Over 123% of Sevastopol residents vote to join Russia!

page: 11
26
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 12:08 AM
link   

peck420

Xcathdra
To an extent you are correct since Crimea violated the law by holding the referendum in the first place. That aside the law used is extremely important since it defines the manner in which who could vote.

FYI, the current Ukrainian government is outside of Ukrainian law.

Yanukovych was not removed from office by the procedures described in Article(s) 108-112.

Kind of funny how the 'law' only becomes relevant when needed...


And how its ignored when it does not support ones position.

The agreement signed by the former President and the parliament, in addition to calling for new elections, immediately reverted back the 2004 Constitution (and by immediate, it means just that. There was no time frame for it and there was no law needed. It became effective once the agreement was signed).

Under the 2004 Constitution, it allowed for impeachment using the existing language as well as a streamlined process, which is the part that people are not familiar with.

Voice of Russia - Constitutional reform may downgrade Yanukovych to figurehead president -




Ukraine’s MPs are due to take up drafts constitutional reform today, the drafts that have been prepared by the Batkivshchina and UDAR party factions. The opposition insists on a return to the constitution of 2004 and on setting limits on presidential powers. Meanwhile, the EU Foreign Ministers are due to meet in Brussels this Monday to discuss the situation in Ukraine. Sweden and Poland will come up with their proposals on changing the stand on Ukraine.


Besides a return to the old constitution, the drafts provide for a simplified system of impeachment and voting, and also deprive the President of any role to play in the Constitutional Court lineup. The opposition feels the Court should be formed by the MPs and a congress of Ukraine’s judges. Unlike the constitution of 2004, which restricted presidential powers, the currently presented draft actually turns Yanukovych into a figurehead President, says the Director of the Institute for Strategic Planning, Alexander Gusev, and elaborates.

“The changes under discussion will largely trim the presidential powers, reducing his function to receiving credentials from foreign Ambassadors. The President’s duties will boil down to representing Ukraine during receptions. He will de facto stop being Head of State, with all powers due to be transferred to Parliament”.


How do we know the 2004 return and simplified impeachment is valid?

Voice of Russia - Ukraine: Yanukovych signs deal on ending crisis, Rada reinstates 2004 Constitution


The following is the text of the agreement signed by Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and opposition leaders in the presence of EU envoys to end the ex-Soviet country's three-month crisis.

1. Within 48 hours of the signing of this agreement, a special law will be adopted, signed and promulgated, which will restore the Constitution of 2004 including amendments passed until now. Signatories declare their intention to create a coalition and form a national unity government within 10 days thereafter.

2. Constitutional reform, balancing the powers of the President, the government and parliament, will start immediately and be completed in September 2014.

3. Presidential elections will be held as soon as the new Constitution is adopted but no later than December 2014. New electoral laws will be passed and a new Central Election Commission will be formed on the basis of proportionality and in accordance with the OSCE & Venice commission rules.

4. Investigation into recent acts of violence will be conducted under joint monitoring from the authorities, the opposition and the Council of Europe.

5. The authorities will not impose a state of emergency. The authorities and the opposition will refrain from the use of violence.


*** A portion was removed by me as it dealt with actions taken under part 5 - the link has the full text ***



6. The Foreign Ministers of France, Germany, Poland and the Special Representative of the President of the Russian Federation call for an immediate end to all violence and confrontation.


The simplified impeachment process was valid and lawful under the Ukrainian Constitution.


Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych has announced that, to settle the crisis in Ukraine, he will initiate the reinstatement of the 2004 constitution and call early presidential elections. He also called for starting the procedure of forming a government of national confidence. "I am announcing steps that need to be made in order to restore peace and avoid more victims of the standoff," Yanukovych said in a statement available on the presidential website on Friday.

"These tragic days when Ukraine has taken the gravest losses and when people has died my duty is to state that human lives are very important. We should do our best to take joint steps to restore peace in Ukraine," Yanukovych said.

"I declare the steps that should be taken to restore calm and avoid new victims," the Ukrainian president said.

"I state that I initiate early presidential elections and return the 2004 Constitution by redistributing powers from the president to the parliament," Yanukovych said.


Yes the return to the 2004 Constitution was valid / lawful.
Yes the impeachment using the simplified process from the 2004 Constitution was valid / lawful.
The impeachment process followed the law as the bill was introduced by Parliament, and was actually authored by Nikolay Rudkovskiy, head of the Socialist Party in Ukraine, which is part of the ruling Party of Regions coalition. The Party of Regions was the party of former President Yanukovych.

Since people have issues using western sources, the above are all Russian sources. The Constitutional changes were discussed by Russian media in 2010/20/12, noting the changes in how parliament was elected would most likely result in parties coming together to impeach the former President. He had been under investigation for a few years prior to all the mess we have now over corruption charges.

Finally - Library of Congress - Ukraine: Simplified Impeachment Procedures - Link 1
Library of Congress - Ukraine: Simplified Impeachment Procedures - Link 2


(Feb 03, 2009) On January 15, 2009, the Ukrainian legislature, the Verkhovna Rada, adopted the Law on Special Temporary Investigative Commissions, which simplifies the procedure for the legislative body to impeach the President. Previously, the impeachment procedure could be initiated on the basis of a petition signed by three-quarters of the parliamentarians. The new Law provides that the formation of a Special Investigative Commission is the formal beginning of the impeachment process. Such a Commission must be formed upon the request of a simple majority of the Rada's members. The original sponsors of a bill on the creation of a Special Investigative Commission cannot recall their signatures and withdraw the proposed bill. Legal justification and evidential materials must accompany the bill. The Law requires the Commission to finish its investigation within a three-month period, although the first report must be submitted to the Rada no later than at the end of the second month of its work. If the Commission's conclusion is supported by the Rada, the case will be submitted to the Supreme and Constitutional Courts.

A Commission is formed from among Members of the Rada who represent the existing parliamentary factions proportionally, plus a special prosecutor and three special investigators. Members of the Rada can be appointed as the special prosecutor and as the investigators. (Rada Simplified the Impeachment Procedure,GAZETA.RU, Jan. 15, 2009, available at www.gazeta.ru...)

Author: Peter Roudik More by this author

Topic: Legislative power More on this topic

Jurisdiction: Ukraine More about this jurisdiction


Gazeta - Russian-
**The article below was translated using the microsofttranslator program.

Rada has simplified the procedure of impeachment

01/15/2009 19:23 | Ria "Novosti"

The Verkhovna Rada adopted the draft law on the ad hoc investigatory commissions, which simplifies the procedure of impeachment of the President.

The adoption of law 408 Lawmakers voted 226 votes required. In Parliament recently, repeatedly sounded calls for impeachment of President Viktor Yushchenko. To declare impeachment requires the support of three-fourths of the constitutional composition of the Parliament, in which 450 places.

A bill on the special temporary investigative commissions supported 171 of 175 deputies from the party of regions faction, 155 of the 156 deputies from the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc, 36 of the 72 members of the pro-presidential faction "Our Ukraine-people's Self-Defense bloc, all 27 Communists and 19 of 20 deputies of the faction of the bloc of Lytvyn.

The Bill regulates the legal status and operating procedure of commissions of inquiry for impeachment proceedings.


Helpfully this clears up the confusion some have on the Constitution of Ukraine, impeachment and its lawfulness.




posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Xcathdra

Your link you used to report the 123% voters includes a advertisement to join the Ukraine Army and lots of Ukraine military flags.

Unbiased? and balanced? I think NOT.



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Reinmax
Xcathdra

Your link you used to report the 123% voters includes a advertisement to join the Ukraine Army and lots of Ukraine military flags.

Unbiased? and balanced? I think NOT.


Yup, that's been discussed... Just as the Crimean response to the 123% was to explain it away as a mistake, which is also called into question since its coming from Russian sources.

As has been stated, I will wait for an independent review when (if) Russia / Crimea releases the raw polling data in addition to the actual law used to conduct the vote.

However, regardless of that, the vote is still unlawful, as my post above this talking about the Ukrainian constitution changes and the fact they were indeed lawful.



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 12:37 AM
link   
You forget laws are made by so called rulers of the land and can be written, changed and dropped at a moments notice. Laws are made to control what can not be controlled.

An example is that King Henry could not divorce and re-marry in the eyes of the law and church so he rewrote the law and even made a new church, the church of England so he could achieve his aim.

In this case, the law was drafted as so Ukraine would not end up like Yugoslavia. The law was written up so that Crimea filled with non Ukraines, could not leave. It was fashioned so not matter how Crimea with their small population could never outvote the total population of greater Ukraine.

History is written by the victor to justify the means



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Reinmax
 


Read the post before dismissing it. In this case your argument is not valid based on the facts.



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I have already debunked your title, I was only trying to bridge the discussion from your point of view and be friendly, not justifying your false claim.

As a previous poster commented, everything else you have spouted is noise, smoke and mirrors.
edit on 21-3-2014 by Reinmax because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-3-2014 by Reinmax because: Spelling mistakes



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Over 123% of Sevastopol residents vote to join Russia!

Amazing so many Crimeans secretly wanted to be Ruskies...

Great result!!



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Reinmax
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I have already debunked your title, I was only trying to bridge the discussion from your point of view and be friendly, not justifying your false claim.

As a previous poster commented, everything else you have spouted is noise, smoke and mirrors.
edit on 21-3-2014 by Reinmax because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-3-2014 by Reinmax because: Spelling mistakes


I was referring to your comment about the laws involved.

Can you cite the law that Crimea / Russia used for the "referendum"?

While some state its irrelevant I disagree since it would explain who could or could not vote. That in turn can be applied to the voting results to either confirm or deny the results. Of course that would also require a release of the raw data.

As for debunked or not debunked its not my immediate concern. That conclusion, debunked or not, will be based on all of the "irrelevant" date / law im talking about.



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 02:21 AM
link   
So some blogger pulls a number out of his backside and shouts "Look 123%!!" and you guys are all over it. Taking up the cry "123% 123%!!".... Even when it's proven to be a hoax, here you still are. One has to wonder what really motivates you since it's obviously not "the truth".



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 03:04 AM
link   
raw results are have been released ....which are u after?



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Xcathdra

The fact its -
A - not coming from an independent source.
B - That the raw data has not been released, just the results.
C - That after the 123% discrepancy, an announcement was made about miscounting to remove it is a basis for questioning the vote itself.
D - That the law used for the votes is no where to be found.

We need to see the law used as a basis for the vote itself.



No, we don't. We don't need to see the laws or the raw data. Why are you so keen to take this thread off topic all the time. Who voted, who was allowed to vote, if the vote was legal, if the vote was overseen. All irrelevant.

The topic is 'Over 123% of Sevastopol residents vote to join Russia'. Can you please try to stick to it?

The 123% in question comes from mathematics derived from the following numbers from your original post.


“At 20:00 in Crimea, 1,250,426 people voted,” Malyshev announced. “This result does not include Sevastopol. When Sevastopol is included, 1,724,563 people voted,” he said. Therefore, according to Crimean “authorities,” 474,137 people from Sevastopol voted in the “referendum.”


If you read the blog which is sourced in the OP, at the very end he says this.

'П.с.2 Ошибка интерфакса в цифрах. В на брифинге была названа цифра: 1524563 человека. www.youtube.com...'

I've run this through Google translate.

It says this.

'Error P.s.2 Interfax figures. In a briefing was named number: 1524563'

The rest is a link to you a Youtube video, which incidentally is the one I provided earlier where he announces 1,524,563.

So here, the blogger you quote in your OP as basis for the 123% of residents of Sevastopol voting is taking back the number he used as a mistake.

I'm curious, will you now refuse to recognise the validity of this source, which I remind you is the very same source you based your op and the topic of this thread on?



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by khimbar
 


I am sticking to it, even more so since I started the thread.

The law is relevant as it determines how the vote works. The raw data is important because its validity is based on the law itself for the vote.



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Xcathdra
reply to post by khimbar
 


I am sticking to it, even more so since I started the thread.

The law is relevant as it determines how the vote works. The raw data is important because its validity is based on the law itself for the vote.


Do you believe that 123% of the residents of Sevastopol voted in the referendum, even though the blogger on which you base this data has admitted it's a mistake?



posted on Mar, 22 2014 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Please can this be moved to the hoax section along with the other garbage.

Or does ATS have an agenda here?



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 01:35 PM
link   

squarehead666
Please can this be moved to the hoax section along with the other garbage.


Nope, in Neo-America you can't argue with opinions, however removed from reality they are. Opinion is result of programming which results in victims inability to discern fact from fiction. To them what matters is how the information makes them feel personally, regardless of how factual it is. If it fits their preprogrammed mentality, then it's good information, regardless of how far it's removed from reality.


Or does ATS have an agenda here?


...





new topics
top topics
 
26
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum