CONSTITUTIONAL CRIZES IN CIS

ianuarie 23, 2011 in Politic
Etichete:CIS Constitution, constitutional crisis

After the collapse of Soviet Union, all 15 member states adopted and improved new constitutions, which renewed the freedom of these nations. The majority of them were hit by political instability but continued the trial to strengthen democracy. Many of them chose lower or stronger legislature as is the case of Moldova, Kyrgyzstan from CIS and many others which are now members of EU. Building powerful legislature is considered by many scientists – the governing system with strong democracy. Prim-minister Winston Churchill mentioned that “democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time”. In this essay, you will wander how “other forms” of governance have affected society mind-set in the CIS experience of last decade and what were the main challenges about regime change.

The Freedom House report concludes that in 2010 only Moldova, Kyrgyzstan and Georgia from CIS managed to improve political and civil rights. On one hand, Kyrgyzstan advanced to shift from not free to partially free status due to the adoption of a new constitution designed to eradicate the super-presidential system, and in the case of the other two due to the reduction in government hostility toward civil society. Regretfully, the rest of Commonwealth Independent States’ status remains partly free or not free. Ukrainian politics showed decline due to increased presidential influence over the judiciary and hostility toward opposition. This would not surprise Steven Fish scientist when a semi-parliamentarian system was replaced with a presidential one, contrarily to the amendments after Orange Revolution.

The reformation of the Constitution in newly EU state members with parliamentary systems was due to political alliances. According to Steven Fish Theory, one block of former USSR countries, such as Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Azerbaijan are ranked with weak Parliamentary powers and low democracy, where another block, such as Slovenia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, Estonia and Moldova has strong Parliamentary power and democracy. In Moldova, Ukraine, Kirghizstan, Georgia and Russia, constitutional crises ended up with revolts or state coups and shifted these countries in different ways. In Kyrgyzstan the new Constitution generated powerful legislature, while the Russian referendum in 1993 brought semi-presidential governance. A Burmese politician states that democracy process for political and social change without violence, which is not the case of Kyrgyzstan where hundreds of Uzbek minorities were killed, likewise in Georgia and Moldova, where the police aggressed hundreds of protesters.

The new Moldovan political elite witness a huge struggle electing the President with 2/3 of legislative votes. Neither could political crises be solved when the Parliament was dissolved for 4 times. Still, Moldova and Ukraine have a long way to go to align the former communist countries now members of EU. Moldovan constitutionalists show that the easiest way to integrate EU is to reform the Constitution, which nowadays looks like a “Dutch cheese” with imperfection holes. The Constitutional Court in Moldova states that it is not the Constitution to be blamed, but the political elite who lacks dialogue and political culture. A crucial time for many CIS: Constitution changes occur either in the interest of politicians or of the society, even if repeated referendums will be announced in the years to come.

Natalia Ghilascu