Suchergebnisse

На основі аналізу наявних документів, реальних історичних фактів відтворюється аспект досвіду діяльності політичних сил України в 1917–1920 рр., спрямованої на запровадження в державотворення демократичних засад (народоправства), реалізації одного з його найважливіших, популярніших гасел і вимог – скликання національного парламенту. Робиться висновок, що попри всі зусилля й бажання, здійснені окремі кроки, лідерам Української революції, як доби Центральної Ради, так і Директорії, домогтися здійснення стратегічного завдання з різних причин не судилося ; In this article, based on the analysis of available documents and real historical facts was made an attempt to follow the approaches and practices of the political forces that sought to implement the concept of the Ukrainian national-democratic revolution, one of its core program requirements - the convening of a national parliament.First steps in the aforementioned direction were made during the time of the Central Rada, headed by M. Hrushevsky. Leading political coordination center, created on a democratic basis and, in the conviction of its leaders, called upon to bring the Ukrainian community into a national system, in the process of its development began to take on some of the functions inherent in the classical examples of the world, first of all European parliamentarism. Starting from the documents of the Ukrainian National Congress (April 6-8, 1917, Kiev), Ukrainian political parties, and the approval of the Constitution of the Ukrainian People's Republic (April 29, 1918), due to the convening of a parliamentary institution (the names were different - Ukrainian Constituent Assembly, The Constituent Council, the Ukrainian Sejm (Soim), the Legislative Duma, the Provisional Parliamentary Assembly, the Parliament, the National Assembly of Ukraine, etc.) the task of creating the People's Parliament was put forward as a political perspective. The same Central Rada, or its unchanging Chairman, or scholars of law, constitutionalists, guided by scientific criteria, are not inclined to qualify as a full-fledged National Parliament. And the initiated process of movement in a democratic way was the force interrupted by the coup on April 29, 1918.Upon coming to power, hetman P. Skoropadsky abolished the Constitution of the UPR with his first acts and banned the convening of the Constituent Assembly, which planned to convene the Central Rada.In times of Hetmanate temporality, extraordinary, transient impetus of authoritarian rule were proved in every way. Numerous public declarations promised to create a parliamentary institution (for 7,5 months of the official existence of the Ukrainian State, even its name was not tired) have in fact turned out to be an empty sound. But the real position of delaying the authorities to resolve the popular, urgent problem was rigorously co-ordinated with the Austro-German occupation administration, for which, as the true ruler of the situation in the country, the National Parliament seemed unclear, totally unnecessary rage.On the business ground, the Directory tried to implement of the idea of creating a national parliament. However, the general situation of 1919 - 1920 was overcomplicated. In particular, contradictions in the political direction of the revived Ukrainian People's Republic were significantly negative. For some time it was planned to delegate the role of the Parliament before the Labor Congress of Ukraine (January 23-29, 1919), but it did not become, according to the plan, a permanent institution. Practically performing certain parliamentary functions (for example, lawmaking activities), the Directory, like the Central Rada, planned to convene a full-fledged national parliament, eventually determined by the beginning of implementation of the judicial process (Act of Unification of the UNR and ZUNR on January 22, 1919). However, due to the difficult, first of all the military, situation which permanently deteriorated, the realization of democratic state-building plans did not happen.Thus, in spite of ideas, initiatives, plans, preparatory efforts and approved documents, the practice of fulfilling some of the functions inherent in the Parliament, such a genuine institution in the revolutionary era (1917-1920), was not created in Ukraine.

На основі аналізу наявних документів, реальних історичних фактів відтворюється аспект досвіду діяльності політичних сил України в 1917–1920 рр., спрямованої на запровадження в державотворення демократичних засад (народоправства), реалізації одного з його найважливіших, популярніших гасел і вимог – скликання національного парламенту. Робиться висновок, що попри всі зусилля й бажання, здійснені окремі кроки, лідерам Української революції, як доби Центральної Ради, так і Директорії, домогтися здійснення стратегічного завдання з різних причин не судилося ; In this article, based on the analysis of available documents and real historical facts was made an attempt to follow the approaches and practices of the political forces that sought to implement the concept of the Ukrainian national-democratic revolution, one of its core program requirements - the convening of a national parliament.First steps in the aforementioned direction were made during the time of the Central Rada, headed by M. Hrushevsky. Leading political coordination center, created on a democratic basis and, in the conviction of its leaders, called upon to bring the Ukrainian community into a national system, in the process of its development began to take on some of the functions inherent in the classical examples of the world, first of all European parliamentarism. Starting from the documents of the Ukrainian National Congress (April 6-8, 1917, Kiev), Ukrainian political parties, and the approval of the Constitution of the Ukrainian People's Republic (April 29, 1918), due to the convening of a parliamentary institution (the names were different - Ukrainian Constituent Assembly, The Constituent Council, the Ukrainian Sejm (Soim), the Legislative Duma, the Provisional Parliamentary Assembly, the Parliament, the National Assembly of Ukraine, etc.) the task of creating the People's Parliament was put forward as a political perspective. The same Central Rada, or its unchanging Chairman, or scholars of law, constitutionalists, guided by scientific criteria, are not inclined to qualify as a full-fledged National Parliament. And the initiated process of movement in a democratic way was the force interrupted by the coup on April 29, 1918.Upon coming to power, hetman P. Skoropadsky abolished the Constitution of the UPR with his first acts and banned the convening of the Constituent Assembly, which planned to convene the Central Rada.In times of Hetmanate temporality, extraordinary, transient impetus of authoritarian rule were proved in every way. Numerous public declarations promised to create a parliamentary institution (for 7,5 months of the official existence of the Ukrainian State, even its name was not tired) have in fact turned out to be an empty sound. But the real position of delaying the authorities to resolve the popular, urgent problem was rigorously co-ordinated with the Austro-German occupation administration, for which, as the true ruler of the situation in the country, the National Parliament seemed unclear, totally unnecessary rage.On the business ground, the Directory tried to implement of the idea of creating a national parliament. However, the general situation of 1919 - 1920 was overcomplicated. In particular, contradictions in the political direction of the revived Ukrainian People's Republic were significantly negative. For some time it was planned to delegate the role of the Parliament before the Labor Congress of Ukraine (January 23-29, 1919), but it did not become, according to the plan, a permanent institution. Practically performing certain parliamentary functions (for example, lawmaking activities), the Directory, like the Central Rada, planned to convene a full-fledged national parliament, eventually determined by the beginning of implementation of the judicial process (Act of Unification of the UNR and ZUNR on January 22, 1919). However, due to the difficult, first of all the military, situation which permanently deteriorated, the realization of democratic state-building plans did not happen.Thus, in spite of ideas, initiatives, plans, preparatory efforts and approved documents, the practice of fulfilling some of the functions inherent in the Parliament, such a genuine institution in the revolutionary era (1917-1920), was not created in Ukraine.

The article reveals M. Hrushevsky's contribution to the substantiation of the concept of the unity of Ukraine. Historiography includes a wide range of publications devoted to elucidation of the phenomenon of the development by scientist and constant leader of the Central Council of a comprehensive, multifaceted, polyhedral concept of the Ukrainian national democratic revolution, while its organic, integral (though in some sense self-sufficient) component – the theoretical formation of projects to collect in a heap ethnically related branches of Ukrainianness, the territories in which they lived – much less often became the subject of special study and evaluation, freely or unwillingly moved to the periphery of the analysis. As a rule, attention shifted to the events of late 1918-early 1919, when the historical figure no longer exerted such influence on social processes as before. However, the fact remains that a prominent intellectual, impeccably possessing scientific methodology and historical data, in particular – statistics, convincingly proved that the most reliable, most logical and understandable, by the large extent and in general terms legitimate version of the constructive movement to the desired goal must be strict adherence to the ethnographic principle. On its basis, the general boundaries of the settlement of the Ukrainian ethnic group were objectively delineated and specifically calculated real proposals were formulated (such work was not simple and not momental) as to include in the revived state at the district level (of course, especially in borderline cases) historically formed lands, where the undoubted predominant array was Ukrainianness. In controversial and сontradictory situations, taking into account the dynamics of revolutionary change, local referendums and plebiscites were planned. Honest, verified, fair approaches formed the basis of the defining documents that guided the current and perspective process of formation of Ukrainian statehood – the Universals of the Central Council and the Constitution of the Ukrainian People's Republic. Theoretical hypothetical constructions were subsequently seriously confirmed in their deep essence by life practice. The author concludes that the specified aspect acquires a special sound and political relevance in connection with the modern information war, the epicenter of which has recently been more than a century of experience of Ukrainian statehood, especially its unity component.