Within first six month of 2005, the Committee of Voters of Ukraine monitored formation and operation of executive authorities in regions of Ukraine. They monitored criteria and transparency of appointments, level of new officials’ competence, their first steps, and public response to such appointees.

Major objects of monitoring were heads and deputy heads of oblast state administrations, heads of rayon state administrations, heads of oblast offices of the State Security Service of Ukraine, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the state Tax Administration, Customs, the Antimonopoly Committee, other key agencies in regions.

Regional branches of the CVU performed monitoring through meeting with representatives of political parties, journalists, public leaders, civil servants, visiting press conferences, examining publications in mass media etc.

Based on the monitoring results, the CVU states as follows:

1. Executive positions in regions were mostly filled in without determination of specific conformity criteria, open competition and with no explanations of such appointments’ reasons to public. Tenders and boards of experts mostly bore formal nature. As a result, such appointments often caused public protests.

2. The main criterion at filling in executive offices was personal ties between heads of regions and their people, instead of professional skills or party affiliation.

3. Among other shortcomings in new authorities’ operation, the CVU points out failure to meet coalition agreements at executive positions distribution, appointment persons having clouded reputation to offices, non-separation of power and business.

4. Occasional utilization of administrative pressure for political parties development, in particular, the People’s Union Our Ukraine and the People’s Party of Ukraine, were registered.

5. At the same time, some improvements in accountability mechanisms were noticed.

6. Administrative resource at the next election will be separated, uncontrolled, and inefficient. Administrative pressure will be more evident on the local level, than on the national one.

7. Problems revealed by the CVU are of objective nature and may be resolved. However, if such drawbacks are not eliminated, authorities may loss confidence of citizens of Ukraine, which would trigger new political crisis.

Based on monitoring results, the CVU recommends that:

1. Executive authorities should more actively report to public, not only to their direct supervisors.

2. Vacancies should be filled in on competitive basis subject to transparent procedures; appointed officers, especially those being criticized by citizens, should undergo public attestation of work performed and professional competence.

3. Civil servants holding executive offices should report on power and business separation.

4. Heads of executive authorities should distribute political offices in line with previous arrangements and assure smooth operation of executive personnel. Civil servants and administrative pressure should not be used for party development and interferences into election process

Local Appointment Procedures

CVU’s monitoring revealed that recent staff changes covered mainly top officials of the administrative vertical. On the oblast level, it dealt with heads of administrations, deputy heads, heads of departments, and occasionally — deputy department heads. On the rayon level, changes were not so radical, although many officials were dismissed, down to department heads. At the same time, minor turnover (if any) was in administrations of Kyiv, Sevastopol cities, Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Donetsk oblast.

During the presidential election, political parties comprising the People’s Power Coalition, who supported Viktor Yuschenko, entered into political agreements, reserving some representation quotas for parties in central and local authorities in case of Viktor Yuschenko’s victory.

However, practical execution of agreements proved to be difficult for both objective and subjective reasons. On the one hand, not all parties had sufficient number of qualified and professional members able to assure required representation. On the other hand, they often deliberately breached the quota principle trying to prevent penetration of some persons into public authorities for political reasons, or, to the contrary, promoting individual nominees in defiance of pre-election arrangements.

Examples of arrangements observed:

Chernivtsi oblast

On the oblast level, the Our Ukraine Election Bloc is represented by two deputy heads of oblast state administration, and 7 department heads. The Bloc’s members were appointed heads of 8 rayon state administrations out of 11.

Head of the oblast organization of Batkivschyna Election Union was appointed the fists deputy head of the oblast state administration. Batkivschyna Election Union has its representatives among deputy heads of all 11 rayon state administrations. Socialists gained the office of a deputy head of the oblast state administration and two deputy heads of rayon state administrations. Socialist Party of Ukraine holds offices of deputy heads of oblast departments, deputy heads of rayon state administrations.

Lviv oblast

On the oblast level, coalition arrangements were met. P. Oliynyk (head of the oblast state administration) is member of the People’s Movement of Ukraine; first deputy head is affiliated with the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists (M.Senyk); Party “Reforms & Order”, Ukrainian People’s Party and the People’s Movement of Ukraine have one deputy head each; executive officer is a member of the Ukrainian Republican Party.

Examples of broken arrangements:

Zhytomyr oblast

Coalition arrangements were partly observed. The most offended was Oleh Antypov (leader of the oblast branch of Batkivschyna), who counted on the first deputy governor, but finally got nothing.

Kyiv oblast

Quota principle did not prevail in formation of the new executive vertical. Majority of heads of oblast and rayon state administrations are old partners and authorized representatives of Ye.Zhovtyak (head of Kyiv oblast administration). According to experts, Yuriy Kostenko, direct supervisor of Mr. Zhovtyak in the Ukrainian People’s Party, exerts no influence upon manpower policy in the oblast.

Luhansk oblast

In his resent interview to the Molodohvardiets newspaper (February 9, 2005), Oleksiy Danylov, head of Luhansk oblast state administration, said that party quotas had exhausted with appointment of ministers and governors. He says that governors may form their teams by their own. In Luhansk oblast, there are no party nominees among deputy heads of the oblast state administration, and only eight heads of rayon state administrations had party affiliation.

Kherson oblast

In defiance of arrangements with the People’s Power Coalition, Socialist Party of Ukraine and Party of Entrepreneurs and Industrialists, B.Silenkov, head of Kherson oblast state adminsitration, refused to meet with coalition leaders for possible appointments discussion in February. Only when parties of the People’s Power Coalition expressed their indignation, such meeting was held. However, they touched upon heads of rayon administrations only.

Head of the oblast state administration B.Silenkov refused to discuss openly nominees for deputy heads of oblast state administration and heads of structural units with leaders of the People’s Power Coalition and public organizations. Later on, the majority of vacancies were filled in with representatives of Our Ukraine. Also, some positions were left to the People’s Party and non-affiliated persons.

Thus, there are 15 members of the People’s Union Our Ukraine, 10 non-affiliated individuals and 3 representatives of other coalition participants out of 28 newly-appointed deputy heads of oblast state administration, heads of structural divisions, heads and first deputy heads of rayon state administrations nominated by the People’s Power Coalition. MP Oleksandr Tkalenko was refused in his official inquiry on party affiliation of new officials nominated by the People’s Party coalition under pretence of data confidentiality.

Sevastopol city

All officials except for individual executives preserved their offices. New vacancies were filled in taking into account personal loyalty to new mayor of Sevastopol — S. Ivanov.

Appointment of new local executive officials was far from transparent; no conformity or competitiveness criteria were established. For example, deputy head of Sevastopol city state administration — D. Basiv (former head of V. Yuschenko’s election HQs in Sevastopol) gained the office only after three-month pressure on S. Ivanov.

Kyiv city

No head of rayon state administration was dismissed in Kyiv.

Protest Actions Against Personnel Policy

Failure to observe quota principle at offices distribution provoked mass protest actions in many regions, which paralyzed activities of new authorities for some time. Some crises were resolved taking into account interests of all political forces; however, more often, equal distribution of offices was not observed.

Chernivtsi oblast

The most controversial was appointment of the head of Sokyrnya rayon state administration. Despite the fact that oblast party members and journalists were informed that P.Perepelytsa (Our Ukraine) would hold the office, it turned out that P.Beskupskyi (non-affiliated head of rayon tax administration, former head of rayon state administration) had been nominated. Support groups of both nominees organized protest meetings and came to the oblast state administration. Followers of P.Beskupskyi actually seized the session hall. Only after prolonged exhausting negotiations with the head of oblast state administration, they reached compromise. P.Beskupskyi and P.Perepelytsa were appointed deputy heads of the rayon sate administration. Neutral individual — V. Shvets, non-affiliated head of financial department of rayon state demonstration — was chosen as an administration head.

Residents of Hlyboke rayon were also disappointed with new head of the rayon state administration. More than 30,000 adult residents out of 50,000 signed an appeal to President V. Yuschenko for keeping incumbent head M. Karliychuk in the office. However, there was no response to their appeal.

Residents of Khotyn rayon signed an appeal to the head of oblast state administration for revising decision on appointment of deputy heads of rayon administration claiming that new appointees are incompetent. More than 20 representatives of parties supporting V. Yushchenko, picketed Khotyn rayon state administration challenging appointment of the rayon state administration head.

Kyiv oblast

On April 3, protest meeting initiated by Vyshgorod rayon union of the All-Ukrainian Association Prosvita named after T. Shevchenko and representatives of the regional election HQs of V. Yuschenko took place in Vyshgorod. Some marchers demanded M.Hermanychuk (head of Vyshgorod municipal service) be appointed head of Vyshgorod rayon state administration; others supported newly-elected head R.Yerema.

Luhansk oblast

On March 2, protest meeting with participation of 100-150 residents of Luhansk and Starobilsk took place near Luhansk oblast state administration. They opposed to appointment of Andruy Nedovesov to the first deputy head of oblast state administration. People said that two criminal cases had been opened against Nedovesov.

On March 3-4, local residents protested against newly appointed heads of Starobilsk and Perevalsk rayon state administrations.

On March 14, residents of Luhansk started picketing the Presidential Secretariat claiming that Mr. Danylov should be dismissed. During 4 days of the protest action, they had two meetings with the President of Ukraine.

On March 31, Luhansk party members held the press conference in the UNIAN news agency, where they distributed materials on new appointees.

Because of protest actions, Mr. Lavrynchuk has been dismissed form the head of Perevalsk rayon state administration; candidacy of Andruy Nedovesov rejected, and Volodymyr Syrotin, deputy head of the oblast state administration has sent in his resignation. Also, papers for dismissal of Starobilsk and Novopskovsk rayon state administrations heads Polulyaschenko and Vakulenko were submitted to the President of Ukraine.

Kherson oblast

Lack of transparency in human policy caused the number of protest action in the oblast. Thus, in March, some active members of the People’s Power Coalition and representatives of NGOs “Partnership for Transparent Society” picketed the oblast state administration. Their demands have been ignored.

Representatives of the People’s Power Coalition in Hornostaivsk, Velyka Oleksandrivka and Tsuryupynsk rayons picketed rayon state administrations demanded their positions be taken into account at making staff decisions. People in Velyka Oleksandrivka even blocked the administration’s premise and prevented deputy head and the newly appointed head of the rayon state administration from entering their offices. As a result, new head was introduced to rayon officials later.

Vinnytsa oblast

Similar appointments caused mass indignation in Barsk, Tyrvivsk, Tulchyn, Vinnytsa, Kozyatyn, Kalynivka rayons, in Vinnytsa city (protest meetings against appointment of H. Zabolotnyi to the first deputy head of oblast state administration). In those rayons, residents held mass pickets and demonstrations (sometimes up to 1,000 participants); rayon representatives went to Kyiv and organized protest meetings near the Secretariat of the President of Ukraine.

Transparency of Staff Policy

While monitoring appointments of public officials, the CVU performed expert assessment of procedural transparency. Transparency covers public motivation of staff decisions, preliminary discussions, and hearing on the issue, rendering information on appointees’ biographies and experience.

In general, selection procedures and transparency level at appointing were rather poor. However, situation is different in various regions.

Examples of adherence to transparency principles

Zhytomyr oblast

The only example of transparent procedure was appointment of the head of oblast health care department. Anyone might be nominated to the office. A candidate should submit his/her development plan to be voted for by deputies of oblast council having medical background. Oblast governor had the final word, when choosing between two best candidates.

Examples of complete lack of transparency and ignore of public requests on staff policy.

Chernivtsi oblast

The majority of appointments in the oblast state administration had closed nature. Journalists were occasionally informed on appointment of some persons to executive positions; no biographies were published. After being criticized in mass media, the oblast state administration held public tender for civil offices in presence of mass media; however, such “democratic” procedure was reserved for middle-level positions only (consultants and leading specialists), and as so, it was of no interest to public.

Luhansk oblast

Immediately after being appointed to the head of Luhansk oblast state administration, Mr. Danylov rejected inquiry of the CVU’s representatives on possible nominees for deputy heads.

As of today, no regional media outlet or news agency published data on previous occupation and biographic details of heads of some rayon state administrations.

Kherson oblast

Yevhen Alkhimov, 22, head of the youth organization, which supported V. Yuschenko during the campaign, headed the youth and sport department of Kherson oblast state administration.

He has been appointed to the office despite of heavy opposition from leaders of youth and women’s organizations, who required fair procedures. They prepared the number of appeals claiming for professional approach to the staff policy, holding presentation of candidates’ programs, public discussion of their professional skills. All appeals have been ignored.

Cherkasy oblast

It is unclear how individual persons are selected to executive positions. Thus, nobody knows why V.Kosmyn (Socialist Party of Urkaine) and D.Lysun (Ukrainian People’s Party) have been appointed to deputy heads of the oblast state administration. Such persons had nothing in common with party structures they pretend to present.

Infringement of Rights of Dismissed Officials

The monitoring was also aimed at revealing infringements of dismissed civil servants’ rights. Based on monitoring’ results the CVU cannot support accusations of opposition parties in mass violations committed during dismissal of civil servants and budget employees. Dismissal procedures mainly complied with labor legislation of Ukraine. However, there were some minor violations in the sphere.

Chernihiv oblast

On June 24, 2005, Halyna Plusch, resident of Bobrovytsa urban type settlement, Bobrovytsa rayon, Chernihiv oblast, appealed to the legal service of the oblast branch of CVU.

She used to be the editor-in-chief of the rayon newspaper Our Life (Nashe Zhyttya, co-founders — Bobrovytsa rayon council, Bobrovytsa rayon state administration, and editorial board) until May 2005. However, when being on leave, she was informed that she had been dismissed form the office by decision of co-founders and based on the editorial order because of “absenteeism” (paragraph 4, Article 40 of the Labor code of Ukraine). Preliminary analysis of the case indicated on the number of violations committed during dismissal of the editor-in-chief, so the CVU’s lawyers have prepared the suit claiming Mr. Plusch is reinstated in her office with remuneration for forced absence and coverage of moral damage.

Kherson oblast

In Kherson oblast, some civil servants were forced to resign. Thus, in early February, all heads of structural units of the oblast state demonstration (divisions and offices of the secretariat) were summoned up on their day off and forced to resign. Some resignations have been accepted. No officials appealed against the procedure.

Professional Level and Morality of New Civil Servants

CVU’s monitoring revealed some inadequacies in qualifications of persons (education, professional background etc), who occupied executive offices.

On the rayon level, professional qualities of the number of rayon heads, let alone department heads, are far from acceptable. The majority of nominees follows old corruptive schemes or relies on personal loyalty to a governor.

Chernivtsi oblast

Head of the main financial department Viktor Zatirka — leader of oblast branch of the Reform & Order Party, authorized representative of V. Yuschenko in constituency # 207, has no experience in financial operations. Before, he was a private entrepreneur, headed small unprofitable shoe factory.

Luhansk oblast

Two deputy heads of the oblast state administration are subjects of criminal investigations. On March 20, 2003, a criminal case was opened against Andriy Nedovesov for purchase of equipment at a damping price (UAH 7 million), and on June 23, 2004, another case was initiated because of illegal VAT remuneration for pseudo-export operations. On June 18, 2004, a criminal case was opened against Volodymyr Syrotin for material damage caused to the state.

A criminal case was initiated against Hryhoriy Lavrynchuk, head of Perevalsk rayon state administration, because of the state property misappropriation. The case deals with former activities or Mr. Lavrynchuk as a deputy director general of Alchevsk Enterprise Kroton. He has been dismissed form the office.

Rivne oblast

A criminal case was opened against Dmytro Kryuchkov, incumbent deputy head of Rivne oblast state administration. Relevant announcement was made on July 12, and immediately after that, it was informed on Kryuchkov’s resignation.

Kherson oblast

Viktor Hutsov, head of Kakhovka rayon administration, was imposed a fine on because of corruption activities. Thus, after his appointment to the office, he has been running own farm.

In many instances, persons being accused of corruption and infringements during the election campaign have preserved their offices.

Sevastopol city

All department heads, staff members of divisions and offices have preserved their offices. Only heads of city and rayon state administrations have been replaced. For six month, mo more than 10 executives were dismissed, given the total numerical strength of about 1,600 civil servants.

Chernivtsi oblast

Former head of rayon administration, member of the socialist Democratic Party (united), has been appointed the first deputy head of Kelmenets rayon state administration — decision was made because of lack of professional candidacies in a rayon.

Many persons, who recently changed their affiliation (passed from the Social Democratic Party (United) to the Our Ukraine) have occupied executive offices in a rayon.

V.Chunush, entrepreneur from Chernivtsi, entered the expert board of the oblast state administration despite of having doubtful reputation.

Utilization of Administrative Pressure for Political Parties Development

In the course of monitoring, the CVU registered administrative interferences into political parties’ development process. Although such facts are irregular, the CVU points out that it may occur during the election campaign.

Chernivtsi oblast

According to first secretary of oblast committee of the Social Democratic Party (united) Vasyl Zabrodskyi, authorities tried to enroll managers of one city hospital, who used to be the SDP(u) members, into the People’s Union Our Ukraine.

Informal sources say that B.Bahley, deputy head of the oblast state administration, convokes meetings of the executive committee of oblast branch of the Our Ukraine in his office.

According to unofficial data, rayon administration and internal departments of the oblast state administration organized representation at party congress of the People’s Union Our Ukraine.

Volyn oblast

On July 18, 2005, Ihor Yeremeyev, leader of the People’s Party of Ukraine faction, informed on pressure being imposed by new heads of rayon administrations, namely in Volyn oblast. According to him, when deputies of Lokachyn rayon council appealed for establishment of the Peoples’ Party office, head of the local RSA Mr. Aleksandryk threatened them with dismissal in case of non-affiliation with the People’s Union Our Ukraine. Also, the same example was given by representatives of political parties at the consultation meeting with the head of oblast state administration on June 13, 2005. However, on the next day officials of the oblast state administration denied such information. In particular, statement of the internal policy department’s head reads, “according to our data, in his statement O.M. Aleksandryk refrained from administrative pressure; it was ordinary discussion of the faction structure of Lokachyn rayon council with deputies of such representative body”.

Luhansk oblast

Administrative pressure is typical tool in development of the People’s Union Our Ukraine structure. Thus, top officials directly participate in formation of oblast and city offices. On the oblast level, first deputy head of the oblast state administration Andriy Nedovesov heads the oblast branch of the PUOU. On the rayon and city levels, new members of the Union are enrolled with assistance of local officials, For example, an employee of the local housing and communal company appealed to Luhansk oblast branch of the CVU and asked what suctions were possible in case of leaving the Our Ukraine. At the constituent congress of the People’s Union Our Ukraine in Severodonetsk, leaders were nor familiar with more than 50 % membership (lists of participants were submitted by a person working for the executive committee). The majority of new members of the PUOU used to be affiliated with the Party of Regions.

Kherson oblast

In the end of June, Yuriy Horbenko quitted the office of the first deputy head of oblast state administration. Officially, he has taken the paternity leave. He validated his resignation by the fact of administrative pressure imposed by the “ruling” party, especially after his leaving the People’s Union Our Ukraine.

Sumy oblast

Leader of the parliamentary faction of the people’s Party Ihor Yeremeyev accused Sumy authorities in attempts to take control of local organizations of the People’s Party. The national deputy informed that a faction had got a directive of M.Lavryk, acting head of Sumy oblast state administration, sent to rayon administrations on May 15. According to Ihor Yeremeyev, it charges officials with prompt collecting data on heads of rayon and city offices of the people’s Party and compiling lists of delegates of the oblast party conference to be held on May 21, in Torba town, with indication of their offices, addresses and other relevant data.

Rivne oblast

Businessmen, who assisted oblast branch of the Batkivschyna Party in organizing Ivan Kupalo fest in Rivne, suffered from pressure of fiscal authorities, who conducted illegal audits, impeded work of enterprises, — reads statement of the oblast branch of Batkivschyna.

“Charitable funds” and “associations” are established in oblast for rendering pecuniary aid on behalf of the Ukrainian People’s Party. (For example, enterprises gathering scrap metal should deduct some money from each ton to the special Association).