Countermeasures against the pro-russian parties, a permit for MPs to cooperate with territorial defense, and new penalties for collaborationism

MPs want to ban founders of pro-russian parties from running for any office, allow themselves to work with territorial defense headquarters, and introduce more severe penalties for collaborationism. We have analyzed which of these initiatives are worth implementing and which are harmful.

Ban for founders and members of pro-russian parties from participating in elections

Draft bill # 7318 of April 26, 2022

Cosponsors: a group of MPs from Holos and Servant of the People factions with Oksana Savchuck (independent) as the first signatory.

Who is affected: founders and members of political parties Communist Party of Ukraine, Party of Regions, Social Democratic Party of Ukraine (united), Opposition Platform — For Life, Party of Shariy, Left Opposition, Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine, Union of Leftists, Socialist Party of Ukraine, Socialists, Opposition Block, Nashi, Block of Volodymyr Saldo, voters, elected officials of the state and local governments.

Summary of the bill: the following parties will not be allowed to nominate their candidates in presidential, parliamentary, and mayor elections:

• Communist Party of Ukraine

• Party of Regions

• Social Democratic Party of Ukraine (united)

• Opposition Platform — For Life

• Party of Shariy

• Left Opposition

• Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine

• Union of Leftists

• Socialist Party of Ukraine

• Socialists

• Opposition Block

• Nashi

• Block of Volodymyr Saldo

What is right: the bill bans founders and members of political parties whose members declared an anti-Ukrainian position, cooperated with the russian occupants, or sided with the russian occupants from running for office.

What is wrong:

• it is unjustified and excessive to ban all founders and members of the political parties in question. None of these parties declared in their charter that their goal is to challenge the territorial integrity of Ukraine or the Ukrainian constitutional order. If the bill is passed, it could be challenged in court on the same grounds as lustrated civil servants challenged restrictions on their rights

• it is unjustified to punish party members that have not committed any crimes. If the bill is passed, it will ban from politics Petro Poroshenko (the founder of the Party of Regions) and Yurii Lutsenko (member of the Socialist Party of Ukraine in 1996-2006), for example

• it is unclear what the bill means by “a party member.” If this definition means current and former members of the listed parties, then it violates the rights of those who were forcefully enlisted. For example, the Party of Regions had over 1.4 mln members in 2013. If only current members are supposed to be banned from running for office, it will be easy for them to terminate their membership in the listed parties.

Alternative solution: criminals that collaborated with the enemy and committed treason have to be held accountable. There are articles in the Criminal Code that allow investigative bodies and the judicial system to deal with them. Ukraine should hold responsible particular individuals that violated its laws, not whole parties.

Engage MPs in the work of territorial defense headquarters

Draft bill # 7344 of May 3, 2022

Cosponsors: a group of MPs from the Servant of the People faction, Trust and For the Future groups with Serhii Kuzminykh (Servant of the People) as the first signatory.

Who is affected: MPs, service members of the Territorial Defense Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Summary of the bill:

• the Verkhovna Rada will be responsible for regulating issues of the national resistance

• MPs will be allowed to participate in the work of territorial defense headquarters with the right of a deliberative vote (if they sign a written obligation to preserve the state secret).

What is wrong:

• there is no justification for the bill. The majority of MPs lack the necessary knowledge and skills to be of any use to the territorial defense forces. Military matters should be handled by military bodies.

• participation of MPs in the work of territorial defense can result in conflicts between the member of the parliament and service members. Some MPs can interfere with the work of service members for political reasons. For example, try to gain political scores on account of military

• the bill can lead to leaks of operative information and thus will be harmful to the work of the Armed Forces and the safety of Ukrainian citizens.

Alternative solution: The General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the Minister of Defense are responsible for providing the Parliament and the Defense Committee with information about the Armed Forces of Ukraine and their needs. MPs, on their part, they have to help the Armed Forces by allocating the proper funding and adopting necessary legislation.

Introduce more severe penalties for collaborators

Draft bill # 7329 of April 29, 2022

Cosponsors: a group of MPs from the Servant of the People faction and For the Future group with Serhii Ionushas as the first signatory.

Who is affected: NABU, SBI, and SSU investigators, MPs, and judges.

Summary of the bill:

• the penalty for collaborationism — public denial of the russian aggression against Ukraine or voluntary work as an official in occupational administrations — will be increased from 17 thousand to 51 thousand or public works for up to 240 hours. Currently, the penalty for such crimes is a restriction to occupy some positions for up to 15 years

• investigative units of the Central SSU Office will be allowed to investigate alleged crimes committed by MPs

• it will be allowed to detain MPs without permission from a judge if they are suspected of committing a severe or particularly severe crime against national security.

What is right: introduction of a real penalty for some categories of collaboration

What is wrong:

• the bill goes against the conceptual framework of the SSU reform. The Security Service of Ukraine is supposed to work as a counterintelligence body with a military unit status, not as an investigative body

• the bill makes unclear the sphere of SBI responsibility. Currently, the SBI is the only body that investigates the crimes supposedly committed by MPs (except corruption cases).