Three former Presidents of Ukraine address Parliament over martial law

Author : News Agency

Source : 112 Ukraine

Leonid Kravchuk, Leonid Kuchma and Viktor Yushchenko expressed their opinion on reasonability of introducing the martial law in Ukraine
18:07, 26 November 2018

Three former Presidents of Ukraine address Parliament over martial law on Nov 26, 2018

Taking into account the numerous appeals of Ukrainian citizens, we express our opinion on the introduction of a martial law in Ukraine. Today, Ukraine is facing a hard choice. Soon, the Verkhovna Rada will have to decide on the introduction of a martial law, which in any case will become fateful

The cynical, open attack of Russia on Ukrainian ships in the Kerch Strait, the capture of ships and the military is an outright act of armed aggression of the state, which has already occupied 13% of our territory. However, will the introduction of a martial law by Ukraine be the best response to this challenge? Otherwise, could it be that the Kremlin arranged such a defiant provocation exactly to make us introduce the Emergency Regime on the banks of the Dnieper River?

Martial law is, first and foremost a radical restriction of the rights of Ukrainian citizens, including the total prohibition of strikes, mass gatherings and rallies, the right to bans political parties and public organizations. There is another unparalleled risk associated with the martial law - it is a legal chaos in the state. Each agreement between business entities contains a paragraph about non-fulfillment of the contract terms in connection with the force majeure circumstances, one of which is a martial law. Blocking payments for goods and services will lead to paralysis of business, current investment projects will be frozen, potential revenues canceled and the outflow of capital from banks will lead to uncontrolled inflation. It is hard to imagine what the hryvnia exchange rate will become.

Are these risks justified? Will this decision to introduce a martial law really help Ukraine in confronting an aggressor? During almost 5 years of the war with Russia, there were many moments when the introduction of a martial law seemed not only appropriate, but also the only possible solution. Annexation of Crimea, the battle at Donetsk airport - 100 of the dead and 440 of wounded, Debaltseve battle - 136 dead, 131 wounded, Ilovaisk battle - 366 dead, 429 wounded and 300 missing. However, thousands of victims and the threat of full-scale enemy intervention then was not enough to introduce the martial law. And one of the main arguments against such a decision was the inevitability of catastrophic social and economic, demographic and political consequences.

Apparently, today other arguments appeared and, most likely, they are of a political nature. It is election. A large part of society believes that in this way democracy could be limited. These suspicions are extremely dangerous, they can lead to a social conflict, the enemy will certainly use so they have to be pacified. If the deputies decide that there are no alternatives to the martial law, they must amend the Law of Ukraine on legal regime of martial law, removing the norm on abolishing elections and excessive restriction of human rights and freedoms. We believe that for the time of martial law and with the changes to the said law, MPs must adopt the resolution of the Verkhovna Rada on the appointment of presidential elections for March 31, 2019, as provided by the Constitution.

The Ukrainian parliament often had to make fateful decisions. Now comes the moment when the future of a forty-million state depends on the wisdom of each people's deputy. The truth is on Ukraine’s side, and so we will definitely win.

Respectfully Kravchuk, Kuchma, Yushchenko.

Система Orphus

If you find an error, highlight the desired text and press Ctrl + Enter, to tell about it

see more