A new record has been set in the Ukrainian parliament. There were 16,335 amendments submitted to one bill. This technology is called “legislative spam,” and in this particular case, it is billion oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky who is using it, trying to retain the right to return PrivatBank.
And even if he loses this fight, Kolomoisky continues to bargain with the authorities, raising bets.
This week, Verkhovna Rada should remove the last obstacle to unlock the International Monetary Fund’s $8 billion loan. If adopted, this law will make it impossible for PrivatBank to return to its previous owners, oligarchs Kolomoisky and Gennady Bogolyubov.
Read also: What is happening with PrivatBank court cases and why is this such a big deal
The amendments could be submitted by midnight on April 6. In general, 16,335 amendments were submitted. And this is an absolute record for Ukraine’s history — there were two laws with the maximum number of amendments made between the first and second reading: the law on elections saw a whopping 4,568 amendments, while the law on the land market — 4,018 amendments.
Among all the mess, the largest number of amendments was submitted by independent lawmaker Anton Polyakov. His parliamentary career looks somewhat sad — he was expelled from President Volodymyr Zelensky’s Servant of the People faction and got closer to the Kolomoisky group, doing dirty work for them.
For example, on Oct. 30, 2019, this lawmaker started the process of ousting ex-Prosecutor General Ruslan Riaboshapka and began collecting signatures for his resignation. It was one of Kolomoisky’s scenarios, because Riaboshapka threatened him by handing over the abuse case at PrivatBank and Ukrnafta to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, thus creating a time bomb for the oligarch.
This time Polyakov put together over 6,033 amendments single-handedly. The bill itself was adopted in the first reading around 5 p.m. on March 30. To come up with 6,033 amendments since then, Polyakov had to write up 850 amendments every day non-stop. This means that he managed to be preparing one amendment every two minutes for seven days and nights.
It is clear that such technology is not within the power of any lawmaker, and Polyakov simply played the role of a torpedo, which Kolomoysky and his associates want to use to stall the bill. By the way, it is indicative that one of the other lawmakers to produce a large number of amendments is Olga Vasylevska-Smahliuk, a former employee of Kolomoisky from 1+1 TV Channel. She authored 1,689 amendments. Another former employee of 1+1 Channel, MP Oleksandr Dubinsky filed 1,199 amendments.
Another “hard worker” is lawmaker Viktor Bondar who co-chairs the 22-member group “For Future” with Kolomoisky’s close ally Ihor Palytsia. Bondar drafted 1,911 amendments.
Dmytro Chorny, a member of the Servant of the People, and an alumnus of Kolomoisky-sponsored party Ukrop, proposed 1,781 amendments.
By submitting such an unimaginable number of amendments through the lawmakers loyal to him, Kolomoisky understands that he is trying not necessarily to bring down the bill but at least to strengthen his negotiating positions and then make a deal. After all, the authorities can not afford the luxury of holding a parliament meeting dedicated to amendments on the PrivatBank bill for half a year.
However, the previous experience of passing this law in the first reading shows that Kolomoisky runs the risk of miscalculation. This is exactly what happened when he and his partners made a mistake by not withdrawing their alternative projects to the original bank bill drafted by the Cabinet of Oleksiy Honcharuk.
Here is what happened. For the first time, the bill that would prohibit banks from returning to their owners after nationalization was introduced by the Cabinet of Ministers under former Prime Minister Honcharuk. It was registered under the number 2571 on Dec. 11, 2019. At the same time, two alternative bills were submitted by Kolomoisky minions — lawmakers Ihor Palytsya and Dubinsky (by the way, they even share one office in parliament).
However, in March, Honcharuk’s government was dismissed and “PrivatBank bill” was automatically revoked. But those two lawmakers, Palytsya and Dubinsky, made a mistake. They did not revoke their alternative bills. What happened next? The newly formed Cabinet of Ministers under Prime Minister Denys Shmygal submitted a new bill on PrivatBank No. 3260 dated March 24. In its essence, this is Honcharuk’s bill with minor amendments, and by introducing it, Shmygal wanted to show his leadership.
After a bill is filed to parliament, lawmakers have 14 days to submit alternative bills on the same issue. And until then, the parliament can not vote on the primary bill itself. But nothing prevents the lawmakers to vote on the alternative bills.
Had Palytsya and Dubinsky withdrawn their alternative bills, they would have won two weeks for their patron. Why they didn’t do it is unknown. However, other lawmakers used it as an advantage: the lawmaker from Verkhovna Rada’s Financial Committee Yaroslav Zheleznyak suggested to not wait for 14 days until the alternative to the Shmygal’s draft law is submitted, but instead use the Dubinsky and Palytsya bills as a basis to create a bank bill known under the number 2571-D.
Although the lawmakers used the bills from Kolomoisky’s minions, they changed it so much that the final product was essentially Honcharuk’s original bill. But using alternative bills sped up the process of moving the bank bill to the session hall.
And at the extraordinary session amid COVID-19 hysteria Rada passed the draft law 2571-D in the first reading. Thus, due to the stupidity of Dubinsky and Palytsya, the lawmakers adopted the right law without a 14-day delay.
Another thing that plays against Kolomoisky is the adopted amendments to the Rada rules. Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the parliament passed legislation allowing its committees to work remotely. Therefore, to work out the final version of the bank bill, it is not necessary to gather lawmakers in one room — all decisions can be made online.
After the finance committee is done with it, the bill will go to the session hall for the second and final vote. Yes, Kolomoisky has a way to disrupt the voting: his minions can demand to take a vote on every amendment before the second reading — just like it was with the land law. But it’s very hard to imagine that the authors of thousands of “spam amendments” would want to sit in parliament for weeks because of the Kolomoisky law.
First of all, it cannot be presented to a voter as a “struggle for people’s good.” It’s one thing to dress up as the defender of the “sacred land.” And quite another is to block Verkhovna Rada because of the law that clearly defends Kolomoisky’s interests.
Secondly, the MPs are afraid to spend much time together amid the coronavirus pandemic. And if they are to consider all the amendments, they would have to spend weeks in Rada.
Therefore, the events may turn out differently: the authors of amendments would not show up to the sessions and their amendments would be automatically rejected. And after that, it will be possible to vote the draft law in the second reading, which is scheduled to take place this week, most likely on April 9.
By playing this dirty game with thousands of amendments Kolomoisky makes the situation ridiculous. He opposes himself to the country and reinforces the negative perception of his persona. If he keeps blocking the adoption of the law in the second reading through his minions, it will expose him as a destroyer and common evil even more.
It can’t be ruled out that Kolomoisky simply offers the authorities a chance to negotiate on more favorable terms. It can be just a game to up the ante — for example, an attempt to bargain for the termination of criminal cases in Ukraine or the suspension of cases on PrivatBank abroad, including in London. It is the consequence of a British court that he should fear the most.
Kolomoisky is gaining arguments for further play, including appealing the law to the Ukrainian Constitutional Court. This means that after the parliament’s vote, the fight for PrivatBank will not be over, but only change its shape and place.
Sergii Leshchenko is a Kyiv Post columnist, investigative journalist and former member of the Verkhovna Rada. It was translated by Kyiv Post staff writer Olena Goncharova.
