Tymoshenko acquittal unlikely despite weak case

Leviy Bereg' Chief editor Sonya Koshkina writes about the "idiotic situation" into which the presidential administration has blundered by proceeding with the gas case against Yulia Tymoshenko, in a recent 'L.B.' article.

She describes four possible outcomes: full acquittal, a suspended sentence which would prevent Tymoshenko from standing for public office, a "light custodial sentence", or a full 7 to 10 year 'stretch'.

Full acquittal is most unlikely - she give the following reasons:

• The stupidity of the authorities in pursuing Tymoshenko would be fully exposed.


• Tymoshenko would again be a focus around which all 'anti-PoR' politicians could rally.


• Weakness of the authorities would be exposed to the electorate - reducing even further Yanukovych's fading popularity ratings.


• Weakness of the authorities would be revealed to other elites in the regions, and to members of the power structures, security services, police etc.


• The system of manual control of the court system by the authorities would be destroyed.

The second, a suspended sentence scenario, was thought to be the most likely until recently because such a result would neutralise Tymoshenko. But neutralisation is not liquidation, says Koshkina.

Tymoshenko's removal from the field of battle is the only way PoR's path would be clear to completely dominate Ukrainian politics [and probably turn Ukraine into yet another semi-authoritarian, 'managed democracy', post-Soviet state]. But any custodial sentence has a major drawback - it could well lead to dramatic economic consequences because of the chill in relations with the EU and the rest of the western world. These would hit all of Ukraine's citizens, rich and poor, and PoR are, if nothing else, a party of big business.

Meanwhile 'Front for Change' party leader Arseniy Yatseniuk, speaking to Kanal 5 TV recently, reckons the case against Yulia Tymoshenko is falling apart. He forecasts prosecutors "will be able, at most, to accuse Tymoshenko of negligence.... bring in a suspended sentence and [she will be granted] unconditional amnesty on Independence Day [with the possibility for Tymoshenko to run for parliament in the 2012 elections]". Like everyone else, he takes it as read that Tymoshenko will be found guilty as charged. Perhaps by suggesting such a 'get out of jail free' scheme he is trying to help Yanukovych ameliorate in some small way the damage that would be caused by full acquittal.

However, numerous blatant [deliberate?] procedural transgressions by the trial judge, mean inevitable appeals against a guilty verdict will be submitted to a higher court. Tymoshenko has not been permitted any defence attorney for several days now - astonishing in a case that could result in a 10 year jail sentence. And there are other cases pending against Tymoshenko which could be pulled out of the hat at any time ...

Tymoshenko Case and the Rule of Law in Ukraine - warnings...

In this Centre for European Policy Studies commentary, Michael Emerson surveys recent developments in the case against Yulia Tymoshenko in Ukraine and their implications for the country’s relations with the EU.

"The [Tymoshenko] case will be followed with great attention, and notably in the European Parliament which will have in due course to ratify the proposed Association Agreement. The Parliament is capable legally of stopping the Agreement from entering into force, if the criticisms of the case mount in volume and credibility. Escalation of the controversy has not so far reached the point of this becoming a prospect: best make sure that it does not.'

Other warnings will appear soon, like this one from a former US ambassador to Ukraine:

"..the president of Ukraine should take heed of these warnings [about the disregarding of principles of democracy], or relations between Ukraine and the West could collapse, as could his expectations of entry into the EU, and Yanukovych could be left as a lone player on the world arena."

p.s. Apologists for Yanukovych who predict 'a soft landing' in the Tymoshenko case' fail to understand how autocrats operate.

A command is given - 'Nail Tymoshenko by the end of August!'

Numbskull prosecutors who worked with Yanukovych during the 'wild east' days of the early '90's, click their heels, "Yes sir!' No-one dare suggest there might not be a case to answer..

They scratch around and eventually manage to cobble together a ramshackle case. Their guys are in power..so they can do anything they want... their man is in complete control...what can go wrong? Critically they fail to notice that no-one can explain, and the man-in-the-street cannot understand, what crimes Tymoshenko is actually being accused of.

The wheels of the big machine start to turn..

Maybe because others know better than to accept, the trial is dropped into the lap of an incompetent novice judge. He knows he will be the fall guy if things go wrong, so he has no choice..bulldoze the trial through, no matter what, and deliver a 'guilty' verdict whatever evidence is offered...even if Tymoshenko were to be charged with stealing presents from Santa Claus's grotto in Lapland.

Senior members of Ukrainian bar association are baffled by the conduct of the hapless rookie judge and his "unprecedented"rulings in this trial.

Meanwhile Tymoshenko has been given a wonderful platform from which to deliver withering scorn and venom onto her foes.

Now, particularly after the fiasco of the last few weeks in the Pechersk courthouse, any diversion from Yanukovych's plan will be a massive victory for Tymoshenko, and a humiliation for the president. But if she is locked up, or even given a suspended sentence, the price to be paid on the international front could be huge too..another humiliation for the president. The former US ambassador is already saying Yanukovych is no longer welcome in Washington. How long before they say the same in Europe?

There can be no soft landing..no tied result.. Yanukovych, like all autocrats who place their egos ahead of national interests, will be discredited...and worst of all, the country will lose out..

Portnikov's dire prediction

I'm loosely translating a most gloomy 'end of term' report by the respected independent political journalist Vitaliy Portnikov, published recently in 'Leviy Bereg'.

Portnikov is well known as a regular, popular commentator on 'Shuster Live' and other television programmes. He is a 'Radio Svoboda' presenter, as well as being a prolific writer for Ukrainian and other language newspapers.

This is not a crisis. This is a collapse.

As the summer holiday season gets under way, PM Mykola Azarov is scaring his ministers and fellow countrymen with the world economic crisis and the potentially dangerous turns of events that will soon take place in the United States and European Union.

Translating his comments into everyday language indicates that Azarov and Co. intend to explain away Ukraine's own approaching economic problems by directing the blame elsewhere. But this time the crisis will primarily be Ukrainian, for the following reasons:

1. An inability and determined unwillingness by the incumbent President to discharge his duties properly. Viktor Yanukovych is focused solely on setting himself and his family up in the newly-conquered country, with 'Mezhiryas', helicopters and other bagatelle. He behaves like a typical African President from the 1960's and the 1970's, not having time for affairs of state and being more concerned with hunting lodges and diamond-studded toilets.

2. Incompetence of the Government and its inability to rise to the challenges of new times. The Government is staffed by 'old-school' officials such as Azarov, or contemporary oligarchs, busy lobbying their own interests and businesses. This symbiosis is practically paralysing the work of the executive branch and increases the costs, to crazy levels, of even reasonably intentioned projects, .

3. Total corruption amongst the authorities. If the modest official Vasyl Volga, takes a half-million dollar bribe, then what do the others take? I don't want to even think about this - but corruption has completely paralysed economic opportunities for small and middle-rank businesses and even put a question-mark against the survival of the country's population itself.

4. The commodity-linked nature of the budget-forming sectors of the economy make Ukraine almost totally dependent on the global situation, and this is deteriorating because of unfavourable trends in the economies of the West.

5. Deterioration of relations with the West because of authoritarian trends in internal politics, primarily the case against Tymoshenko. In such a situation, the country's borrowing is at risk, and the government has no money of its own.

6. Deterioration of relations with Russia because of the reluctance of Yanukovych to give up assets to Putin and to the Russian oligarchs. In such situation, new agreements on gas price cannot be counted on, again hitting the economy.

7. Degradation of the power structures. The prosecutor's office and the courts are used as tools to solve political problems and provide cover for business asset 'carve-ups'. The state security service [SBU] has become a holding company under the control of Valeriy Khoroshkovsky. The army in this country is an army of beggars.

8. Complete disinterest of state officials to rectify the situation. Yanukovych is occupied with the construction of helicopter pads [at his residences near Kyiv and in Crimea etc.], his nearest circle compromise him in the West and in Moscow in order to take his place, while the the middle circle compromise the inner circle in Yanukovch's eyes in order to take place of the inner circle. With the increasing crisis all these 'worms in the can' will start to shoot and jail one other. The detention of the Vasyl Volga is just the start.

9. Lack of coordination between the government and the National Bank of Ukraine, and the desire of each of these parties to consider only corporate, and not public interests. A similar situation was observed during Yushchenko's period in office, but with a small diffence. Yushchenko was a banker and least understood what was happening around him.

10. Disoriention amongst the general population, disillusioned with the authorities, but not seeing any alternatives to what is happening, making it impossible for serious reforms to take place.

This is not even a crisis. This is a collapse.

Freudian slip by the ambassador?

Yesterday, the ambassador of Ukraine to the UK, Volodymyr Khandogiy, had a letter published in the "Financial Times" entitled 'Government of Ukraine respects judicial process'. He takes issue with an editorial published in the same paper several days earlier entitled 'Ukraine has its Yukos moment'. [See previous blog]

Khandogiy writes: "Mr Khodorkovsky..was arrested by masked commandos, jailed and then "caged" during his trial [in Russia]. There is no comparison whatsoever between Yukos and the open process taking place in Ukraine."

Former Ukrainian PM Yulia Tymoshenko's Minister of Internal Affairs, Yuriy Lutsenko, was arrested on December 26th last year by masked commandos, just like Mr Khodorkovsky, and is still under arrest. He has been charged with trivial, if not to say preposterous charges, e.g. allegedly overspending on flowers in preparation the 2009 Militsia Day festivities, and overpaying his driver. During his trial which is currently in progress, Lutsenko is always "caged" - just like Mr Kodorkovsky.

An April 28 report by The Danish Helsinki Committee on Human Rights cited numerous human rights violations, and a large number of EU observers and politicians have expressed concern recently - just as in the Khodorkovsky case.

[Read more here and here

Response to 'FT' editorial on Ukraine

Today, Amanda Paul, of the European Policy Centre, Brussels, has responded to yesterday's 'FT' editorial [posted in previous blog]. in a letter to the editor.

Ms. Paul, who has connections to Party of Regions, speculatively claims: "certain politicians and political groups in the EU, those that are either close to the Tymoshenko bloc, or who reject the idea of Ukraine one day receiving a membership perspective, are using the case to sabotage Ukraine’s efforts to further integrate into the EU.."

She does not provide any details. I suggest these assertions are mere conjecture.

She adds: "Mr Yanukovich has done himself no favours by pursuing Ms Tymoshenko so fiercely.." inadvertently adding credibility to the allegation that it is the president himself who is instigating the assault on his greatest political rival.

She concludes with the glib, often-heard declaration that the signing of a free trade agreement would reduce corruption and improve the rule of law and democracy in Ukraine...

Surely the onus is on the current Ukrainian authorities to demonstrate they are making progress in reducing corruption and improving the rule of law and democracy, before being admitted into the club...

Is this not reasonable?

The EU will not fix Ukraine's problems...right now they have plenty of their own...

'FT' says EU should suspend talks with Ukraine

This from the 'Financial Times':

Ukraine has its Yukos moment

Ukraine’s president Viktor Yanukovich has justifiably been accused of setting up a “Putin lite” system since his election 18 months ago. Power has been concentrated in his hands, media criticism stifled. Extending the analogy, he has now found his Yukos case.

The accused in Kiev is not, like Russia’s Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a billionaire oligarch. She is Yulia Tymoshenko, the former prime minister and Orange revolution co-leader. As in Russia, few in Ukrainian business and politics are whiter than white; shades of grey abound. So the legal assault on Ms Tymoshenko, as with Mr Khodorkovsky, looks like selective justice and a politically-motivated attempt to neutralise an opponent.

Mr Yanukovich’s camp insists that the action is part of a broader corruption clampdown, probing 400 as yet unnamed current officials. Yet nearly all of the high-ranking figures charged to date are Tymoshenko associates.

Moreover, while she faces proliferating investigations, the charge on which Ms Tymoshenko is on trial – carrying a potential 10-year sentence – is highly questionable. She is accused of exceeding her authority in agreeing a 2009 gas deal with Russia’s Vladimir Putin at an excessively high price.

This raises questions over whether policy steps, particularly during a crisis, should be subject to criminal charges. The European Union welcomed the deal in question as it restored Russian gas flows to Ukraine and further west after a shut-off, and removed an opaque intermediary from the Russia-Ukraine gas trade.

Faced with western criticism, Mr Yanukovich’s circle is rumoured to be seeking a face-saving solution – say, a suspended sentence, keeping Ms Tymoshenko out of jail but also out of the next elections. The international community should reject that kind of cynical manoeuvre.

For the EU, in particular, has far greater leverage over Ukraine than over Russia. It is negotiating a free trade and association agreement with Kiev. EU officials seem reluctant to link the talks with Mr Yanukovich’s democratic record for fear of pushing Kiev back into the arms of Russia, which is trying hard to restore its influence over Ukraine.

Yet Kiev has made clear it wants and needs the EU deal, calling closer European integration Ukraine’s “strategic choice”.

That gives Brussels power it should use – to suspend talks if the assault on Ms Tymoshenko continues. Trade privileges should be linked to values. And the values displayed in this case fall far short of those demanded by the EU.

LEvko says: Ironic that the 'FT' supported Yanukovych in the 2010 presidential elections...

Revenge of the oligarchs

A recent detailed article in the prestigious 'Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung' entitled "Revenge of the oligarchs" describes how two of the top three leading lights of the Orange Revolution, Yulia Tymoshenko and Yuriy Lutsenko, are now subjects of political repression. [The third, Viktor Yushchenko sold his soul years ago.]

Lutsenko, who has been in jail for over half a year, is paying a particularly high price for 'crossing' two of Ukraine's biggest oligarchs when he was minister of the interior.

According to Konrad Schuller, the author of the the article, the current leadership of Ukraine wants to intimidate the opposition in the country and create a climate of fear.

Schuller writes that shortly after the Orange Revolution, oligarchs who came to dominate the Ukrainian economy following battles over the redistribution of property and assets in the 1990's, frequently with the help of guns and explosives, were terrified that they would be brought to justice for their alleged criminal behaviour. One of them, the current Deputy Prime Minister, Boris Kolesnikov, spent several months behind bars, and Ukraine's richest man, Rinat Akhmetov, one of the president's main sponsors, was forced to watch as armoured vehicles enter the grounds of his residence while police searched the premises.

Without doubt, articles such as this one and this one in western media, and the ever more strident concern expressed by leading European and North American politicians about the criminal cases against Tymoshenko and Lutsenko are causing significant harm to Ukraine's image; but by naming the two oligarchs, the FAZ article could potentially harm their individual businesses too.

It would be reasonable to surmise it is the 'gas people' in Yanukovych's circle that are driving the prosecution cases against Tymoshenko rather that the 'metallurgist' faction; but it could be the latter who could suffer most if free trade agreements are delayed/cancelled, or foreign direct investments curtailed.

Last Friday the German ambassador Dr. Hans-Jürgen Heimsoeth attended the 'Alice in Wonderland' pre-trial hearing of the case against Yulia Tymoshenko in person. He listened in bafflement as the judge and defendant argued for over an hour as to whether Tymoshenko should stand when addressing the court, as demanded by the young judge. Eventually Tymoshenko was thrown out of the courtroom for refusing to do so.

Yanukovych and his team must have weighted up the benefits and possible damage that would be caused when they made the decision to embark on these criminal cases against Tymoshenko and Lutsenko, but once started there is no turning back..and rifts inside the ruling party could be widening too. Maybe it seemed a good idea at the time, but most likely they were just following the gangsters' iron rule: never give your enemies a second chance...

p.s. French newspapers are asking questions about Yanukovych's palatial Mezhyhirya residence with its 70 vehicle garage, 350,000 Euro bathroom, helicopter hangar, etc. etc.

Ukrainians consider trials against opposition leaders unjust

Last Friday's 'Shuster Live' programme was particularly bad-tempered - opposition parliamentary deputies eventually walked out in protest because of constant interruptions and harassment by Party of Regions' spokesmen.

Despite the PoR attack-dogs' vociferous protests, and their attempts to 'talk-down' former president Leonid Kravchuk, the latter, with the support of a visibly-annoyed Shuster, managed to conduct a straw poll among the supposedly representative studio audience.

Responding to the question, "Is that which is taking place in the Pechersk courthouse [where former PM Yulia Tymoshenko and former minister of Internal Affairs, Yuriy Lutsenko are being tried] justice?" 84% of the studio audience said 'No', 16% said 'Yes'.

Responding to the question, "Is Tymoshenko's behaviour in the court correct?" 60% said 'No', 40% said 'Yes', i.e. a majority do not like the courtroom being turned into a zoo.

Nevertheless, as I mentioned in a previous blog, a majority of Ukrainians, as well as Western observers have probably already made up their mind and decided these criminal cases are politically motivated.

The voting results in the studio would seem to support the notion that many 'undecideds', and many Yanukovych supporters, also perceive these criminal cases as being politically motivated.

My guess is Ukrainians are getting rather scared that too much power is being accumulated by the current Yanukovych-led power 'vertikal'.

Breathaking arrogance of Yanukovych and PoR deputies

Today, [Friday] laws on pension reforms which will directly affect the lives of every Ukrainian citizen, were passed in parliament. Now every Ukrainian will have to work several years longer before achieving retirement.

248 deputies voted in support of the motion even though it seems only 143 deputies were actually registered to vote in the parliament building.

Multiple voting by deputies is a blantant contravention of the country's Constitution, but takes place with numbing regularity.

Today the majority of deputies were not even bothered to turn up to work for a few hours to discuss such a vital issue, probably because it was the last day of the session before the summer recess. Their decision means Ukrainians now have to work many hundreds of days longer. I guess many of the missing deputies were just too busy packing their suitcases and checking their flight tickets, or maybe had flown out already.

Also today, President Yanukovych, who is 'Guarantor of the Constitution', was asked at a press conference why his younger, parliamentary deputy son, Viktor, had voted in the past in parliament for other deputies in their absence, thus contravening to the Constitution.

His reply? - "When children are picked on - this is something else. I assure you I am not ashamed of my children, my family....When children are dragged into this dirt into which you are trying to drag my children, my family. You could pick on my grandchildren, the oldest is 11 years old - come on, let's go after them too."

[Video of Yanuk jr. voting for four deputies here]

LEvko says: What toe-rags these people are - bloated and drunk with power...there can be no better example of the disregard they have to those they are supposed to serve...half of Ukrainian men will now will probably die before they retire, at the new retirement age of 63. [Male life expectancy in Ukraine is just under 63...]

Reminder: Yanukovych's nickname at the time he was serving his two prison sentences in a young offenders' prison was 'kham' - means boor or lout. I can see why..

Judge in Lutsenko case compromised

Serious doubts have been cast on the impartiality of judge Serhiy Vovk, who is presiding over the trial of former Interior Minister Yuriy Lutsenko.

Documents have been published revealing a criminal case had been opened against Vovk in 2007 concerning the illegal appropriation of land belonging to 'UkrProfOzdorovnutsya'. The judge had allegedly intentionally altered the designation of this land, but in 2009, a Kyiv Appeal Court annulled Vovk's rulings in these matters.

Yesterday, in court, Lytsenko demanded Vovk stand-down because he could not be considered impartial, but Vovk refused to go.

Lutsenko added that the criminal case against Vovk was initiated after an audit by the Ministry of Internal Affairs audit which took place at a time when he himself headed the ministry, in other words Vovk could use the trial to settle old scores and 'get even'.

Lutsenko claimed he informed the Prosecutor's Office during the investigation of his own case that Vovk was 'dirty', but was told that no case against the judge existed.

The press service of the Prosecutor General's Office have now officially denied the existence of any criminal case against Vovk. "We have to report that a decision by a college of judges of the Chamber of Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court on February 23, 2010 upheld the decision of the district court of Kyiv Holosiyivski court two years ago (16 July 2009) to rule as unlawful the decision to institute criminal proceedings against Serhiy Vovk ".

Lutsenko claimed the case against Vovk could be reopened in the event the court "makes the wrong decision..", in other words 'vlasti' have Vovk by the 'short and curlies'..

All sound very grubby...You would think that because Lutsenko's trial is being closely scrutinised and because Ukraine's judicial system has such a terrible reputation everything possible would be done to ensure everything was as clean and above board as possible, so why not change the judge? But this trial not about justice, it's about macho posturing and revenge ..

p.s. More 'dirt' on Vovk to follow?

Novice judging 'trial of the century'

Astonishingly, the 31-year old judge, Rodion Kireyev [see above], who is presiding over Yulia Tymoshenko's shambolic pre-trial hearing in Ukraine's 'trial of the century', has, until now, has only been involved in petty crime cases e.g. thefts of 1000 hryven, and everyday hooliganism. The hapless Kireyev, nicknamed "Harry Potter" in the media, was selected at random from a pool of judges..

His experience of multimillion-dollar fraud cases seems to be....er.. nil..

Looks like someone really "dropped him in the sh*t"...sent a boy to do a man's job..

Why the gas charges against Tymoshenko cannot be proven

So, "Tymoshenko is accused of causing a loss of some $190 million to the Ukrainian state because of a 2009 energy deal she signed with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin."

How can anyone be so sure of this figure?

Has Putin or Gazprom ever admitted on the record that they would have sold the gas in question for $190 million less to NaftoHaz Ukrainy in the event that, in 2009, the Ukrainian side had been represented by anyone else? Not very likely...

So to claim anyone else would have got a better deal is pure conjecture..

Or does the prosecutor intend to prove Tymoshenko received a kick-back from Putin, as PM Azarov recently intimated? If the prosecutor intends to 'go down this route' what is Putin's reaction likely to be?

Yanukovych hastily cobbled together a subsequent gas deal and received a 30% discount on gas from Russia in the notorious Kharkiv agreement last year...but as the 'Kyiv Post' said at the time, the “discount” only gives shady gas-trading intermediaries fatter profit margins along the change from import to end consumer; the industrial-baron oligarchs are sure to benefit in all this murkiness.."

And recently PM Azarov received short shrift from Putin when he tried to renegotiate a better price one year later...so perhaps Yanukovych could be accused of selling the country short when he handed over Sevastopol to the Russian Black Sea Fleet in exchange for the 30% discount too. Maybe he could have got 35%? Or 40%? Who knows?

Yanukovych's Mezhyhirya interview

President Yanukovych has finally shown a select few journalists around his Mezyhirya home. Not one of them were amongst the 'troublemakers' who had initially requested such a visit over a year ago.

The interior of the building is decorated in the usual hideous/cheapo, tacky central European '60's communist dictator style - and does not give the impression that it is actually lived in..But the building itself is very grand, and the extensive forested grounds are palatial. They include fountains, lots of marble, waterfalls, a large swimming pool etc. The journalists behaved as if they were impressed.

Afterwards, they interviewed the president at length under a rather grand gazebo, fountain playing in the sylvan background. The president answered the soft-ball questions put to him in his usual bumbling style, but looked quite relaxed and confident inside his botoxed and buffed face.

One passage that struck me was almost at the end of reel 4 of the interview.

With a fancy swimming pool, fountain an exotic trees and flowers behind his shoulder, he said rather inarticulately: "Life has not been simple for me and has taught me to suffer/endure..[terpity]. In order to do this for people that have already suffered much. I cannot look at this when poor people are still suffering...the government should apply just policies for people..we need to reduce the distance between rich and poor.."

Somehow I don't think he would have convinced many viewers...

Naturally, he was not asked the obvious question: How did a man who has only worked as a civil servant, and never run any business acquire such a property? And naturally, not a word about the remaining 135 hectare of Mezhyhirya with its massively bigger 'clubhouse', tennis courts, riding range, boating lake, yacht club, ostriches, llamas, kangaroos etc. etc..Or about the swanky downtown Kyiv apartment, the Crimean mansions, hunting lodges, Donetsk properties etc.

p.s. How it can end if you get too greedy...

Many times in recent history have the palaces of greedy and vain leaders been ransacked But Yanukovych was probably more interested in running a street crime gang than studying history while at school..and he spent three and a half years in prison as a youth for theft and violent crimes..

Prejudice and intimidation

Not for the first time, PM Azarov has made highly prejudicial public statements concerning the criminal charges being faced by his predecessor, Yulia Tymoshenko.

When asked in a television interview why Tymoshenko had signed such an allegedly bad gas deal for Ukraine, Azarov explained: "Shortly there will be a trial. Let's listen to what will be said at the trial. I can only express my own supposition. There was an interest - of course - 100%" - I think, a personal interest. Because to move away from from the state's interests, and to sign such uncomfortable conditions, is difficult."

The premier declared: "What other interests could there be there, other than personal?"

With such statements emanating from the president and PM, and with the Ukrainian judiciary being so tightly controlled by Yanukovych's 'vertikal', how can any judge possibly acquit Tymoshenko?

The numerous grim-faced policemen glowering over Tymoshenko's shoulder in the courtroom during the pre-trial hearings [see previous blog] were there no only to intimidate the accused, but to intimidate the young bright-eyed, bushy tailed judge...

And yes, the behaviour of Tymoshenko's supported in the courtroom was also intimidatory - as was the presence of a large number of mysterious young persons, wearing tee-shirts with anti-Tymoshenko images, sent with the intention of packing the courtroom even tighter..

No fair trial can take place in such circumstances..but it has nothing to do with the pursuit of justice has it?

No way to treat a lady..

Photos from day 2 of Yulia Tymoshenko's pre-trial hearing..

Intimidation, no?

Is this Pol Pot's Cambodia?

What else can be expected from the Donbas thugs that are in power today..What are they so scared of? Shame on them...

p.s. In a measured, brief presentation during last Friday's 'Shuster Live' show, old NUNS hand Roman Bessmertnyi, made the following points:

Whatever the judges, the president, and the cabinet of ministers say, the Ukrainian nation has already made up its mind - the criminal investigations and trials of Yulia Tymoshenko and Yuriy Lutsenko are politically motivated. This is what most Ukrainians believe.

Western politicians in the EU and beyond, whatever the the current authorities tell them, are convinced, and will remain convinced that these are acts of political repression. [Bessmertnyi was, until a few days ago, the Ukrainian ambassador in Belarus..]

Between 80 and 90% of the supposedly balanced studio audience at the Shuster show assessed Bessmertnyi's statements positively on their monitors while he was speaking..

p.p.s. Although Yanukovych's ratings are falling, Party of Regions' membership is burgeoning - it is now one of the biggest parties in Europe with one and one half million members...The author of this article says that in Soviet times, being a member of "the party" could only mean on thing. It's the same now...if you want to get on - you have to join the PoR. Simple as that. Just as in Soviet times...You have to join "the party" to be 'more equal than the others'..

p.p.p.s. The number of Ukrainians who consider no-one is safe from being tortured by the law enforcement agencies has increased to 66%. The figure was 61% two years ago.

The number who think coercion is widely practiced by the police has increased to 59% over the same period.

Last year 51 persons died inside police establishments. This year the figure so far, is 26.. ..

Trial in a cattle truck

Yulia Tymoshenko attended the first day of her pre-trial hearing today - in a courtroom the size of a cattle truck.

One report describes the scene thus: "Puddle of sweat on the floor. Dictaphones and camera slip from wet hands. Journalists, deputies, security guards, lawyers and others pressed tightly against each other. About fifty people are squeezed into the 40 square meter Pechersk courtroom. The air in the room is fetid, devoid of oxygen, and there's a smell of sweat. [See jacket of Tymoshenko's bodyguard, above]

Head of the European Commission to Ukraine, Jose Manuel Pinto Teixeira, who attended the court session, called the conditions in the courtroom where the Yulia Tymoshenko 'gas case' is being held, "inhuman".

"I just attended a meeting of the Pechersk district court, where the case against former Prime Minister of Ukraine has begun. I can testify to the inhuman conditions in which it taking place. A small room without any air conditioning was filled with a large number of people. There were also many people who could not get into the room standing in the corridor. But I think I was lucky. I stood at an open window and was able to withstand [the conditions] and even did not finish up in hospital because of dehydration, " said Teixeira.

Yulia Tymoshenko's attourney, Sergey Vlasenko, requested the court be transferred to a more suitable room. He suggest premises of two thousand square meters which were available in the Writers' Union headquarters nearby, free of charge.

Tymoshenko herself said: "In Soviet times, when dealing with dissidents' court cases, there was a directive - choose a small room where you cannot not invite the press or others to attend these processes. Your honour, I would like to once again urge you not to humiliate people today in this room, do not show contempt to them and their health. Look all those present in the room, look what condition they are in. Already several people have passed out in the hall. So I would like to support the request of my counsel. "

Judge Rodion Kiryeyev, [presiding over the case] said he will consider the request "at the appropriate stage of the process." As a result, the court hearing continued in the crush..".

Other reports claim there were over one hundred persons in the courtroom at one time, including a number of suspicious and moody-looking 'plant's who had been there before it had opened. The report estimates the entire 9-hour 'sauna' took place in a room of 30 square metres.

Ukraine's legal authorities have had plenty of time to organise this 'trial of the century'. But IMO their intention was to deliberately humiliate Tymoshenko, and subject her, and her team in court to 'inhuman' conditions - [dare I say "make them sweat?"]

Surely a twice head of government, well known throughout the world, whatever the rights and wrongs of the case, deserves better. This took place not in a third-world despotic African country, but in a member country of the Council of Europe, a country that considers itself 'part of Europe'.

Karadzic and Mladic are immeasurably better treated in the 'Hague Hilton'..

It is a humiliation not for the accused, but for the Ukrainian authorities and judiciary..

p.s. Brief Euronews video report here

p.p.s. Several unedited video clips of this 'kangaroo court in a cattle truck' here.

Hryshchenko talking bollocks*

Several days ago in Strasbourg, at a PACE session, the Ukrainian Foreign Minister Konstantyn Hryshchenko explained that democracy in Ukraine, "is the same as in the British Parliament".

"We live in a country where democracy is a tool, a means of political competition. We live in a country where all political forces convey their [political] messages directly, " he said.

In Ukraine there exists, " a situation that allows all political forces to deliver their message and ideas to people, to those who support them or who challenge them."

"Thus, a situation exists where on weekly live television politicians answer the same questions. This is the same situation as in the British Parliament ," he said.

LEvko says this is bollocks.

Every week in the Westminister parliament, on live television, the British prime minister answers questions, frequently hostile, from the leader of the opposition and from opposition members of parliament, as well as from his own members of parliament. The leader of the opposition is allowed to ask six or seven questions, including follow-up questions in response to the PM's answers, during each session.

In the Ukrainian parliament, opposition deputies have been physically assaulted and intimidated on quite a few occasions by Party of Regions' deputies. in premeditated attacks. As a result, several have even had to be hospitalised.

Parliamentary voting is a farce. Multiple-voting 'piano-players' have turned the Verkhovna Rada into a laughing stock. Large numbers of deputies do not attend parliament for months at a time. Some never attend.

In Ukraine all leading television channels are owned by magnates linked to the Party of Regions.

In Great Britain television broadcast are scrupulously vetted to ensure that both government and opposition spokesmen of equal stature are granted equal airtime to air their views.

In contrast to Great Britain, in Ukraine the head of the ruling 'vertikal', Viktor Yanukovych never faces direct questions from the opposition. The rare television interviews that have taken place with him over the last year have been total 'brown nose' jobs.

During last year's presidential elections, Yanukovych 'chickened out' of live head-to-head television debates with his rival, Yulia Tymoshenko. She was left to debate with an empty chair.. [He didn't have the balls?]

Television talk-show debates are heavily biassed in favour of the ruling party. Representatives from right wing extremist parties, with no sitting parliamentary deputies, frequently feature more prominently that the parliamentary opposition. Air-time is heavily loaded in favour of ruling party representatives. [Detailed analysis about this here ]

Leader of the opposition, Yulia Tymoshenko has been virtually shut out from talk-shows for many months. She has been prevented from travelling at home and abroad to carry out her political duties.

The report by the US Trout Charteris and Akin Gump on Tymoshenko's alleged maladministration during her period in office, commissioned by the current administration, was given massive exposure in the Ukrainian media. In contrast, the recent US Covington and Burling preliminary report, commissioned by BYuT, which gave her a 'clean bill of health', was all but ignored by the mainstream Ukrainian media, even though both companies are comparable legal 'heavyweights'. [Links to these two reports here]

p.s. This is what Her Majesty's Government think about the democratic situation in Ukraine..

*Bollocks - testicles. Talking bollocks - speaking nonsense [UK English]

British 'Guardian' on Tymoshenko trial

Check this out...

Jarring prejudicial comments by president in Europe

Last Friday, in Bratislava, president Yanukovych was quoted as saying:

"[As] to Yulia Tymoshenko, my wish is that she will show [or will prove] her innocence in court, and can live, work, and occupy herself with her beloved matters."

In most countries, defendants accused of crimes do not have to prove anything - they are innocent until the prosecutor proves their guilt 'beyond reasonable doubt' in a courtroom. Yanukovych's statement, was therefore, highly prejudicial.

And yesterday, in Strasbourg, he was asked:

"And if we assume that Yulia Tymoshenko will, nevertheless, be convicted. What do you think.. what will be the legitimacy of next parliamentary elections, without the participation of the leader of the opposition?"

Yanukoych reply was again prejudicial: "It is too early to say - we need to separate politics and the law! In no case should any criminal activity be covered over by political slogans. I am convinced of this."

Mustafa Nayem's comments, in the conclusion of his 'Ukrainska Pravda' piece describing yesterday's visit by Yanukovych to the European parliament:

[This] response of the President was indirect. But one thing was obvious: no matter what, and without even waiting for a court decision, he had already decided that the activities of Tymoshenko are criminal. And all other attendant processes - including protests in Europe and at home against selective justice will be considered exclusively as 'political slogans'.

Nayem correctly points out that preventing Tymoshenko visiting Strasbourg on the same day as the president, despite appeals by the most influential group in the European parliament,

was an act worthy of a third-world country. Tymoshenko's visit would have changed nothing, but Yanukovych would definitely would have gained 'brownie points' for being fair-minded had she attended. As it was, Tymoshenko's ban merely reveals a morbid fear of the woman by the ruling authorities.

Meanwhile, the British ambassador in Kyiv, Leigh Turner, in a newspaper article, has declared:

"We have clearly explained to representatives of the Ukrainian authorities, that any impression of selectivity and disproportionate use of legal action [against leaders of the political opposition] may substantially and permanently damage the international image of Ukraine. At the moment we do not consider sanctions such as travel bans, appropriate. [But] in the case of the deterioration of the situation we will be forced to reconsider our position and will consult with our European and international partners as to the most appropriate response."

The problem for Yanukovych and his advisors is any retreat from their current plan to stage show-trials against Tymoshenko, Lutsenko and other opposition leaders, would be a huge humiliation. They now know the price that may have to be paid if the trials, which will be closely scrutinised, are not considered absolutely fair.

Another example of "Ukrainian justice"

In April I posted a blog about a 20-year old student, Hanna Sinkova, who together with some friends, fried some eggs and sausages on the Eternal Flame Memorial in Kyiv's 'Park of Eternal Glory', as part of an artistic event /prank /demonstration, call it what you will,.

The students were protesting about the wasteful consumption of gas at the memorial at a time when many WW2 veterans are receiving meagre pensions and living on the 'bread line'.

Absolutely no damage was caused to the bronze and stone memorial, and it is highly debatable whether the behaviour of the students, as recorded on this video, could be considered in any way loutish or abusive.

Yesterday, a Kyiv court ordered Sinkova be detained in jail for a further period at least until the next court session at the end of June.

Sinkova, who has been in prison for nearly three months, is charged with desecration of a grave [even though, apparently, no-one is buried there]. She claims to have been maltreated, threatened with violence, and subjected to unlawful interrogations [not difficult to believe]. If found guilty the poor girl could face up to five years in prison.

In matters of law Ukraine frequently seems closer to Tehran than Europe.

Someone recently said: "So Ukraine wants to move toward Europe...right now they're not even in the position to catch a tram to the edge of town...

p.s. The recent Covington and Burling preliminary report, in English, on two of the charges being faced by Yulia Tymoshenko, here

The pdf report by the US Trout Charteris and Akin Gumps on Tymoshenko's alleged maladministration during her period in office, in English, is here