$200 Knee Surgery Takes Yanukovych to Spain on Private Jet Worth $7,000-12,000 per Hour

Having sustained a tennis trauma that reportedly costs about $200 to repair locally, Yanukovych instead opted for royal treatment sponsored by his friends, writes Obkom, the Ukrainian blog. Not bad for a country with a GDP per capita of about 8K (PPP)? To carry the point further, he and his wife live on a per capita monthly income of $700. Well, that’s what his personal income statement says. (You’re not buying any of this, are you?)

Señor Yanukovych’s passion for Spanish surgical craftsmanship adds yet another episode to his burgeoning catalog of splashy, Paris Hilton-like appearances, which includes

• a voyage to Athens on a luxurious cruise liner as head of the Ukrainian delegation to the 2004 Olympics

• a pair of designer shoes worth $1,285 in which he extravagantly set foot on the floor the Council of Europe

So what’s the difference? Paris Hilton ends up with a few weeks jail time for DUI and our man remains on the loose. He’s unstoppable and untouchable.

Justice-for-Hire?

As the court battle of two Viktors opens this Tuesday, the SBU went public with the results of its background checks on Justice Susanna Stanik, according to which her mother has recently become the proud owner of $12 mn worth of real estate.

Bribery, the lifeblood of Ukrainian institutions, has long been manifest in luxurious suburban mansions that have mushroomed grossly out of proportion to their dwellers' salaries. When legalizing their trophies, bribe takers often put relatives on registration forms to mask their true identity.

In this regard, the Stanik Affair appears to be an attempt to challenge the credentials of a Justice tasked with preparing the briefs on the case. Stanik, who denies the allegations, has promised legal action against the SBU. The Office of the Prosecutor General, a Yanukovych-friendly organization, sided with Stanik, citing a lack of evidence. The SBU, a Yushchenko-friendly organization, should be ready to deliver on that account.

It all began when Realna Politika came up with the alleged transcript of a 2004 conversation between Susanna Stanik and Olena Lukash, the front woman on Yanukovych’s legal panel. In that dialogue, the two appear to be engaged in an important discussion of the Orange Revolution’s outcome.

Lukash, now Deputy Minister of Justice, outlined her business proposition to Stanik, a Kuchma appointee, on a first-name basis. She asked Stanik to endorse Yanukovych publicly and to pull a few strings for him using her connections in the High Court.

(Do not confuse the High Court, which had jurisdiction over the election fraud case, with the Constitutional Court, which handles the dissolution case. These are two separate courts, as Ukraine does not have a single supreme court.)

The story clearly falls into the kompromat, or political blackmail, category. Remember, we a wiretapped nation. For better or worse, our politicians have a passion for spying on each other. Ukraine has a rich kompromat culture in which highly sensitive intelligence leaks were used for the purpose of persuasion/dissuasion.

The cold shower Yanukovych took at the Council of Europe hearings could be compared with the cold shoulder treatment accorded to Yushchenko by the European Commission’s hands-off policy of ‘stability and democracy,’ as framed by President José Barroso.

Meanwhile, the opposition has urged Yushchenko to recall his appointees on concerns of the Court's pro-Yanukovych bias and corruption. To be continued.

The Ombudswoman in Blue: Reappointment of Yanukovych Associate Defies European Practice

The Yanukovych-controlled Rada Thursday appointed MP Nina Karpachova, PRU, to her third term as Ukraine's Commissioner for Human Rights. Later in the day, MP Mykola Tomenko, BYuT, landed the job as Vice Speaker. The latter position, generously reserved for the opposition, came with the nodding approval of the ruling Anticrisis Coalition. Being part of BYuT’s prior agreement with the PRU, it saved BYuT the agony of having to explain another episode of rapport with the PRU. (BYuT largely abstained from the Karpachova vote.)

While Tomenko’s promotion provides BYuT with a comfortable perch, Karpachova’s political credentials make her comeback a demotion for Ukraine’s human rights track record. (Blue is the official color of the PRU.)

European democracy requires that this watchdog position be occupied by an independent, nonpartisan figure. In Ukraine, however, democracy takes a back seat to Donbas and justice walks in lockstep with the oldest profession — or should we say proffession? But since Ukraine became a member of the Council of Europe in 1995, its citizens have learned to sue the corrupt government all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, winning settlements of a few thousand euros.

Despite assurances to the contrary, the human rights agenda to expect from Ombudswoman Karpachova should probably be called “See no evil, hear no evil.”

Bonjour mesdames Severinsen and Wohlvend. Here’s your clue on how Yanukovych’s goes about his vision of “building a Europe inside Ukraine.”