.president.gov.ua\/documents\/3032019-27121\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Decree<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>2. Respective authorities counter-point\/argument<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Constitutional Court received the submission and, at this stage,\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ccu.gov.ua\/novyna\/konstytuciyni-podannya-stanom-na-24-travnya-2019-roku\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">assigned\u00a0<\/a>it to the judge-speaker.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>3. CPLR assessment of the authorities counter-point<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Constitutional Court should consider the submission of people\u2019s deputies and adopt a Decision on the (un)constitutionality of early termination of parliamentary powers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This is critical for the Constitutional Court to adopt it before the day of voting, because in the opposite case, subject to the establishment of unconstitutionality, the legality and, as a consequence, legitimacy, of the next convocation of Parliament will be in jeopardy. It is important to prevent such a development of events. Right now, the Constitutional Court, as the only body of constitutional jurisdiction, should take a proactive position and resolve the conflict between Parliament and the President. It is unacceptable to reach the point at which the political crisis will turn into a constitutional one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>To this end, the Constitutional Court should determine this constitutional proceedings as urgent, and, in accordance with the procedure stipulated by part three of Article 75 of the Law of Ukraine \u201cOn the Constitutional Court of Ukraine\u201d, consider constitutional proceedings within one month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>4. Related legislation\/instructions which require the authorities act in a certain manner<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Constitution of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine \u201cOn the Constitutional Court of Ukraine\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>5. CPLR expert suggestions on how to fix the problem using the legal instruments available in Ukraine.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>We call on the Constitutional Court to determine constitutional proceedings as urgent and to consider it within one month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Rivne_precedent_return_of_repressive_practices_against_participants_in_peaceful_gatherings\"><\/span>Rivne precedent: return of repressive practices against participants in peaceful gatherings?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>1. CPLR expert opinion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/uarivnetv\/photos\/a.1744091235910173\/2320320731620551\/?type=3&amp;theater\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">According to<\/a>\u00a0the media, in Rivne, two members of the peaceful gathering in support of the impeachment of the President of Ukraine V. Zelensky were detained by the police for \u201cunauthorized\u201d peaceful assembly. The police officers issued administrative protocols in relation to the participants of the action under Article 185-1 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses (CUoAO) \u201cViolation of the procedure for organization and holding of peaceful gatherings\u201d. Bringing them to administrative liability is motivated by the fact that the participants of the peaceful assembly did not notify on its holding in accordance with the established procedure. In addition, since one of the \u201coffenders\u201d is a minor girl, an administrative protocol was drawn up against her mother for the failure of parents to perform their duties on the education of children under Art. 184 of the CUoAO.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Experts of the Centre of Policy and Legal Reform are of the opinion that the detention of the participants in the gathering and the drawing up of administrative protocols against them is a manifestation of arbitrary actions of the police. In accordance with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, which is the source of law in Ukraine, breaking up the demonstration solely because of the lack of prior notification, in the absence of any unlawful actions by the demonstration participants, is not in line with the criterion of \u201cthe need for a democratic society\u201d. Thus, in the case \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.legislationline.org\/documents\/id\/17932\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Bucta agaings Hungary<\/a>\u201d, the European Court concluded:\u00a0<em>\u201cIn cases where an immediate response to a political event in the form of a demonstration is being considered, the decision to break up the demonstration solely because of a lack of prior notification, in the absence of any unlawful actions by the demonstrators, constitutes a disproportionate restriction of the freedom of peaceful assembly\u201d\u00a0<\/em>(p. 36).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In addition, although the Constitution of Ukraine contains a general provision on the need to notify executive authorities and local self-government bodies on the holding of a peaceful assembly, there are no legislative norms in Ukraine that specify this provision. In particular, the laws do not have specific provisions as to which executive authorities or local governments should be notified, and the timing for making such a prior notification. In view of the existence of such legal gaps, the question arises whether citizens can, under existing legal regulation, foresee the consequences of their actions of not reporting about the peaceful assembly. The answer to this question was given by the European Court of Human Rights in the case of \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/zakon.rada.gov.ua\/laws\/show\/974_945\/print\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Verentsov against Ukraine<\/a>\u201d. According to the Court\u2019s opinion, \u201c<em>the Constitution of Ukraine provides certain general rules on possible restrictions on freedom of assembly, but these rules require further development in national legislation \u2026. Having analyzed the national law on peaceful gatherings, the European Court of Human Rights resolved<\/em>\u00a0that\u00a0<em>\u201cit is impossible to conclude that the \u201cprocedure\u201d specified in Article 185-1 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses is sufficiently clear in order to enable an applicant to foresee, to the extent that it was substantiated by circumstances, the consequences of his\/her actions\u00a0<\/em>\u201d (paragraph 54).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>2. Respective authorities counter-point\/argument<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Spokesman\u00a0 of the National Police\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ukrinform.ua\/rubric-society\/2708333-policia-provede-sluzbovu-perevirku-cerez-incident-na-mitingu-za-impicment-prezidenta.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">stated<\/a>, that the police would conduct an official investigation of the police officers\u2019 actions during the incident in Rivne, when administrative protocols were drawn up against the participants of the gathering for the impeachment of the President. According to him, from the legal point of view, police officers acted within the framework of their responsibilities, but they could apply milder methods of influence, for example, conduct a preventive and explanatory conversation and issue a verbal warning. The National Police Spokesman also informed that an explanatory discussion will be conducted with the staff member of the police department about one of the principles of police reform, namely \u2013 in which cases the methods of communication with citizens on the clarification of compliance with the requirements of the law should first be applied.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The President of Ukraine V. Zelensky also reacted to the situation on\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/zelenskiy95\/posts\/2255637548019942\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Facebook<\/a>.\u00a0<em>\u201cI explored the situation regarding the alleged arrest of a boy and girl who arranged a protest against me in Rivne. There was no detention, but police officers could act less severely. The police will conduct an official check. I urge the Ministry of Internal Affairs not to take actions against political protesters if people do not violate the public order. I\u2019m not afraid of the criticism.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>3. CPLR assessment of the authorities counter-point<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Experts of the Centre of Policy and Legal Reform do not agree with the assessment of the Spokesman of the National Police of Ukraine on the actions of the police officers as being carried out within the limits of their responsibilities. Commentary by the Spokesman of the National Police of Ukraine and actions of the police officers testify to the insufficient level of police awareness on Ukrainian legislation and international standards regarding the right to peaceful assembly. At the same time, we can welcome the decision of the National Police leadership on the appointment of an official investigation on this incident.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>4. Related legislation\/instructions which require the authorities act in a certain manner<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>According to Article 39 of the Constitution of Ukraine, citizens have the right to gather peacefully, without weapons and to hold meetings, rallies, campaigns and demonstrations, about which executive bodies and local self-governments are notified in advance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Restrictions on the exercise of this right&nbsp;<strong>may be established by a court in accordance with the law<\/strong>&nbsp;and only in the interests of national security and public order \u2013 in order to prevent disturbances or crimes, to protect public health or the rights and freedoms of others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Article 92 of the Constitution of Ukraine provides that the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen, guarantees of these rights and freedoms and&nbsp;<strong>main duties of a citizen<\/strong>&nbsp;may be determined only by the laws;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>According to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/zakon.rada.gov.ua\/laws\/show\/974_945\/print\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">\u201cVerentsov against Ukraine\u201d<\/a>, \u201cthe Constitution of Ukraine provides certain general rules on possible restrictions on freedom of assembly, but these rules require further development in national legislation \u2026. Having analyzed the national law on peaceful gatherings, the European Court of Human Rights resolved that \u201cit is impossible to conclude that the \u201cprocedure\u201d specified in Article 185-1 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses is sufficiently clear in order to enable an applicant to foresee, to the extent that it was substantiated by circumstances, the consequences of his\/her actions \u201d (paragraph 54).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>5. CPLR expert suggestions on how to fix the problem using the legal instruments available in Ukraine<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the opinion of the CPLR experts, a law on the abolition of liability under Article 185-1 of the CUoAO should be adopted.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>62 people\u2019s deputies addressed the Constitutional Court regarding the unconstitutionality of the dissolution of Parliament 1. CPLR expert opinion On May 24, people\u2019s deputies of Ukraine\u00a0raised\u00a0the issue of unconstitutionality of [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","categories":[176],"authors":[178],"source":[],"analytics":[400],"class_list":["post-4656","analytical-materials","type-analytical-materials","status-publish","hentry","category-constitutional-order","authors-cplr","analytics-weekly-analytics"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v24.8.1 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Political Points for 20\u201327 May 2019 - Pravo<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"62 people\u2019s deputies addressed the Constitutional Court regarding the unconstitutionality of the dissolution of Parliament.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Political Points for 20\u201327 May 2019 - Pravo\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"62 people\u2019s deputies addressed the Constitutional Court regarding the unconstitutionality of the dissolution of Parliament.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Pravo\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-07-18T11:42:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/frame-30.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1350\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\n\t    \"@context\": \"https:\/\/schema.org\",\n\t    \"@graph\": [\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"WebPage\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/\",\n\t            \"url\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/\",\n\t            \"name\": \"Political Points for 20\u201327 May 2019 - Pravo\",\n\t            \"isPartOf\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/#website\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"datePublished\": \"2019-05-27T04:24:00+00:00\",\n\t            \"dateModified\": \"2025-07-18T11:42:03+00:00\",\n\t            \"description\": \"62 people\u2019s deputies addressed the Constitutional Court regarding the unconstitutionality of the dissolution of Parliament.\",\n\t            \"breadcrumb\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/#breadcrumb\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"inLanguage\": \"en-US\",\n\t            \"potentialAction\": [\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ReadAction\",\n\t                    \"target\": [\n\t                        \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/\"\n\t                    ]\n\t                }\n\t            ]\n\t        },\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"BreadcrumbList\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/#breadcrumb\",\n\t            \"itemListElement\": [\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ListItem\",\n\t                    \"position\": 1,\n\t                    \"name\": \"Home\",\n\t                    \"item\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/\"\n\t                },\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ListItem\",\n\t                    \"position\": 2,\n\t                    \"name\": \"Policy analysis\",\n\t                    \"item\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/\"\n\t                },\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ListItem\",\n\t                    \"position\": 3,\n\t                    \"name\": \"Political Points for 20\u201327 May 2019\"\n\t                }\n\t            ]\n\t        },\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"WebSite\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/#website\",\n\t            \"url\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/\",\n\t            \"name\": \"Pravo\",\n\t            \"description\": \"\",\n\t            \"potentialAction\": [\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"SearchAction\",\n\t                    \"target\": {\n\t                        \"@type\": \"EntryPoint\",\n\t                        \"urlTemplate\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"\n\t                    },\n\t                    \"query-input\": {\n\t                        \"@type\": \"PropertyValueSpecification\",\n\t                        \"valueRequired\": true,\n\t                        \"valueName\": \"search_term_string\"\n\t                    }\n\t                }\n\t            ],\n\t            \"inLanguage\": \"en-US\"\n\t        }\n\t    ]\n\t}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Political Points for 20\u201327 May 2019 - Pravo","description":"62 people\u2019s deputies addressed the Constitutional Court regarding the unconstitutionality of the dissolution of Parliament.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Political Points for 20\u201327 May 2019 - Pravo","og_description":"62 people\u2019s deputies addressed the Constitutional Court regarding the unconstitutionality of the dissolution of Parliament.","og_url":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/","og_site_name":"Pravo","article_modified_time":"2025-07-18T11:42:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2400,"height":1350,"url":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/frame-30.png","type":"image\/png"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/","url":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/","name":"Political Points for 20\u201327 May 2019 - Pravo","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-05-27T04:24:00+00:00","dateModified":"2025-07-18T11:42:03+00:00","description":"62 people\u2019s deputies addressed the Constitutional Court regarding the unconstitutionality of the dissolution of Parliament.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-20-27-may-2019\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Policy analysis","item":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Political Points for 20\u201327 May 2019"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/","name":"Pravo","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/analytical-materials\/4656"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/analytical-materials"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/analytical-materials"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4656"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4656"},{"taxonomy":"authors","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/authors?post=4656"},{"taxonomy":"source","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/source?post=4656"},{"taxonomy":"analytics","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/analytics?post=4656"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}