Presidency conducted a roll call vote
By 1994 Belarus was parliamentary republic. This means that the highest authority in the country belonged specifically parliament — at that time the unicameral Supreme Council. But he is under pressure from MPs, who were guided by the then Prime Minister Vyacheslav Kebich, voted for the transition to the presidency.
This was done so — MPs considered the latest draft of the Constitution. At first, they voted for its various sections. The latest sections taken on the form of government, as the founders presidency here for a long time could not dial the desired 2-thirds of the votes.
"Then they went on a dishonest pitch — made names newsletters, which were recorded first and last name of the deputy, recalls deputy of the Supreme Council of XII convocation Yuri Belenky. — It is only through such ballots and they were able to spend part of the presidency."
Why Democratic deputies, first fraction of the BPF, did not perceive the presidential form of government?
"Zenon Pozniak, other members of the opposition stated: Belarusian society can not go for the presidential form of government, because there is no tradition of democracy, there is no development of democratic institutions, there is no real separation of powers — continues Yuri Belenky. — And so the introduction of the presidency with a strong president will obviously seizure of power in the president of the whole country. Which is what happened. "
The conflict between the president and parliament, now the Supreme Council XIII convocation, resulted in the famous confrontation with the attempt to impeach Lukashenko, with the arrival of so-called peacekeepers from Moscow (Chernomyrdin, drill, Seleznev). It ended so referred to the 1996 plebiscite, the elimination of the Supreme Soviet (parliament) and the establishment of the House of Representatives, where the deputies were not elected but were appointed by the head of state.
In Belarus the conflict were not involved foreign partners
Member of the Supreme Council of Convocation XIII Vladimir Nistuk believes that between events over decade ago in Belarus and in Ukraine today is not much like:
"In Ukraine, there was a conflict between the structures that have long been in power who have the ability to both monetary and human resources. And the fact that we came out in 1996, was very nevranavazhanae. Everything was in the hands of 1 person, and nothing was in the hands of the other side, not counting those 150-200 people who came to the area to support us.
In-2, in our situation were not so intensively involved foreign partners. In Ukraine, there is a side that is very intensively supported by Russia, and there is a side that is supported by the West. We also did not have such. Since the Supreme Council had no support — whether from the West or the East. Support had only one side. Because it was all so simple in 1996. "
And yet, if there is something in common between the events in Ukraine at the moment and in Belarus 10 and a half years ago? With this issue appeal to Vladimir Nistiuk.
"Overall, only one — the former Soviet Union the people who come to power, very unwilling to build this power to a democratically — says Nistuk. — Nobody wants to, that one branch of government as opposed balance another. Everybody wants to have power in the same hands. all well aware that a Russian syndrome. To survive it, you need at least a century to live in the new criteria. Unfortunately, this desire to be a Russian general secretary. "