Lawlessness in the country “does not impinge on citizens interests”
On Friday, 29 February, Kyiv administrative court passed a rule which if not historic, must at least be considered typical for the country. It rejected the civil suit brought by “Maidan” Alliance activists Viktor Garbar and Oleksandr Severyn against the Verkhovna Rada, the Authorised Human Rights Representative of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (the Human Rights Ombudsperson) Nina Karpachova and the Speaker of Parliament
As already reported, the “Maidan” Alliance activists are convinced that there were clear infringements in the decisions, actions and inaction of the claimants. These cover the period after the then Ombudsperson was elected National Deputy and neither resigned, nor was dismissed, failures to comply with legally established time limits over the vote, etc. The respondents were demanding that Ms Karpachovas election to office (again) on 8 February be declared unlawful.
At a hearing where the claimants were represented by human rights defender Ludmila Koval, and the respondents representatives were accompanied by a regional deputy, the panel of judges turned down the claim in full. The judge chairing the panel explained that the ruling was based on the fact that the actions, inaction and decisions in question had not “impinged on the claimants interests”.
While we await the appeal proceedings, we would note that if the State considers that its actions on the principle of “Ill do what I feel like” does not impinge upon citizens interests, then the latter are fully entitled to make far-reaching conclusions about the State (those in power).