One of the primary problems of a dumbed down education system is that it creates a dumbed down population.
Hence why the average person has the mental capacity of a hamster and the memory of a goldfish.
Not even the politicians, journalists and political commentators have a memory or historical vision that allows them to understand contemporary international issues like the Ukranian Revolution.
In 1993 Boris Yeltsinj ordered an attack on the Russian parliament.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Russian_constitutional_crisis
The constitutional crisis of 1993 was a political stand-off between the Russian president and the Russian parliament that was resolved by using military force. The relations between the president and the parliament had been deteriorating for some time. The constitutional crisis reached a tipping point on September 21, 1993, when President Boris Yeltsin aimed to dissolve the country's legislature (the Congress of People's Deputies and its Supreme Soviet), although the president did not have the power to dissolve the parliament according to the constitution. Yeltsin used the results of the referendum of April 1993 to justify his actions. In response, the parliament declared that the president's decision was null and void, impeached Yeltsin and proclaimed vice president Aleksandr Rutskoy to be acting president.
The situation deteriorated at the beginning of October. On October 3, demonstrators removed police cordons around the parliament and, urged by their leaders, took over the Mayor's offices and tried to storm the Ostankino television centre. The army, which had initially declared its neutrality, by Yeltsin's orders stormed the Supreme Soviet building in the early morning hours of October 4, and arrested the leaders of the resistance.
The ten-day conflict became the deadliest single event of street fighting in Moscow's history since the revolutions of 1917.[1] According to government estimates, 187 people were killed and 437 wounded, while estimates from non-governmental sources put the death toll at as high as 2,000.
This action by Yeltsin has direct legal consequences for the actions of the Russians in the Ukraine.
The attack by Yeltsin to topple the ELECTED Russian government was illegal under the Russian Constitution.
It breached the terms of the constitution of the Russian State.
Yet the West and the Russian government of Yeltsin that replaced the former government regarded Yeltsins actions as lawful.
Therefore the exact same scenario applies in relation to the Ukraine.
The former leader of the Ukraine fled the country and after his departure a new government was formed to replace the previous one.
In this case the Ukranian people, as opposed to a single tyrant using the army eg Yeltsin, did the toppling of the government.
The fact that the former government of Russia then had no legal authority to issue any laws or decrees was affirmed by Yeltsin.
The same situation now applies in the Ukraine.
The former government have no legal authority, using the exact same legal principles as used by Yeltsin, to issue any request to Russia for them to invade the Ukraine or to undertake any actions in the Ukraine that conflict with the pre-existing legal agreements in place relating to Russian use of Ukranian territory in the Crimea.
Putins decision to regard the request of Yanukovych as the order of a legal government is in fact unlawful.
The fact is that regardless of Yeltsin being the Russian president AT THE TIME, the Russian Constitution stated that the President did not have the power to remove the Russian Parliament - especially by using the army and tanks to shell the Parliament building, murder hundreds of people and put members of the Parliament in Prison.
Therefore there is no legal authority for Putin to regard the orders of Yanukovych as the expression of a government that still retains power in the Ukraine, neither in fact or law or in regard to the legal principle as defined by Yeltsin in the 1993 toppling of Parliament.
The actions of Russia are therefore illegal under not just Russian law, but Ukranian law and international law.
The basis of this is the fact that the legal principle stating that the toppling of a government illegally can be legal is the legacy of the modern Russian state itself.
In the ongoing Ukranian example ;
1) the surrender of power and the fleeing of the Yanukovych government from Ukraine
2) the issuing of illegal orders to Russia
3) and the ongoing illegal actions of Russia in the Ukraine as mandated by Yanukovych
also ensure that the previous government cannot claim any legal authority in regard to their assertion that they are the legal government of the Ukraine.
No comments:
Post a Comment