[Pages H967-H971]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

URGING GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE TO ENSURE A DEMOCRATIC, TRANSPARENT, AND
FAIR ELECTION PROCESS

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
agree to the resolution (H. Res. 339) urging the Government of Ukraine
to ensure a democratic, transparent, and fair election process leading
up to the March 31, 2002, parliamentary elections, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:

H. Res. 339

Whereas Ukraine stands at a critical point in its
development to a fully democratic society, and the
parliamentary elections on March 31, 2002, its third
parliamentary elections since becoming independent more than
10 years ago, will play a significant role in demonstrating
whether Ukraine continues to proceed on the path to democracy
or experiences setbacks in its democratic development;
Whereas the Government of Ukraine can demonstrate its
commitment to democracy by conducting a genuinely free and
fair parliamentary election process, in which all candidates
have access to news outlets in the print, radio, television,
and Internet media, and nationally televised debates are
held, thus enabling the various political parties and
election blocs to compete on a level playing field and the
voters to acquire objective information about the candidates;
Whereas a flawed election process, which contravenes
commitments of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe (OSCE) on democracy and the conduct of elections,
could potentially slow Ukraine's efforts to integrate into
Western institutions;
Whereas in recent years, incidents of government corruption
and harassment of the media have raised concerns about the
commitment of the Government of Ukraine to democracy, human
rights, and the rule of law;
Whereas Ukraine, since its independence in 1991, has been
one of the largest recipients of United States foreign
assistance;
Whereas $154,000,000 in technical assistance to Ukraine was
provided under Public Law 107-115 (the Kenneth M. Ludden
Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs
Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year 2002), a $16,000,000
reduction in funding from the previous fiscal year due to
concerns about continuing setbacks to needed reform and the
unresolved deaths of prominent dissidents and journalists,
such as the case of Heorhiy Gongadze;
Whereas Public Law 107-115 requires a report by the
Department of State on the progress by the Government of
Ukraine in investigating and bringing to justice individuals
responsible for the murders of Ukrainian journalists;
Whereas the Presidential election of 1999, according to the
final report of the Office of Democratic Institutions and
Human Rights (ODIHR) of OSCE on that election, failed to meet
a significant number of OSCE election-related commitments;
Whereas according to the ODIHR report, during the 1999
Presidential election campaign, a heavy proincumbent bias was
prevalent among the state-owned media outlets, and members of
the media viewed as not in support of the President were
subject to harassment by government authorities, while
proincumbent campaigning by state administration and public
officials was widespread and systematic;
Whereas the Law on Elections of People's Deputies of
Ukraine, signed by President Leonid Kuchma on October 30,
2001, which was cited in a report of the ODIHR dated November
26, 2001, as making improvements in Ukraine's electoral code
and providing safeguards to meet Ukraine's commitments on
democratic elections, does not include a role for domestic
nongovernmental organizations to monitor elections;
Whereas according to international media experts, the Law
on Elections defines the conduct of an election campaign in
an imprecise manner which could lead to arbitrary sanctions
against media operating in Ukraine;
Whereas the Ukrainian Parliament (Verkhovna Rada) on
December 13, 2001, rejected a draft Law on Political
Advertising and Agitation, which would have limited free
speech in the campaign period by giving too many
discretionary powers to government bodies, and posed a
serious threat to the independent media;
Whereas the Department of State has dedicated $4,700,000 in
support of monitoring and assistance programs for the 2002
parliamentary elections;
Whereas the process for the 2002 parliamentary elections
has reportedly been affected by violations by many parties
during the period prior to the official start of the election
campaign on January 1, 2002; and
Whereas monthly reports for November and December of 2001
released by the Committee on Voters of Ukraine (CVU), an
indigenous, nonpartisan, nongovernment organization that was
established in 1994 to monitor the conduct of national
election campaigns and balloting in Ukraine, cited five major
types of violations of political rights and freedoms during
the precampaign phase of the parliamentary elections,
including--
(1) use of government position to support particular
political groups;
(2) government pressure on the opposition and on the
independent media;
(3) free goods and services given by many political groups
in order to sway voters;
(4) coercion to join political parties and pressure to
contribute to election campaigns; and
(5) distribution of anonymous and compromising information
about political opponents:
Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) acknowledges the strong relationship between the United
States and Ukraine since Ukraine's independence more than 10
years ago, while understanding that Ukraine can only become a
full partner in Western institutions when it fully embraces
democratic principles;
(2) expresses its support for the efforts of the Ukrainian
people to promote democracy, the rule of law, and respect for
human rights in Ukraine;
(3) urges the Government of Ukraine to enforce impartially
its newly adopted election law, including provisions calling
for--
(A) the transparency of election procedures;
(B) access for international election observers;
(C) multiparty representation on election commissions;
(D) equal access to the media for all election
participants;
(E) an appeals process for electoral commissions and within
the court system; and
(F) administrative penalties for election violations;
(4) urges the Government of Ukraine to meet its commitments
on democratic elections, as delineated in the 1990 Copenhagen
Document of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe (OSCE), with respect to the campaign period and
election day, and to address issues identified by the Office
of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) of OSCE
in its final report on the 1999 Presidential election, such
as state interference in the campaign and pressure on the
media; and
(5) calls upon the Government of Ukraine to allow election
monitors from the ODIHR, other participating states of OSCE,
and private institutions and organizations, both foreign and
domestic, access to all aspects of the parliamentary election
process according to international practices, including--
(A) access to political events attended by the public
during the campaign period;
(B) access to observe voting and counting procedures at
polling stations and electoral

[[Page H968]]

commission meetings on election day, including procedures to
release election results on a district-by-district basis as
they become available; and
(C) access to observe postelection tabulation of results
and processing of election challenges and complaints.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume, and at the outset, I would like to recognize some
exemplary students from Hamilton High School West and Vicki Schoeb,
their dedicated teacher, and thank them for being here to observe the
workings of the Hill, especially the proceedings of the House. They are
very much welcomed to this Chamber.
Mr. Speaker, today the House moves to the timely consideration of H.
Res. 339, which urges the Government of the Ukraine to ensure a
democratic, transparent, and fair election process leading up to the
March 31 parliamentary elections. I would like to thank our majority
leader, the gentleman from Texas, (Mr. Armey), for his commitment to
schedule this timely and important resolution this week so that it
happens before and so that, hopefully, it will have some impact on the
proceedings.
I was pleased to be one of the original sponsors of this resolution
which acknowledges the strong relationship between the United States
and Ukraine, urges the Ukrainian Government to enforce impartially its
new election law, and urges the Ukrainian Government to meet its OSCE
committments on democratic elections. I strongly encourage my
colleagues to support this measure.
Mr. Speaker, the Helsinki Commission, which I chair, has a long-
standing record of support for human rights and democratic development
in Ukraine. Commission staff will be observing the upcoming elections,
as they have done for virtually every election in Ukraine since 1990.
The stakes in the Ukrainian elections are high both in terms of the
outcome and as an indication of the Ukrainian Government's commitment
towards democratic development and integration into Europe.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to underscore the reason for
this congressional interest in Ukraine. The clear and simple reason: An
independent, democratic, and economically stable Ukraine is vital to
the well being of all Ukrainians to the stability and security of
Europe; and we want to encourage Ukraine in recognizing its own often-
stated goal of integration into Europe.
Despite the positive changes that have occurred in the Ukraine since
independence in 1991, including the economic growth over the last 2
years, Ukraine is still undergoing a difficult path towards transition.
The pace of that transition has been distressing, slowed by
insufficient progress in respect for the rule of law, especially by the
presence of widespread corruption, which continues to exact a
considerable toll on the Ukrainian people. They deserve better, Mr.
Speaker, than what they have gotten.
Another source of frustration is the still-unresolved case of
murdered investigative journalist, Heorhiy Gongadze. And let me say one
thing about him, as well as his widow. Last year, at the OSCE
parliamentary assembly which I led, to Paris, my colleagues will
remember that we honored him posthumously for his great work and
because he paid the ultimate price for his convictions--death.
The flawed investigations of this case and the case of another
murdered Ukrainian journalist, Ihor Aleksandrov, call into question
Ukraine's commitment to the rule of law. And I can assure you, Mr.
Speaker, that going on into the next weeks and months the Helsinki
Commission will continue its vigilance. We plan on holding hearings to
look into this even further, hopefully keeping pressure on the
Ukrainian Government simply to do the right thing.
There have also been a number of disturbing cases of violence and
threats of violence. For example, 78-year-old Iryna Senyk, a former
political prisoner and poetess, who was campaigning for the pro-reform
party, our Ukraine bloc, was badly beaten by unknown assailants.

{time} 1645

Such unchecked violence has created an uncertain atmosphere.
Most of independent Ukraine's elections have met international
democratic standards for elections. The 1999 presidential elections
were more problematic, and the OSCE Election Mission Report on these
elections asserted that they ``failed to meet a significant number of
the OSCE election-related commitments.''
Mr. Speaker, it remains an open question as to whether the March 31
elections will be a step forward for Ukraine. With less than 2 weeks
until election day, there are some discouraging indications, credible
reports of various violations of the election law, including, one,
campaigning by officials or use of state resources to support certain
blocs or candidates; second, the denial of public facilities and
services to candidates, blocs or parties; three, governmental pressure
on certain parties, candidates and media outlets; and, four, a pro-
government bias in the public media, especially the government's main
television network, UT-1.
Mr. Speaker, these actions are inconsistent with Ukraine's freely
undertaken OSCE commitments and undermine its reputation with respect
to human rights and democracy. A democratic election process is a must
in solidifying Ukraine's democratic credentials and the confidence of
its citizens and in its stated desire to integrate with the West.
During his visit to Ukraine last week, the President of the OSCE
Parliamentary Assembly, Adrian Severin, expressed concern over the
mistrust in the election process among certain candidates as well as a
general skepticism as to whether or not the elections would be truly
free and fair, and encouraged Ukrainian officials to take quick
measures to ensure that it is a free and fair election and that the
outcome is credible.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that the summary of the most recent Long Term
Observation Report on the Ukrainian elections prepared by the
nonpartisan Committee of Voters of Ukraine, be submitted for the
Record.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

announcement by the speaker pro tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The Chair must remind the
Member that the rules do not permit references to or introductions of
persons in the galleries.
Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 339 and compliment
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) for his cosponsorship of this
important resolution, for his passionate statement on the floor today,
and for his work behind the scenes to get this resolution on the floor
today. It was not easy to do. We were running short on time. This is
the last week of our session before the Ukrainian parliamentary
elections on March 31, and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith)
worked with dispatch and effectiveness behind the scenes. I am sure
that the freedom-loving people of Ukraine are glad that the gentleman
did, as well.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Hyde) of the Committee on International Relations and subcommittee
chair, the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly), for their
commitment to move this bill forward. There were several bumps in the
road, but cooperation carried the day. We kept the bill in a strong and
effective form, and I compliment all on the majority side for bringing
this resolution forward.
I certainly compliment the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter),
co-chair with the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Schaffer) of the
Ukrainian Caucus in the House. The gentlewoman from New York (Ms.
Slaughter) is the prime sponsor of this important legislation.
We are all here today to promote this legislation, which urges the
Government of the Ukraine to ensure a democratic, transparent, and fair
parliamentary election on March 31. The resolution also urges the
Government of Ukraine to implement basic tools in order to ensure free
and fair elections,

[[Page H969]]

including a transparency of election procedures, access for
international election observers, multiparty representation on election
commissions, and equal access to the media for all election candidates.
Mr. Speaker, this is the third parliamentary election in the Ukraine
since they gained their independence 10 years ago. It is the most
critical. This is a big deal in the Ukraine. If they fail to continue
to move forward with democratic reforms, if this is not a fair and free
election, it will be a major setback to the cause of democracy in
Ukraine.
It is very appropriate for this government, as friendly as we are
with the people and the Government of Ukraine, to urge that the
government in Ukraine do everything in its power to ensure the fairness
and openness of this election process.
Ukraine has come a long way in the last 10 years. Its economy grew
more than 6 percent last year. It has voluntarily given up the third
largest nuclear arsenal in the world, and has consistently sought to
eliminate its existing stockpile of strategic missiles. There are basic
political reforms under way in the country, and we have friendly
relations with the Ukraine and we want those relations to continue to
be as friendly and supportive as possible.
But significant challenges remain. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Smith) and others have indicated the challenges that we have. There are
restrictions on basic democratic freedoms in the country. The nuclear
plants I mentioned are in desperate need of appropriate clean up. The
media suffers from blatant government harassment and pressure, and
government corruption runs rampant.
There have been a number of activities and accusations involving the
government that are terribly disturbing. The gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Smith) has talked about the unsolved murder of the brave
journalist Heorhiy Gongadze in September 2000, and the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and I participated in the Parliamentary Assembly
of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe held last
July in Paris in which the OSCE awarded a prize to the widow of Mr.
Gongadze in honor of his great service and the sacrifice he made in
support of freedom of the press.
I, as does the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), remember well
the passionate speech that Mrs. Gongadze made in Paris a year ago. I am
happy to tell the gentleman from New Jersey that Mrs. Gongadze visited
my district this past weekend and spoke again with great passion at the
Ukrainian Educational and Cultural Center of Greater Philadelphia on a
panel called to discuss the importance of the Ukrainian elections
identified as ``Ukraine at a Crossroads''; and her passion for
democratic reforms remains unabated, as is her desire, as is ours, to
determine and hold accountable those that murdered her husband.
The OSCE, through their Office of Democratic Institutions and Human
Rights, has issued a final report on Ukraine's most recent national
election, the presidential election of 1999, and indicates that that
election was marred by violations of Ukrainian election law and failed
to meet a number of OSCE election commitments. There was state
interference with the campaign and government pressure on the media.
This month's election has been reviewed ahead of time. There is a
group called the Committee of Voters of Ukraine, the leading Ukrainian
watchdog group on elections; and they have reported numerous violations
in the run-up to the 2002 parliamentary election. So the challenge is
still present. This is a very important watershed election in Ukraine.
They have got to get this right. They cannot slip back and repeat the
mistakes of the 1999 presidential election. They must continue to move
forward; and it is very appropriate for this Congress, this House, to
urge the Government of Ukraine to run as fair and open an election as
possible.
Mr. Speaker, Ukraine strives to realize a more robust democracy, and
it needs our encouragement and support. It has both, and I urge all of
my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

General Leave

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and
extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 338,
the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel)
for his comments. The gentleman's statement was right on point.
I think it is important to underscore the good work that the
Committee of Voters of Ukraine are actually doing. Between February 23
and March 10, 225 long-term observers visited 622 cities and 712
political party branches. They attended 578 events conducted by
political groups. They are making a Herculean effort to ensure that the
upcoming elections are free and fair and impartial. They deserve our
highest support and praise and congratulations for being so committed
to fair and free elections in Ukraine. The Committee is comprised of
true patriots of Ukraine. They are brave and resourceful and they
deserve the full support of every Member of this body.
Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the summary of the Long Term
Observation Report of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine.

Summary

In October 2001, the Committee of Voters of Ukraine (CVU)
began its long-term observation of the 2002 parliamentary
election process. CVU is a non-partisan citizens' election
monitoring organization with 160 branches throughout the
Ukraine. CVU will report regularly until the March 31, 2002
elections.
Between February 23 and March 10, 225 long-term observers
visited 622 cities and 712 political party branches, and
attended 578 events conducted by political groups. CVU
observed the same kinds of violations as in the previous
three-week period. Some types of violations decreased in
number, while others increased.
Each time a problem was reported to an observer, the head
of the regional CVU organization called the individual making
the report to verify it and obtain details. In many cases,
witnesses are reluctant to talk about violations, fearing
retribution from their employers or others.
CVU has noticed a few positive developments since its last
report. In the past three weeks, voter education programs in
the mass media have become more robust. Likewise, election
commissioners are receiving practical training from non-
governmental organizations. Some television stations have
also been showing debates between various political leaders.
Nonetheless, the pre-election period continues to be marked
by substantial violations of Ukrainian law. The main types of
offenses recorded by CVU during the last week of February and
first two weeks of March were:
Campaigning by state officials or use of state resources to
support favored political candidates and groups. The block
``Za Edu'' (For a United Ukraine) was the principal, but not
exclusive beneficiary of this support.
Government pressure on certain political parties,
candidates, and media outlets.
Interference in election campaigns through violence,
threats of violence or destruction of campaign materials.
Illegal campaign practices by candidates offering free
goods and services to voters and distributing unregistered
campaign materials.
Executive branch interference in the election process has
decreased somewhat since the previous three week period,
although it remains a key feature of the electoral
environment. As before, the principal beneficiary of this
assistance is the bloc ``Za Edu'' and its candidates in
single mandate constituencies. Much of this interference
takes place openly; in many cases, government officials
involve themselves in the electoral process in an apparent
attempt to win favor with their superiors. Although CVU
has witnessed fewer instances of this kind of violation,
this does not necessarily suggest that executive branch
officials are behaving more impartially. In many cases,
they have simply shifted their attention away from the
parliamentary elections to oblast (state) and local races,
which are not covered in this report.
Conversely, legal provisions requiring free and transparent
campaigning are being ignored with increasing frequency.
Criminal interference in campaigns has gone up; in turn,
parties and single-mandate candidates are breaking the
election law more often.
Some candidates, parties, and citizens whose rights have
been infringed are beginning to lodge formal complaints with
election commissions and the courts. Some commissions have
responded by warning parties and candidates accused of
campaign violations to respect the law. No state officials

[[Page H970]]

has been punished for abuse of office, however. While CVU has
uncovered no evidence that state interference in the election
has been ordered by senior government authorities, neither
have these authorities punished any accused lawbreakers or
acted preemptively to ensure neutrality on the part of their
subordinates.

election commissions

The country's central and constituency election commissions
appear to functioning relatively well. Most are following
proper procedure and trying to respond to appeals in a timely
manner. Where problems with district commissions do exist,
they are more likely to be found in eastern and southern
regions of Ukraine.
The formation of polling-place election commissions (PECs)
has not gone smoothly, however. Instead, this process has
been marked by confusion and numerous violations of proper
procedure. Detailed information on the make-up of the
country's roughly 33,000 PECs was supposed to be released by
February 27 Article 21.13 of the election law, but this
requirement was not observed in most areas. Hence, an
analysis of the make-up of the commissions is not possible at
this time.
CVU is concerned that the provisions of Ukraine's election
law that provide for multi-partisan representation on
election commissions have not been respected in spirit. In
many areas, local executive bodies have taken advantage of
the weaknesses of political parties to appoint election
commissioners who nominally represent a party but who are, in
practice, loyal to the local administration alone. CVU has
witnessed numerous cases where election commissioners are
unaware even of identity of the party they are supposed to
represent. Clearly, a good deal of the blame for this problem
also lies with the parties, which have been incapable of
recruiting trusted members to serve as commissioners in many
parts of the country.

Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments and simply add
that we take elections for granted in this country. We know how
important they are, but we assume that they will be fair and open and
transparent. We need to do everything in our power to encourage the
same in the emerging democracies in Europe. Those countries, such as
Ukraine, emerging from the tyranny of the Soviet bloc, for 10 years a
new independence and freedom has been observed in Ukraine; but this
election is of critical importance. They have got to get it right. We
have to help them get it right, and this legislation is dedicated to
that proposition.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman
from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel) for championing this very important
resolution to put our Nation and the Congress on record in highest
hopes that the elections this year in the Ukraine will ensure a
democratic, transparent, and fair election process leading up to March
31. Their parliamentary elections will be held on that date. Of course
the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Smith), and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel) have traveled
together to that part of the world and have made such a difference in
carrying the banner of freedom's institutions into regions of our world
where heretofore people had not been able to exercise their full
democratic rights.
Having just returned from the Ukraine myself and having had the
really historic opportunity to meet with nearly 300 of their younger
citizens, and people representing nongovernmental organizations that
are monitoring the elections and trying to produce information so
people know what they are voting about, we can see a change, a glacial
change occurring there for the better. But without question, people of
that nation must feel free and unintimidated as they go to the polls,
and they must understand what the various candidates' platforms are;
and it is safe to say that that kind of transparency and information
has not been easily available.
Sometimes it is hard here, but there the systems are just not robust.
It is not easy to understand how a party slate or individuals on it
might actually support a certain program, and it is hard to distinguish
among the major blocs and the people in those blocs. I would add an
encouraging word for passage of this resolution and a great hope that
the Government of Ukraine will ensure that the election process is
open. Let flourish those who are attempting to help people understand
the issues and understand what those who are running actually will
champion in their own programs once elected to RADA or local office.
This kind of information should be more broadly available. The Internet
should be allowed to function so people will share information across
regions and become more informed about what their vote actually means.
The task before the Ukrainian people of building a more open and free
society is enormous. That is true in Russia also and many of the former
republics of the Soviet Union.

{time} 1700

I know that I detected, especially among the young, such a great
hope, such a feeling that they had the future of the country in their
hands. They are looking for us to pass this resolution to give a signal
that our country stands and walks alongside those who are trying to
build more open and free societies. In fact many young people who are
21 years of age are running for office in some of the towns, or are
trying to run for parliament, to try to change the laws in order to
make property traded freely with a mortgage system. They are fighting
for laws so loans can be made by a regular bank and have a free credit
system established. They want an educational system that is available
to all so students are able to learn critical thinking methods. All of
these challenges lie ahead of those young leaders.
And so to the young people in our country, I encourage them to pay
attention to Ukraine, the most important nation in Central Europe. As
it goes, so will the nations around it. I rise in very strong support
of House Resolution 339 and want to thank so very much the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Hoeffel) for bringing this to the attention of the entire world,
indeed. We respectfully say to the people of Ukraine, vote, vote
wisely, monitor the elections, help to move your country forward, as I
know the hearts of your people tell you they want.
I express my fullest support for this resolution.
Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, a real leader on
Ukrainian issues in the House. I compliment her on her remarks.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose H. Res. 339, a bill by the
United States Congress which seeks to tell a sovereign nation how to
hold its own elections. It seems the height of arrogance for us to sit
here and lecture the people and government of Ukraine on what they
should do and should not do in their own election process. One would
have thought after our own election debacle in November 2000, that we
would have learned how counterproductive and hypocritical it is to
lecture other democratic countries on their electoral processes. How
would members of this committee--or any American--react if countries
like Ukraine demanded that our elections here in the United States
conform to their criteria? So I think we can guess how Ukrainians feel
about this piece of legislation.
Mr. Speaker, Ukraine has been the recipient of hundreds of millions
of dollars in foreign aid from the United States. In fiscal year 2002
alone, Ukraine was provided $154 million. Yet after all this money--
which we were told was to promote democracy--and more then ten years
after the end of the Soviet Union, we are told in this legislation that
Ukraine has made little if any progress in establishing a democratic
political system.
Far from getting more involved in Ukraine's electoral process, which
is where this legislation leads us, the United States is already much
too involved in the Ukrainian elections. The U.S. government has sent
some $4.7 million dollars to Ukraine for monitoring and assistance
programs, including to train their electoral commission members and
domestic monitoring organizations. There have been numerous reports of
U.S.-funded non-governmental organizations in Ukraine being involved in
pushing one or another political party. This makes it look like the
United States is taking sides in the Ukrainian elections.
The legislation calls for the full access of Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) monitors to all aspects of
the parliamentary elections, but that organization has time and time
again, from Slovakia to Russia and elsewhere, shown itself to be
unreliable and politically biased. Yet the United States continues to
fund and participate in OSCE activities. As British writer John
Laughland observed this week in the Guardian newspaper, ``Western
election monitoring has become the political equivalent of an Arthur
Andersen audit. This supposedly technical

[[Page H971]]

process is now so corrupted by political bias that it would be better
to abandon it. Only then will countries be able to elect their leaders
freely.'' Mr. Speaker, I think this is advice we would be wise to heed.
Other aspects of this bill are likewise troubling. This bill seeks,
from thousands of miles away and without any of the facts, to demand
that the Ukrainian government solve crimes within Ukraine that have
absolutely nothing to do with the United States. No one knows what
happened to journalist Heorhiy Gongadze or any of the alleged murdered
Ukrainian journalists, yet by adding it into this ill-advised piece of
legislation we are sitting here suggesting that the government has
something to do with the alleged murders. This meddling into the
Ukrainian judicial system is inappropriate and counter-productive.
Mr. Speaker, we are legislators in the United States Congress. We are
not in Ukraine. We have no right to interfere in the internal affairs
of that country and no business telling them how to conduct their
elections. A far better policy toward Ukraine would be to eliminate any
U.S.-government imposed barrier to free trade between Americans and
Ukrainians.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, since regaining its independence in 1991,
Ukraine's democracy has made significant progress but has not been
without its difficult periods. Nowhere has the integrity of the
country's political system been more challenged than in its electoral
process.
On March 31, Ukraine will hold its third election for parliament.
This election will be a critical test of the strength of Ukraine's
evolving democracy and its new election laws.
Given the importance of a strong and stable Ukraine in the region,
the importance of our relations with Ukraine and our keen interest in
Ukraine's continued emergence as a responsible, democratic member of
the international community, we are naturally interested in the
electoral process as well as progress the country has made in the areas
of human rights, rule of law, freedom of expression and the strength of
its democratic institutions.
In this context, the United States Congress, through H. Res. 339,
expresses its interest in, and concerns for, a genuinely free and fair
parliamentary election process which enables all the various political
parties and election blocs to compete on a level playing field; allows
the voters to acquire objective information about the political
candidates; and expects all parties to the election to observe their
own laws.
Historically, since 1991, elections in Ukraine have been marred by
problems such as intimidation of journalists and opposition candidates;
denial of access to the media; unbalanced news coverage; abuse of power
and political position by government officials; and the illegal use of
public funds. Today, we have received reports from Ukraine that the
current election period has been beset by similar allegations of
individuals or groups illegally trying to influence the outcome of the
elections.
This is not to say that the overall electoral process is seriously
flawed. The Ukraine parliament has passed a positive new election law.
What H. Res. 339 does say, however, is that the reported abuses of the
election law have to be stopped, that the government has the
responsibility to enforce its election law fairly, and that every
effort must be taken to ensure that a free, fair and transparent
election take place on March 31.
This resolution we are considering today does represent a genuine
concern that the reported activities of some could cast a negative
cloud over these elections and the entire democratic process in
Ukraine.
The authors of this Resolution are to be congratulated for bringing
these problems to our attention, and we hope the resolution is seen in
a positive and constructive way inside Ukraine.
By addressing these concerns, Ukraine can only be better off and its
democracy made stronger
I urge passage of this resolution and reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be joined by my colleagues,
Representatives Joseph Hoeffel and Christopher Smith, in offering this
important resolution. H. Res. 339 urges the Government of Ukraine to
ensure a democratic, transparent, and fair election process leading up
to its March 31 parliamentary elections.
Just over 10 years after gaining its independence from the Soviet
bloc, Ukraine stands at a crossroads. On Sunday, March 31, Ukraine will
hold its third parliamentary elections since becoming independent. It
is widely believed that the outcome of the parliamentary elections will
determine whether Ukraine continues to pursue democratic reforms, or
experiences further political turmoil.
As a founding member and Co-chair of the Congressional Ukrainian
Caucus, I have watched the growth of this new nation with keen
interest. Their path to democratization has not been easy. More
troubling, however, has been a series of scandals involving government
corruption over the past 2 years. In April 2001, I was troubled to
learn about the Ukrainian Parliament's vote to remove reform-minded
Prime Minister Viktor Yushchenko. This change in government came in the
midst of the ongoing political turmoil resulting from allegations over
the involvement of President Leonid Kuchma in the case of murdered
journalist Heorhiy Gongadze. Meanwhile, reports of government
corruption and harassment of the media have raised concerns about the
Ukrainian government's commitment to democratic principles. I have
spoken out for a more democratic Ukraine and expressed my continued
concern about the lack of progress in the Gongadze case and recent
political instability.
According to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights' final report on
Ukraine's most recent national election, the presidential election of
1999 was marred by violations of Ukrainian election law and failed to
meet a significant number of OSCE election commitments. There is now
concern that the 2002 parliamentary elections will be compromised by
similar violations. Recent reports on the 2002 parliamentary elections
released by the Committee on Voters of Ukraine (CVU), a leading
Ukrainian watchdog group on elections, have cited numerous violations
in the campaign process.
The intent of this resolution is to make the Government of Ukraine
aware that the U.S. Congress is monitoring the conduct of the
parliamentary election process closely, and will not just be focusing
on Election Day results. My resolution urges the Government of Ukraine
to enforce impartially the new election law signed by President Kuchma
in October. The resolution also urges the Government of Ukraine to meet
its commitments on democratic elections and address issues identified
by the OSCE in its final report on the 1999 elections, such as state
interference in the campaign and pressure on the media. Finally, the
resolution calls upon the Government of Ukraine to allow both domestic
and international election monitors access to the parliamentary
election process.
It is my hope that this resolution will send a clear message to the
Government of Ukraine that the U.S. Congress will not simply rubber
stamp funding requests for Ukraine without also considering the serious
issues involved in Ukraine's democratic development. In particular, the
conduct of the 2002 parliamentary elections will have a major impact on
funding considerations when Members of Congress are again confronted
with the task of blancing their support for the U.S.-Ukrainian
relationship with Ukraine's progress in making democratic reforms.
I urge my colleagues to vote for H. Res. 339, and I encourage the
Government of Ukraine to conduct a democratic, transparent, and fair
parliamentary election process on March 31.
Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) that the House
suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H.Res. 339, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of
those present have voted in the affirmative.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and
nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.

____________________