This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/29/world/europe/ukraine-prime-minister-resign.html

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Ukrainian Premier Submits Resignation Ukrainian Premier Resigns as Parliament Repeals Restrictive Laws
(about 1 hour later)
KIEV, Ukraine — Mykola Azarov, the prime minister of Ukraine, submitted his resignation on Tuesday hours before he risked being stripped of his powers in a vote of no confidence in Parliament. His offer to quit was the latest sign of the building momentum of the opposition in the ongoing crisis. KIEV, Ukraine — Mykola Azarov, the prime minister of Ukraine, resigned on Tuesday, hours before a planned vote of no confidence by Parliament that could have stripped him of his powers.
In another concession to the opposition, the pro-government political party in Parliament, the Party of Regions, voted together with the opposition to repeal most of the laws in a package of rules limiting free speech and assembly the lawmakers had passed just a week earlier. The resignation came shortly after the pro-government Party of Regions joined with opposition lawmakers on Tuesday to repeal most of the laws in a package of legislation restricting freedom of speech and assembly that was enacted only last week.
President Viktor F. Yanukovych has promised other concessions, including an amnesty for arrested protesters and a revision of the Constitution to weaken presidential powers, measures which also require votes in the Parliament, or Verkhovna Rada. Lawmakers were expected to take up these legislative overhauls later Tuesday. Together, the resignation and repeals were significant concessions by Ukraine’s embattled president, Viktor F. Yanukovych, as well as clear signs of the building momentum of opposition to his rule.
Mr. Azarov has been a staunch ally of the embattled Mr. Yanukovich through the two months of protests roiling Ukraine and his offer represented the first substantive concession to the protesters on the part of Mr. Yanukovych. In a statement posted on his website, Mr. Yanukovych said he had accepted Mr. Azarov’s resignation and had signed a decree dismissing the rest of the cabinet of ministers as well. But he said Mr. Azarov and the ministers would stay on until a new cabinet is approved by Parliament.
The resignation and repeal of the repressive legislation, called by the opposition the “dictatorship laws,” were not likely to appease protesters. The opposition Fatherland Party posted on its Twitter feed that “the resignation of Azarov does not mean the resignation of the government.” “All of the current members of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine continue to work in their posts and exercise the powers entrusted to them,” he said.
On Independence Square, the central plaza occupied by demonstrators, their tents, field kitchens and a stage since November that is the epicenter of the street protest movement, reactions were mixed. Mr. Yanukovych has promised other concessions as well, including an amnesty for arrested protesters and a revision of the Constitution to weaken presidential powers. Lawmakers were expected to take up those matters later on Tuesday.
One elderly woman in a kerchief giddily told the Ukrainian channel 5 television after Mr. Azarov’s resignation, “Thank God you heard us!” Mr. Azarov had been a staunch ally of Mr. Yanukovych through the two months of protests roiling Ukraine. But neither his resignation nor the repeal of the restrictive legislation, which the opposition calls the “dictatorship laws,” were seen as likely to appease the protesters.
On Independence Square, the central plaza that has been occupied since November by demonstrators, with tents, field kitchens and a stage, reactions to Tuesday’s developments were mixed.
One elderly woman in a kerchief giddily told the Ukrainian Channel 5 television network after Mr. Azarov’s resignation, “Thank God you heard us!”
But a young man wearing a metal helmet told the television station, “It’s not a victory yet.”But a young man wearing a metal helmet told the television station, “It’s not a victory yet.”
Mr. Azarov wrote in a letter posted on the government website that he was prepared to resign “for the sake of a peaceful resolution” to the civil unrest that escalated sharply last week with the deaths of five protesters in clashes with the police or who died after being abducted by people with apparent ties to the security services. Demonstrators occupied provincial administration buildings in at least 10 regions, sending the police fleeing through rear exits in some instances. One policeman was shot to death on a street in Kiev far from the protest site; a nationalist group calling itself the Ukrainian Partisan Army claimed responsibility in a Facebook post. In a letter posted on the government website, Mr. Azarov wrote that he was prepared to resign “for the sake of a peaceful resolution” to the civil unrest, which escalated sharply last week with the deaths of five protesters. Demonstrators occupied provincial administration buildings in at least 10 regions, sending the police fleeing through rear exits in some instances. One policeman was shot to death on a street in Kiev, far from the protest site; a nationalist group calling itself the Ukrainian Partisan Army claimed responsibility in a Facebook post.
“The state of conflict in the nation threatens the social and economic development of Ukraine, and presents a threat to all Ukrainian society, and all its citizens,” Mr. Azarov wrote in his letter. “In order to create additional opportunities for social and political compromise for the sake of peaceful resolution of the conflict, I made a personal decision to ask the president of Ukraine to accept my resignation.” Mr. Azarov wrote in his letter: “The state of conflict in the nation threatens the social and economic development of Ukraine, and presents a threat to all Ukrainian society, and all its citizens. In order to create additional opportunities for social and political compromise for the sake of peaceful resolution of the conflict, I made a personal decision to ask the president of Ukraine to accept my resignation.”
Mr. Yanukovych has said he would be willing to dismiss Mr. Azarov, and over the weekend offered the prime minister’s position to the Parliamentary leader of the opposition Fatherland party, Arseniy P. Yatsenyuk, though Mr. Yatsenyuk declined. Mr. Yanukovych had previously signaled that he would be willing to dismiss Mr. Azarov. Over the weekend, the president offered the prime ministership to the Parliamentary leader of the opposition Fatherland party, Arseniy P. Yatsenyuk, who declined the offer.
Mr. Yanukovych did not immediately accept Mr. Azarov’s resignation, a point pro-government lawmakers made in statements noting that Mr. Azarov would remain prime minister until the president had done so. In the ranks of the radical opposition, empowered now by its survival as an organized movement after a week of fierce street fighting with the police and security services in which scores of people were wounded and arrested, few believed that Mr. Azarov’s resignation was voluntary.
In the ranks of the radical opposition empowered now by its survival as an organized movement after a week of fierce street fighting with the police that left scores wounded and under arrest, Mr. Azarov’s suggestion that he had voluntarily resigned brought only scorn. Oleg Tyagnibok, the leader of the nationalist Svoboda party, said Mr. Azarov had been forced out in a maneuver to avoid the confidence vote in Parliament. “It’s clear they are looking for ways to avoid responsibility,” he said.
Oleg Tyagnibok, the leader of the nationalist Svoboda party, said he had been forced out. Members of Parliament had intended to vote on a no-confidence measure covering the entire Cabinet, not only the prime minister. Though it was unclear whether such a vote would have garnered support from the pro-government party, Mr. Tyagnibok called the prime minister’s resignation a maneuver to avoid the vote. “It’s clear they are looking for ways to avoid responsibility,” he said. In the morning session of Parliament, which began with a moment of silence for those who died last week, lawmakers repealed nine of the 12 restrictive laws that had been passed on Jan. 16 by a show of hands, without debate. Outrage at the limits the laws imposed on free speech and assembly in the country sparked the violence on Jan. 19.
In the morning session that began with a moment of silence for those who died last week, lawmakers repealed nine of 12 laws that were passed on Jan. 16 by a show of hands, without debate. They had limited free speech and assembly, and outrage over their passage touched off the violence on Jan. 19. The repeal vote on Tuesday was conducted more formally, with 361 votes recorded in favor of repeal in the 450-seat chamber, including the Party of Regions, Mr. Yanukovich’s party.
The Party of Regions, Mr. Yanukovych’s party, supported the repeal, which passed with 361 votes in the 450-seat chamber. The laws had specifically banned tactics adopted by the opposition in the protests. For example, a provision banning the driving automobiles in a column of more than five was aimed at a group called AutoMaidan that had taken to protesting by driving through the capital in large, honking caravans of vehicles
The laws had specifically banned tactics adopted by the opposition, such as instituting a prohibition against driving in a column of more than five cars, a rule aimed at a group called AutoMaidan that had taken to protesting by driving in large, honking caravans of vehicles . In a compromise, members of Parliament, including those from opposition parties, also voted to approve more limited versions of some of the repealed restrictions. For example, a provision to make destroying monuments a criminal offense was reinstated, but with the specification that it covers only monuments to fighters against fascism, like the World War II statues that are ubiquitous in Ukraine. It no longer applies to statues of Lenin, like the one toppled by protesters in Kiev in December; the Svoboda party has called for dismantling all of Ukraine’s Lenins.
In a compromise, members of Parliament, including those from opposition parties, also voted for four bills similar to those overturned. A criminal offense for destroying monuments, for example, passed with the specification it applied only to monuments honoring those who had fought against fascism, covering Ukraine’s ubiquitous World War II statues. It clearly exempted statues of the Communist leader Vladimir Lenin, a statue of whom was toppled by protesters in December. The Svoboda party has called for dismantling all of Ukraine’s Lenins.