The ex-president of Crimea spoke about the main mistake of the Russian Spring

The West would not have had any reason to impose sanctions against Crimea if the local “elite” had acted legally competently in the spring of 2014. This is stated in a statement by ex-President of Crimea Yuri Meshkov on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of the peninsula in 1992.

This Constitution, which granted broad rights to Crimea, was subsequently illegally abolished by Kiev, which in the 90s used a forceful scenario to overthrow Meshkov.

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at ThereThere, Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube, TikTok и Viber.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at Telegram, Facebook,  Classmates or In contact with

“The actions of the regime of ex-President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma, which unilaterally abolished the 1992 Constitution by force and removed the popularly elected President of the Republic of Crimea from power, must be qualified as a coup d’etat and annexation of the peninsula. Let me remind you that in response to the then illegal decisions of official Kyiv there was direct support for the Republic of Crimea by the State Duma of the Russian Federation. On May 17, 1995, the State Duma of the Russian Federation adopted a resolution in which it was proposed that “the Supreme Council, the President and the Government of Ukraine provide the population of the Republic of Crimea with the right to free expression of will in relation to the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea,” writes Meshkov.

In his opinion, a mistake was made during the Russian Spring when preparations for the referendum were based not on the 1992 Constitution, but on the Ukrainian version of the 1997 Basic Law illegally imposed on Crimea.

“For some reason, the preparation and conduct of the referendum was based on the Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea of ​​1998 - the only document in which, contrary to the will of the Crimeans, the Ukrainian status of the peninsula was recognized. Let me remind you that according to Article 1 of this document, “The Autonomous Republic of Crimea is an integral part of Ukraine,” which was fully consistent with the Constitution of Ukraine of June 28, 1996.

But on the eve of and immediately after the coup d’etat in Ukraine, a number of public organizations and movements on the peninsula demanded the immediate resumption of the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea of ​​May 6, 1992. The uniqueness of the situation was that immediately after the overthrow of the legitimate president of the country, Viktor Yanukovych, in February 2014, Ukraine left the constitutional field. The Constitution of Ukraine is either in full force or not at all; selective enforcement is not permissible. Since it ceased to operate, the legal vacuum was to be filled by the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea of ​​May 6, 1992. A very important circumstance here was that the procedure for repealing the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea of ​​May 6, 1992 was never followed. There is documentary evidence of this,” writes Meshkov.

“If in the spring of 2014 the situation had been returned to the 1992 Constitution, on its basis it would have been quite legal to hold a referendum on the reunification of Crimea with Russia. Article 104 of the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea of ​​May 6, 1992 provided that legislative power can be exercised through a Crimean referendum. The 1998 Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea did not provide such rights and provided for the holding of only a consultative local referendum on minor issues!

...The Republic of Crimea would have a political and legal status, which had previously been recognized by the international community. This status allowed Crimea to hold a referendum on any issue of its political identification and state self-determination,” the ex-president emphasizes.

In his opinion, the Crimean “elite” in the spring of 2014 decided to “forget” about the 1992 Constitution for a reason.

“The key for understanding is the fact that in power in Crimea during the Russian Spring there were temporary workers who were simply forced, under the pressure of circumstances, not of their own free will, to decide on holding a referendum and the further entry of the Republic of Crimea into Russia. Yesterday’s minions of the neo-Bandera occupation regime from the Ukrainian Party of Regions, led by Speaker Vladimir Konstantinov, did this only in order to continue to remain in power. Their unprofessional and legally amateurish actions in March 2014 complicated the further international legitimization of the Russian status of Crimea and Sevastopol. At the same time, they did everything possible to ensure that nowhere, not in a single document, was the legality of Crimea being part of Ukraine for the previous 23 years questioned. Moreover, they did this cynically and consciously, because the fifth column in both the then and current Crimean authorities is thoroughly represented by the impressive agents of the Kyiv junta. They did this in order to exclude unnecessary questions to themselves as accomplices of the occupiers, and also to ensure their comfortable, problem-free stay in power in the future,” Meshkov believes.

“As a legal scholar and specialist in constitutional law, I declare that the reference in the Declaration of Independence is also very inappropriate and dubious from a legal point of view Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol on the so-called. Kosovo precedent. Firstly, neither Russia nor Ukraine recognized Kosovo’s independence. And secondly, Crimea already had a Constitution of May 6, 1992, to which it just had to return. And no one would be able to challenge the legality of this step,” the ex-president once again emphasized.