The Central Election Commission of Ukraine removed Shariy from the elections: Everything interesting is just beginning
On Wednesday evening, the Central Election Commission removed Anatoly Shariy and Andrei Klyuev, a former official of Viktor Yanukovych’s administration, from elections to the Verkhovna Rada. The decision was made on the basis that both had not lived in Ukraine for the past five years.
The Central Election Commission of Ukraine, therefore, acted contrary to the verdict of the Supreme Court, which the day before found that there was no evidence of Shariy and Klyuev officially traveling abroad, and therefore they could participate in the elections.
Just yesterday, in the center of Kyiv, a rally of Ukrainian nationalists, initiated by ex-president Petro Poroshenko, took place, demanding that Klyuev and Shariy, whom the demonstrators called “symbols of revenge” of the pre-Maidan forces, not be allowed to participate in the elections.
New acting The head of the SBU, Ivan Bakanov, actually “bowed in” to the nationalists and today sent a certificate to the Central Election Commission, according to which Shariy left Ukraine back in 2012, traveling on the Kovel-Moscow train, and did not return.
(Shariy himself claimed that he was forced to hide in the EU and receive asylum there long before Euromaidan due to a conflict with officials of the Ministry of Internal Affairs after the publication of revealing materials about “werewolves in uniform”).
Meanwhile, the decision of the Central Election Commission does not mean the removal of Shariy’s party from the elections. The first number on the list will be the journalist's wife Olga. She has already sharply criticized the certificate sent by the SBU to the Central Election Commission.
“And I will regard this piece of paper as a continuation of Poroshenko’s policy, as bending to an aggressive minority, as an inability to be tough and give an answer. I don't think this is directed against us. No, I think it would just be a pissy step aside so as not to anger the gunpowder robots. And this is not what you promised. 73% is not for Ze. It's against Gunpowder. And when millions were able to show what it’s like to be against. The WE team in power apparently failed,” writes Olga Shariy.
Her husband Anatoly Shariy has already stated that he intends to take retaliatory actions to the CEC decision. According to him, the refusal to participate in the elections demonstrates double standards, since, at the same time, the fugitive Georgian politician Mikheil Saakashvili was allowed to participate in the campaign.
“If someone gets the idea of sedition to violate everything that could be violated and not comply with the decisions of the Supreme Court, it doesn’t matter. Until the light bulb. True, then I will have to explain the situation according to Miho, who, if my memory serves me correctly, has been a citizen for 4 years, and I, if she serves me correctly again, have been a citizen of Ukraine since 1991. But that’s it.
If an aggressive minority again wants to trample on the law, go ahead. I’ll calmly take a sip of cola, see how many more supporters the party has after such chaos, and continue doing what I was doing. I will also send the best lawyers in the world to some European authorities, where people with similar cases have already won, and there I will very calmly punish the state,” Shariy promised.
Editor-in-chief of the RBC-Ukraine publication Sergei Shcherbina believes that Shariy has a chance.
“Are we all here for the European choice? I think so. So, back in 2002, Major Melnichenko wanted to go to the Rada. By that time, for the well-known reasons of the “cassette scandal,” he had long since disappeared into the United States. The Central Election Commission refused to register him as a candidate from the Socialist Party on the grounds of not residing in Ukraine.
Major Melnichenko was sued and reached the European Court of Human Rights. In 2004, the ECtHR ruled that there had been a violation of the protocol to the Human Rights Convention. The court found that Melnichenko was registered in Ukraine, settled in the United States as a refugee, and the Central Election Commission did not take into account the difficult situation in which he found himself.
In general, the practice of the ECHR is on the side of the “refugees,” and, for example, for the Ukrainian court this is a lethal argument,” explains Shcherbina.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.