23 years ago, the Verkhovna Rada adopted the new Constitution of Ukraine. Voted for her on the morning of 28 June 1996, prosacea before that day without sleep.
Still on how accepted the main law of the country, different rumors. In parliamentary working groups was a bitter struggle on many issues that dealt with language, symbols, state structure of Ukraine.
Then at stake was the question – will Ukraine finally an independent state living under its own laws. Furious resistance, then, had the Communists trying to disrupt or delay the process. What has worked and what hasn’t. OBOZREVATEL have collected the TOP 7 little-known facts about what shaped the Basic law.
In the preparation of the Constitution it was assumed that our Parliament will become bicameral.
Indeed, such a proposal was, but it is not supported. “There were two points of view. Some said that we need to reflect the interests of the regions as they differ greatly from each other. Opponents of this idea said that we have no such regions that differ sharply in their mentality.
So we don’t need to create additional structure that is more similar to the federalization. In fact, the deputies divided into two camps – supporters or opponents of federalization”, – says ex-Deputy, member of the constitutional interim Commission of the Verkhovna Rada Ivan Zayats.
The Constitution Of Ukraine
In addition, members understand that, with the adoption of the bicameral Parliament they would have to go for re-election, but few wanted it.
First, in the draft Constitution there was no point on the oath of deputies. He appeared later, closer to the vote.
“Indeed, we had only the oath of the President. After all, the first elected President of Ukraine Leonid Kravchuk in 1991 had to give an oath, so for her he wrote. But the oath of the deputies were not discussed. When a working group of the Constitutional Commission and I entered it, I thought why not be the oath of a Deputy. In order to get their idea on the working group decided that the oath to write.
Read a different Constitution, which was things like that, and jotted down their thoughts. Somehow it came to me my friend, the grandson of the famous ethnographer and archaeologist Nikolai Belyashevskiy. I told him while I prepare food in the kitchen, here’s my thoughts, articulate them. The result was a written oath of a Deputy in my kitchen. I made it, there were opponents who thought that the MP does not need this, he is not the President. But managed to convince colleagues. However, the last words in the oath yet finished Deputy Volodymyr Butkevych,” says Ivan Zayats.
Was not the attorney General. It was assumed that prosecutors will be headed by the Minister of justice.
Later in the draft Constitution of a Chapter on the Prosecutor General and the Prosecutor General. “The main thing we wanted to change the function of the Prosecutor’s office that it was not the sword as in the Soviet Union. Therefore, a Chapter on the Prosecutor General and the Prosecutor-General.
However, in the transitional provisions, we noted that the Prosecutor General’s office continues to perform the function of supervision over observance and application of the law, while in force will not join the new laws that will regulate the activities of state bodies responsible for it,” said Zayats.
The Ukrainians are waiting for the adoption of the Constitution
The meeting of Parliament, which was to adopt a Constitution, lasted a day, the door to the courtroom was closed to the parliamentarians fled.
It is not so. Doors closed were not, as members worked and in the working groups, coordinating the latter formulation of the basic document of Ukraine. But the then speaker, socialist Oleksandr Moroz warned deputies who had tried to escape by night from the audience, that they will be deprived of the mandate.
“There was a fierce struggle and it was unclear whose point of view wins. The left constantly delayed the process. Everyone understood that this is an important document for the country which actually draws a line under the Communist past. Worked despite hunger, terrible fatigue. Yes, frost warned that can deprive of the mandate of those who will leave. But the main incentive was that Kuchma could in the case of the adoption of the Constitution to carry it through a referendum. As it did in Russia.. And it is clear that in this case, the deputies would have to go again to the polls, no one wanted it,” says hare.
President Leonid Kuchma and Parliament speaker Oleksandr Moroz (left) after the vote
The Nikolaev news
Offered to change the flag on the tree lined, adding a crimson stripe. Or even leave the old Soviet – red and blue.
A fierce struggle unfolded for the symbols of Ukraine. The controversy aroused anthem, emblem and flag. The main opponents were leftists. About them arguing even on the voting day. “There were those who offered to leave the old flag of red and blue. Or make it in three bands – the yellow and blue add a crimson or red,” – says expert.
At midnight from 27 to 28 June 1996, discussions began on the characters in the courtroom. More than an hour of fruitless debates frost asked the working group to work. This lasted until 6 o’clock in the morning. The Communists fought to the death.
The Flag Of Ukraine
The issue was Ukrainian as the state language. The left demanded to do two state languages – Ukrainian and Russian.
“It was the most violent struggle, the left did not want any official language, but the main trend they were still two languages. And you know, there is no language, no nation. This was the fundamental issue,” – said the expert.
Left almost managed to defend effectively “federalization” of the Crimea. Crimea had its own Constitution.
On the day of voting for the Constitution
Coat of arms, flag, anthem and the status of Crimea took one package. As a result, the Crimea had autonomy and its own Constitution, and Ukraine – their national symbols. Such was the price of compromise, the adoption of the Constitution. “In the old Constitution there was an autonomy of the Crimea, but the left and the Crimean deputies want to its Constitution. It was all Moscow development. No need to have illusions about Russia, neither under Yeltsin nor under Putin, they didn’t want Ukraine to be independent.
Even after Ukraine 21 August 1991 voted for Independence, on 26 August, a press-Secretary Yeltsin stated that Russia reserves the right to have territorial claims to the Republic, which embarked on the path of independence. They wanted the Crimea had its own Constitution, which is also adopted by the Crimean Verkhovna Rada. But we noted that their Constitution must comply with the laws of Ukraine”, – said the expert.
Don’t miss the lightning! Subscribe to us via Telegram
Read all related news “Exclusive” on OBOZREVATEL.