As compared to the Constitution of Ukraine, which has established the basis of language policy and the general order for the use of languages, the Charter only encourages states to freely choose among the means listed in its optional framework that are supportive of the use of “historical regional or minority languages in Europe, some of them over time threatened with extinction”. At the same time, the preamble of the Charter provides that “the protection and support of regional or minority languages should not be to the detriment of official languages and the need to study them.”

2. The Kivalov-Kolesnichenko draft bill did undergo expert examination by the Venice Commission, but the authors of this draft bill have obviously concealed from you the assessment that the Commission rendered regarding their “product.” The conclusions of the Venice Commission dated December 2, 2011 noted that the contents of the document, contrary to the goals and principles as proclaimed in Art. 5, evidence that the draft bill creates mechanisms for domination of the Russian language to the detriment of the Ukrainian language as the state language.

The Venice Commission urged the authors of the draft bill to carefully review the terminology and the consistency of its use throughout the draft bill text, and most importantly, the Commission insisted that the Ukrainian legislators should find a “fair balance” between protecting the rights of minorities, on the one hand, and preserving the state language as an instrument of social integration, on the other”. (Items 66, 68) Thus, according to opinion of the Venice Commission, the draft bill needs further fundamental redrafting.

The draft bill was also negatively rated in the conclusions of all relevant institutions of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine:

At the hearings held by the Committee on Culture and Spirituality of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (20.06.2012), the draft bill “On the Principles of State Language Policy” was deemed not to be in compliance with the requirements of the Constitution of Ukraine and that it required radical conceptual rewriting.

3. From the moment of its introduction, the passage of the draft bill through the Verchovna Rada was accompanied by systematic and gross violations of Articles 82 and 84 of the Constitution of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine “On the Regulations of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine” The apparatus of the Verchovna Rada registered the draft bill in violation of § 3 and § 6 of Art. 91 Law of Ukraine “On the Regulations of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine”, as its authors did not submit a financial feasibility study and comparative tables indicating the resulting changes to the laws of Ukraine proposed in section II “Transitional Provisions” of the draft bill.

During the consideration of the draft bill in its first reading on June 5 this year, the provisions of Art. 102 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Regulations of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine” were violated: the draft bill was voted on without discussion of its basic principles, rules, criteria and structure. This vote was carried out in violation of Art. 84 of the Constitution of Ukraine, which requires that a voting peoples’ deputy to be physically present to vote.

On July 3rd of this year, during the evening session of the Verchovna Rada, First Deputy Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine [and presiding speaker], Adam Martyniuk, encouraged the violation of parliamentary rules with his manipulative “technologies”. Without conciliation committee approval and without review of the numerous amendments introduced by other peoples’ deputies, Adam Martyniuk orally announced and placed out of order for a vote on the daily agenda the draft bill number 9073 “On the Principles of State Language Policy. ” This attempt failed getting only 219 of the required 226 votes. The second vote concerned the proposal of the presiding speaker to go back to the just “bungled” issue of changes to the agenda, which passed with 241 votes. After this, Adam Martyniuk did not put to a vote the issue of the inclusion of the draft bill on the agenda, but immediately, even without specifying the version of the draft bill to be voted upon, put to a vote draft bill number 9073 in its entirety (which received 248 votes). Thus, the issue that was voted upon was not even included on the daily agenda, and above all, was absolutely not prepared for a vote.

In terms of law and fact, any debate, voting, and approval of the aforementioned draft bill did not take place at its second reading and could not have happened in principle, since the main committee in accordance with Chapter 20 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Regulations of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine” was continuing to work on its preparation for the second reading, because of the large number of amendments (over 2000). That is why the draft bill was not (and could not be!) initialed by the head of the main committee, the head of the secretariat of this committee, as well as by the heads of the legal and the editorial staff of the Verkhovna Rada, as required by Part 1 of Art. 117, and was not (and could not be!) distributed to the peoples’ deputies “not later than ten days prior to consideration of the draft bill at the plenary session of Verchovna Rada.” In the absence of the draft bill being prepared for the second reading, it was not possible for it to fulfill the requirements of Art. 119 of the Regulations regarding item by item discussion, and voting on amendments based on the comparative tables, and reaching agreement on the final text of the law. Thus, the peoples’ deputies voted for a phantom document that in the legal sense did not exist, and, again, in violation of Art. 84 of the Constitution of Ukraine.

4. Attempting to “improve” a non-existent document by using structures of the Cabinet of Ministers controlled by your administration is nothing but a continuation of the gross violations of the Constitution of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine “On the Regulations of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.” Such an attempt is illegitimate for the reason that amendments to the draft bill that is before Verchovna Rada, and approval of its final text can only be made in the parliament and in accordance with procedures established by Chapter 20 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Regulations of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.”

Thus, you have no basis to consider the decision of the Verchovna Rada of 3 July 2012 concerning the draft law “On the Principles of State Language Policy” as the adoption of a law, since such a law in principle, does not exist. Even if this decision was modified by Cabinet of Ministers, the document cannot be considered as law. By signing the phantom act “approved” by unprecedented violations of the Constitution of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine “On the Regulations of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine”, you will commit illegal actions and will become a co-participant in a fraud, which entails moral, political and criminal responsibility

As guarantor of the Constitution of Ukraine, you should take all measures to ensure that the unconstitutional Kivalov-Kolesnichenko draft bill, which causes rifts in society, divides Ukraine, and infringes on its constitutional order, be removed from consideration. We believe that the best way out of the situation would be to establish a working group formed, inter alia, of representatives of civic organizations and expert groups, to prepare a qualitatively new law “On the Order of Use of Languages in Ukraine” in accordance with the requirements of the Constitution of Ukraine, and taking into account the European experience in the field of language policy.

If you want to be President of all of Ukraine and not a pawn in the hands of anti-Ukrainian forces, you should stop flirting with them and refrain from participating in activities aimed at undermining the foundation of the independence of Ukraine. We expect that you do not want your presidency to lead to the destruction of Ukrainian statehood.

Kyiv, July 13, 2012

On behalf of: