This from a highly prejudicial statement [in goofy English], on the Party of Regions' website:
"Tymoshenko is being judged because in 2009 she forged the documents of national importance - the directives of the Cabinet of Ministers on negotiations with the Russian party and signing the contract on gas supply and transit of gas from the Russian Federation. In these directives the government, accountable to people, determines: what gas price Ukraine can agree, what price on gas transit through its territory should be, what volumes of gas Ukraine is planning to consume and so on.
When making a faked document ex-prime minister knew that the Ukrainian government had refused to support the content of written by her directives, because the conditions of gas supply and transit, determined there, were extremely disadvantageous and discriminatory for Ukraine.
However, according to Tymoshenko’s instructions, the forged document titled "Directives", was produced, signed personally by her and a seal of the Cabinet of Ministers was attached.
Using this fake, Tymoshenko made the leaders of "Naftogaz Ukraine" to sign the agreement, providing dramatic, unjustified increase in gas prices since 2010 and onerous conditions, depriving Ukraine for 10 years of the possibility to cancel the agreement."
Prejudicial or what? Where is the big word "allegedly"?
A reminder to whoever wrote the above: the court decides what was fake what was not - not PoR propagandists.
No wonder western observers call the Tymoshenko trial a farce, a bad joke, a pantomime, etc. etc..
True - it woud raise a few eyebrows to say the least if the governing Conservative party in the UK put out such a statement about a Labour party member who was being tried in court. On the other hand there seems to be an automatic reaction that Tym has no case to answer and even if she did something wrong, it was only a minor thing and everyone's corrupt anyway including the current government and therefore it's ALL political and there should be no trial at all.
ReplyDeleteAs several journalists have pointed out [eg here http://lb.ua/news/2011/08/10/109807_CHomu_Timoshenko_ne_sudyat_za_Lui_.html ] when Tymoshenko was PM she definitely cast a blind eye on corruption within the ranks of BYuT. Some of the culprits have now even defected to PoR. But the case against Tymoshenko is not about corruption but about [bad?] political decisions. If she is found guilty this will not deter corruption - it will merely encourage future governments to mete out vengeance on its political opponents in the same msnner. Honest people will learn this - you cannot oppose the authorities, you cannot oppose corruption.
ReplyDeleteAgreed the case has nothing to do with fighting corruption given the selectiveness of prosecution etc but
ReplyDeletea) the accusation against her is not that it was a bad politcial decision but that, knowing that the agreement did not have a majority, Tym, through Turch, by-passed the cabinet. Dubinya gives testomeny that he was given the impression that the deal had cabinet approval and therefore he signed. Given I'm not exactly a legal expert, but I can't imagine similar behaviour, say by a British PM.
b) secondly the trial is giving the gas business and politics a public area that would never have been possible only in the media. EVen though, they;re restricting journalist there seem to be verbatim reports of witnesses (for and against Tym) in the meadia.
c) Tym's not in the dock because she was honest and opposed corruption. She's a big part of the corruption herself. One mobster against another.
There's nice quote from Stephen Cloud in Unian I don't know who is he is but he's says why on earth are the opposition wasting their time protecting this swindler Tym?