Posted on 03/23/2014 11:43:14 AM PDT by annalex
Venice, 21 March 2014
Opinion no. 762 / 2014
OPINION
ON “WHETHER THE DECISION TAKEN
BY THE SUPREME COUNCIL
OF THE AUTONOMOUS REPUBLIC OF CRIMEA IN UKRAINE
TO ORGANISE A REFERENDUM
ON BECOMING A CONSTITUENT TERRITORY
OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
OR RESTORING CRIMEA’S 1992 CONSTITUTION IS COMPATIBLE
WITH CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES”
adopted by the Venice Commission
at its 98th
Plenary Session
(Venice, 21-22 March 2014)
on the basis of comments by
Mr Peter PACZOLAY (Honorary President, Hungary)
Ms Hanna SUCHOCKA (Member, Poland)
Mr Evgeni TANCHEV (Member, Bulgaria)
Mr Kaarlo TUORI (Member, Finland)
[...]
V. Conclusions
27. The Constitution of Ukraine like other constitutions of Council of Europe member states, provides for the indivisibility of the country and does not allow the holding of any local referendum on secession from Ukraine. This results in particular from Articles 1, 2, 73 and 157 of the Constitution. These provisions in conjunction with Chapter X of the Constitution show that this prohibition also applies to the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the Constitution of Crimea does not allow the Supreme Soviet of Crimea to call such a referendum. Only a consultative referendum on increased autonomy could be permissible under the Ukrainian Constitution.
28. Moreover, circumstances in Crimea did not allow the holding of a referendum in line with European democratic standards. Any referendum on the status of a territory should have been preceded by serious negotiations among all stakeholders. Such negotiations did not take place.
Of course you can, and anyone interested in that august commission's decisions, I am sure, would read it and draw conclusions.
And Putin will care about some EU commission’s opinion, why?
Anybody who’s willing to kill dozens of their own people in false flag operations is a Nazi or worse.
... and promptly gave power to the same Rada that had been previously elected, and the Rada legitimized the revolution. It did not, however, abolish the Ukrainian Constitution.
a gang of Nazis
What reason could there be to think that someone unable to discuss things other than by throwing buzzwords around can be an interesting poster on a serious thread?
But your point is correct: Putin is worse than a Nazi.
They've been claiming their opposition are "Fascists" and "Nazis" since the Spanish Civil War, and they will keep right on doing that as long as there are morons who'll buy into the nonsense.
Godwin's Law applies. Don't feed the trolls.
Would the EU have stepped up and admitted that they considered themselves to be "stakeholders"?
I seriously doubt you can find a loophole in the Ukrainian Constitution that would permit the referendum, I'd be very surprised if you could. OTHO, I seriously doubt the Crimea considered themselves to be limited by the Ukrainian Constitution as opposed to their own definition of "autonomy". A definition they obviously think includes the right to break away from the Ukraine.
It's a case of theory vs. "Facts on the Ground" as the saying now goes. Back in my day, it was theory vs. who actually controlled the countryside when there wasn't a US grunt standing on it and in spite of the briefings in Saigon, we all knew the SVN government rarely controlled the ground a US grunt wasn't at least within sight of.
The Ukraine wasn't prepared to deal with even a minor guerrilla war in the Crimea even if Russia were only matching the EU small arms supplies to the Ukraine bullet for bullet. Given that obvious weakness, once nationalists in the Ukraine got vocal, IMHO, it was inevitable the crowd who want to be part of Russia rather than the Ukraine were going to become very active. Anything, and I mean anything, that Russia felt would threaten security around their bases in the Crimea was going to trigger exactly what we've seen.
If the EU had tried to stop the mass demonstrations and get the groups "to the table" to negotiate it wouldn't have been so painfully obvious that the EU was going to do whatever they had to do in order to keep the Ukraine from not doing what the EU wanted done. That may not have changed a thing but it at least wouldn't have been rubbing Russia's nose in the fact that the EU didn't mind supporting an overthrow of the government if that's what it took to put the Ukraine under the thumb of the EU.
As far as I can tell, Russia had no reason to believe that if the EU backed new government took charge that they wouldn't be faced with all sorts of "re-negotiations" related to their bases. Why people think Russia would believe that the same people who so recently have overthrown a number of governments would play fair with them once they installed a new government, I don't know. I do know that all my Russian friends were convinced that if the EU backed government took charge and the Crimea remained part of the Ukraine that the new government would want Russia out of the bases.
Is that paranoia on their part? Dunno, but it's how they were looking at things and everyone in the West seems to have not cared how Russia would see the changes as a threat. It was a, "Screw Russia" attitude from the start that I think led to Russia deciding they should move and do whatever it takes to regain control of the Crimea.
Would they have done so no matter what? I'm not so sure they would have if the the EU hadn't made it crystal clear Russia couldn't make any kind of deal with the Ukraine that the EU wasn't going to undermine by hook or by crook.
And what all those academics think is of no value whatsoever.....They have no army to change what happened
nicely played
Lordy you are soooo ill informed
Pick up your phone Alex wants to chat
/bingo
Certainly by RT’s version anyway. I cannot believe we have come to a time when folks actually believe that the Soviet Union (formerly known as Russia) run by the KGB in the form of Putin actually believe that communism is okay
So much for the concept of self-rule and self determination. Those pesky constitutions and lawyers getting in the way.
The EU legal beagles seem to advocate the forced containment of peoples and nations. By the same standard every modern nation in Europe and the Western Hemisphere would “illegal”.
Crimea is Russian again by virtue forced colonization and ethnic cleansing over 500 years, the right of conquest, and now a popular vote (sham or otherwise) of the majority Rus.
To combine and paraphrase what so many pragmatists through history have pointed out with the tip or their lance/sword/bayonet/naval battle task force.
“They have made their decision. Now let them enforce it if they can.”
Absent the hand of God, what is called right, written as history, or called settled law is always defined in the end by the best defensive positions or the heaviest divisions in attack at a ratio of 3 to 1.
Europe lacks both in the Crimea. They have become toothless old men and we are lead by a sunken chested capon.
But, what the heck do I know.
You apparently did not pay attention to the build up of the protests. For months people peacefully gathered asking the government (run by a Putin puppet no less) to do what had been promised during an election campaign. Then in an EDICT all assembly was outlawed. Troops and police were ordered to fire on those assembled and many resigned rather than fire on peaceable assembled country men. At that point all hell broke loose.
Read from those in Ukraine and those with family there. Alex Jones and RT are NOT reliable sources
You can read here http://www.worldmomsblog.com/2014/03/10/ukraine-language-culture-reason-war/
And of course you know it is a false flag because Alex said so.....Do your own research at real sites not just info wars.
Try here
http://www.worldmomsblog.com/2014/03/10/ukraine-language-culture-reason-war/
And while you are at it read what the gal wrote as to why she left RT not what Alex claims. It might just get your logical thinking brain going again
Bert, March 23,2014
Possession is .9 of the law
That’s actually quite funny, because the group didn’t claim to be NAZIs. The Russians claimed they were NAZIs, trained in Poland.
This goes back in the Russian Psyche to the days of the U. S. S. R., when Poland would not cower to it. Russian officials have never been able to shake that memory from their minds.
So today, the worst thing Russia can do when acting like a NAZI, is call others NAZIs, introduce that evil Poland into the mix, and invade a sovereign territory, and annex it.
Legal opinion? I hate to break it to you, but Conservative support for the U. S. Constitution is based on the legality of it, the precedence, and what it allows or doesn’t allow today.
Why would you not be interested in the legality of what Russia just did?
Not Soros’ creature but the European Union’s. In their words “composed of constitutional and international law experts, supreme or constitutional court judges and members of national parliaments. It is dedicated to the promotion of Europe’s legal heritage and is now recognised as an international independent legal think-tank.” In short, a gaggle of scolds to promote a transnational uniformity with no real authority over anything except social censure of the stinky kids.
Here they are in their own words. Bastards of a different father, but family.
http://hub.coe.int/what-we-do/democracy/venice-commission
I am sure Obamacon jingoists and sycophants will assume a proper proskynesis to this body.
It is there, but it does not have to be that way. The disregard for even the appearance of laws of war is characteristic of the Soviet man in particular.
Right. And in general, in the leftist vocabulary if you don't like someone, call him a "Nazi" and the argument has been won by knockout.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.