in october 20, 54% of respondents answered that for ukraine a strong leader is more important than a democratic system, and 31% answered about the priority of democracy, then in december 23, on the contrary, 59% answered that a democratic system is more important for ukraine, and only 32% spoke in favor of a strong leader. andrii, why could this correlation of these data occur, and that's enough. seriously, if 32 and there are 54 - that's about a third, well, it's a classic electoral cycle, when the president, who was just elected, has great faith in him, and of course, ukrainians in that at a time in the 20th year, they still hoped that their hopes for zelenskyi would come true, and in addition, people voted for various reasons,

we remember that election campaign of zelenskyi, when nothing concrete was promised, and everyone saw in him someone of their own, his ideal, and first of all, some new face that will replace the old politicians, and in recent years, when it became clear what trends there are, that a new face is hiding behind a new face, including old politicians, and it became clear that the procedure... and democracy is a procedure, v first of all, procedures work better than faces, faces change, procedures remain, and of course, since we are talking about a strong leader, about democratic procedures, we cannot help but mention that during the war, elections to the verkhovna rada of ukraine and the presidential elections will not take place, it seems that everyone here has come to an agreement, well, at least with the verkhovna rada... the legislation clearly provides for

this decision of the constitutional court regarding the absence of presidential powers, but we also understand that the next president will come already to replace the current one, when there will be such an opportunity, that is, when the presidential elections will be held, but the russian federation is now emphasizing that from may 21, 2024 , zelenskyi may be illegitimate, while the minister of justice of ukraine. in an interview with the bbc, denys malyuska assured that the president of ukraine zelenskyi will not lose his legitimacy after the end of his five-year term of office, i.e. on may 21, 2024. let's listen to what the minister of justice said. no, he will not lose his legitimacy. powers of the president continue until the election of the next, but many, many norms in the constitution are formulated in such a way that whoever wants to find. what to find fault with or what

to build some theory on from the language, he will find it, therefore, of course, we should expect a lot of noise and shouting, and especially based on the fact that the authors-developers of the constitution had little faith in the realism of a full-scale war with the participation of ukraine, so it is enough behaved clumsily in relation to the relevant norms prescribed in the constitution. well, at a time when these are the norms of the constitution that he complains about denys malyuska are not fully prescribed, or there are certain questions related to them, obviously, then the arbitrator is the constitutional court, because only the constitutional court has the right to interpret the norms of the basic law and give certain verdicts. katerina, in your opinion, why the presidential team did not go, well, in such a traditional way, there is a constitutional court that interprets. the constitution, and even more so, the question

of legitimacy and further legitimacy of zelenskyi could simply be fixed by a decision of the constitutional court and shown to everyone, including not only to ukrainians, but also to the leaders of western countries, because russia in principle uses this and tries to torpedo our western partners and say: listen, you will give weapons there, and there the president has already reached the end of his powers and in general, as lavrov says , we, we will not be at the negotiating table with zelensky at all. these dates are after may 21 , 2024, because, as the kremlin says, he is nobody to us. well, in principle, we understand that for russia the arguments there are unimportant, how they are in fact is also unimportant, therefore any the situation from a propaganda point of view can be twisted, here it can be mentioned that in gur, for example, he has been informed for a long time about what is there, the maidan 3 special operation, or something like that. they call it, that is, that there is a certain

information wave, a threat, we now basically see how it works in several aspects, the topic of the illegitimacy of the president of ukraine is developing there. a very negative view of the work of the tsc there and the distribution of all such scandalous videos, for example, and there are such weak point shots. why do they do this and not that in the president's office otherwise, it's hard to say, maybe because i'm not a lawyer here, but with the experts with whom they talked, it looks like, legally , the question of legitimacy or illegitimacy does not stand, maybe it should be broader. more precisely, it is to communicate with ukrainians, with the population, and to emphasize this, although it seems to me that the majority, everyone who lives in our country, understands the realities, the war and the fact that it is really impossible to hold elections there, if

there are legal factors, and the president does not can leave his post, but not until he is elected there another president, and legally this is normal, then it is possible that if there is no... trust in society, then it is worth going to such more significant, let's say, factors, but if this is enough, for argumentation, and ukrainians have trust the international community also has no doubts that president zelenskyi is not illegitimate, so perhaps the only question is how russian propaganda will spin it, well, russian propaganda lies as always, and it is clear that their the goal is completely different, that is not to fix... the filigreeness or legality of this or that decision, although, well, in this situation with the kss, it seems to me that the other thing was the fear that the constitutional court would make some decision that would not be entirely acceptable, or let's say yes, the absence of a decision by the constitutional court allows

us to talk about the legitimacy of president zelenskyi without any problems, and it is possible in this situation, maybe it is better, although i am a supporter of the legislative process there. and the correctness of decisions regarding the constitutional court, although, although, if we recall the same leonid kuchma, he was also there in the early 2000s, the constitutional court's decision regarding kuchma's second term, because according to the 1996 constitution, the president did not have the right to hold the office of president twice, and now this rule is in effect, but kuchma was elected in 1994 before the adoption. the first time before the adoption of the constitution in 1996, well, in the early 2000s, they decided to count how many presidential terms leonid danylovych served, and it turned out that if before the adoption of the constitution, it was one term, after its adoption it was also the first, and

then already the second is possible, but there is a situation the political situation developed in such a way that kuchma had to agree that in 2004 he had to resign. because both the tape scandal and the murder of heorhiy gangadz, there were many things that simply did not allow him to take advantage of this decision of the constitutional court, but andrii, in this story, of course, when the russians are pumping this story with the legitimacy or illegitimacy of zelenskyi, apparently ukrainian propaganda had little b more actively, not only diplomacy, but also propaganda, to pump the topic of putin's illegitimacy, because we see how the so-called the inauguration of the so-called... president, the so -called putin, on may 7, and we see that the world, part of the world either delegated its representatives, six european states were represented there, or made statements that the elections were not completely free, but we recognize that that putin is at the head

of the russian state, have we told the world enough and does the world want to hear it, that... since may 7, 2024, he is a self-proclaimed president, that he is a usurper of power, that he is a man who commits a war crime and it is recorded internationally by a criminal court, but at the same time this is a person who conducts elections in the occupied territories of a foreign state and releases these data as part of his victory, we certainly feel it the most and... it hurts us the most in countries that are far from russia, citizens who live far from russia, they do not feel it, and for them the imitation of russian elections is, well, equal to the elections they hear about from other countries,

so here russian propaganda is in a winning position, really, when we say that ukrainians did not hold elections, but we did and for... who do not go into details, for them it sounds convincing, but the western elites, of course, they know and understand the situation, including with... with the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the russian president, the question why some western countries sent their representatives to his inauguration, lies not only in the plane of his legal legitimacy, but also in russia's own military morale in nuclear weapons, with which russia threatens the world and in attempts to leave some doors. for negotiations with putin in order not to cause this nuclear conflict,

this is how the western elites explain their continued communication with the russian dictator. katerina, you, as we obviously did, all in one way or another followed what happened during the inauguration, how putin behaved, what statements he made, it is clear that he again spoke about nuclear weapons. weapons about the fact that we will not allow anyone, we have strategic weapons, and everyone should understand this, but from the point of view of a person who was actually crowned, and who probably should not be called a president, even with our western partners, well this the head of russia, or the leader of russia, or the dictator of russia, well, there are such definitions, that's how he looked, did he look confident. the fifth presidential term, 24 years in great power at the head of russia, that is, how did you

see putin? i would have preferred not to have seen it, but here it can be noted, but in fact, well, looking at putin, especially the last 10 years after the start of the invasion of ukraine, working in the crimearealia project, where we did a lot of broadcasts there, we paid attention to what he says and tracking ... there are always press conferences and everything, i, like everyone, for sure, who watches journalists there, i can say that on the one hand i am an expert there, on the other hand we do not know doubles, not doubles, so it does not matter, he, well, he has such an appearance and manner of presenting information that, for example, i would not like him as a leader there and would not listen to him, for me he is fundamentally unsure of many things, and his behavior. and his appearance characterize him in a bad way for me, but despite

that, there is already a completely different field in russia, and by the way, when we talk about legitimacy or no, but are we sure that not the majority of russians, they support vladimir putin, but are not the majority really voting for him, well, there are some polls, we can pay attention to that, and we can see how the russian-ukrainian is going war, how these people are recruited there, and then when they become prisoners. what they say, what their relatives say, well, there is obviously support there, and putin, unfortunately, is probably not the only problem of ukraine, in principle, the whole system, well, relatively speaking, there will be no putin, this does not mean that the russian, ukrainian war, it will stop and that's it, russia will withdraw its troops, absolutely not, that's why everything seems to me to be more global and scarier than the very figure of vladimir putin, who can be criticized there in the sense of this ceremony that for a very long time he was going somewhere this is very strange, as always on victory day they have a background of those older people who are presented

as veterans, and there it is in principle clear that these are probably the children of war there, and that is why he rallies around the war and that kind of victorious rhetoric, own people, own population, and he promises something, says that we should achieve there together, and everything inspires, probably in this way with... courtes, that is, as for the citizens of russia, especially those who support him, well, surely, surely it works , and you know what still amazes me is that abroad, when citizens of russia, or maybe not citizens of russia, but consider themselves russians, go out, celebrate with flags and so on, in germany we know that on the day victory, flags there and any symbols of the russian army were banned, but there are a bunch of countries where citizens of russia come out and they are celebrating something, that means there are nesting dolls, that’s all, and it’s so strange to me that

people are not ashamed, and i even asked yulip namaryov, a russian politician, during the broadcast , why this is so in general, what’s the trick, what do they do, well, they are about showing their patriotism, i remember my great-grandfathers, grandfathers who fought there, well, this is such a different psychology, i would be ashamed if my country was the aggressor and did what it does, that is , such murders and all that russia does . in principle, i would be ashamed to show there your passport, even more so to go to some festivals abroad, and celebrating it, that is , we do not understand the logic of all this, our logic is that in the 14th year, as citizens of ukraine, the enemy came to us, murders began, disappearances began, mass repressions in the occupied territories, illegal elections in the occupied territories, they have actually been taking place since 2014, the question is for the western world, and why was this illegitimacy not recognized there then, and that is , it may not be clear to the citizens of ukraine, why it is like this again indecision,

not the maximum effectiveness of the western world, and now actually even you... putin as the acting legitimate president, it does not fit into our logic, into the logic of the western world, where it is necessary to somehow communicate, negotiate, well, obviously it fits, unfortunately for us. thank you, kateryna, andriy, but given the fact that and how putin presents it, it is obvious that he perceives the next presidential term as legitimization or the right to continue the war. and obviously this will somehow shape his further steps, and we are already we can see these further steps, because just three days ago putin, the so-called president of the russian federation, was inaugurated, we can already see how the russian offensive is unfolding in the kharkiv direction, they are already talking about the fact

that this offensive can also affect. and the neighboring sumy region, well , they have been talking about this for a long time, what can we expect from the crowned putin? well, actually, i just read on the espresso website that heavy battles are taking place along the entire front line, zelensky listened to syrsky’s report, putin really accepted this procedure of his inauguration, legitimization, as permission and the attention of western countries to him, as permission for... further aggressive actions, for further escalation, and of course he uses other moments, we know that the americans have supported both financial and military aid to ukraine, but in order to transfer the weapons directly to the places, it takes time, and the first, for example, the f16 planes will be only

in the summer, now the first one is transferred, not a mockup, but the first simulator on which you can train. directly to ukraine, and the planes themselves will be later, actually stop the offensive when the russians are using cabs, such heavy bombs, by the forces of one infantry, infantry, drones and the usual means of fighting for us, it is impossible, because this is a real innovation of theirs, which did not exist before and which... they have been covering the front line with these cabs for the last six months and many losses , well, we will monitor the situation at the front, of course it can change, and we can already see the reaction of the supreme commander of the armed forces of ukraine, he talks about what he spoke with oleksandr syrskyi, there is a sufficiently tense situation, we on the espresso tv channel and on radio svoboda

, we monitor all these processes, and of course we also comment on... the air and present the situation in our news and in our programs, we discuss what is actually happening at the front. however, colleagues, before moving on to another topic, i would like to remind our viewers that today we are conducting a survey and we are asking you whether you agree that democracy is more important for ukraine than a strong leader, on youtube everything is quite simple, yes no , if you have a separate opinion, please leave it in the comments below this video. video, do not forget to subscribe to our youtube channel and our social networks, and most importantly, if you watch us on tv, change your smartphone or phone and vote if you think that democracy is more important for ukraine than a strong leader, 0800 211 381, no 0800 211 382, all calls to these numbers are free, vote, at the end of the program we will sum up

the results of this vote, another event, but an internal one of our domestic political life, which happened yesterday, is the resignation of oleksandr kubrakov from his post vice prime minister for the reconstruction of ukraine, minister of community development, territories and infrastructure, a person who was quite close to the office of the president of ukraine, and even to the president of ukraine himself, and it turned out that on the eve of his release, kubrakov refused to report to the specialized committee of the supreme council, he himself wrote on social networks that he was resigning. came as a surprise to him, but he was ready to report, i will quote mr. kubrakov, always ready for an open dialogue and a detailed report on the ministry's work in all directions. responsibility, the leadership of the faction, including the head of the government, denys shmyhal, this decision was not discussed with me at the meeting of the faction , and i was not invited to the profile committee.

the day before, the faction of the servants of the people spoke about the need to divide the ministry of community development, territories and infrastructure into two separate departments, but the most interesting thing is that it was the representatives of the servants of the people who molded this great ministry, now they say, listen, there is no kubrakov, we don’t need such a great ministry. watching this katerina, to what conclusion do you come to the fact that, in principle, there is one decision-making center, sometimes those who believe that they are also included in this decision-making center, find themselves outside this center, well , that is, these five six managers, about whom zelensky once spoke at the final press conference in the 23rd year, it turns out that those who even think that they are included in these five... six managers, well, like kubrako, for example, they are simply they fire and do not even warn or there is no previous conversation with prime minister, how to perceive it? well, it

is perceived very badly, it looks very strange, that the decision-making center is at the bank, well, we hear about it from everywhere, either from our own sources, or from the sources of journalists who specialize in these topics there, or from deputies behind the scenes. and you can hear, well, it can be seen, it ’s already like a fact, but i just can’t understand why these processes can’t at least be made more clear in public, and that the minister who is fired, he really spoke there in the verkhovna rada , in order to mps asked questions or expressed their dissatisfaction with some decisions and processes that took place in the ministry when he was in charge. mr. kurbakov, so that the society at least sees that there is a dialogue and what is happening in general, we understand that in our country, in principle, citizens of ukraine do not know the faces of all

the ministers and such important top officials, well, that's it is also true, that is, there are faces that are familiar, that are recognizable, and there are people whose activities are not recognizable, among, well, about what can be said that this is a person who, about they don't speak so badly, exactly, which presents ukraine well enough there, has its own connections with western partners, and the team is strong there, i don't know anyone there personally, but there from a professional point of view , you see that the people there are worthy, for example, and and that is, there is no such impression here that the person there did not cope at all, so we will not even say goodbye to her normally, well, in any situation, a normal office, she is a person, will probably call the hr there, at the very least, and tell what the problem is. what is the problem, what is the reason for the dismissal, communication, well, how always, not really, it is not worthy, because it would be necessary to explain to ukrainians, in general, what the activities of the ministry are, what

is changing there now, and so on, this is not enough and not for the first time. oleksiy goncharenko from european solidarity says that the story of kubrakov's dismissal and plans to divide his ministry shows the absence of a systematic personnel policy in the state, listen. what did honcharenko say? all this looks strange, the result is the same, there is no subjectivity either in the government or in the parliament, all decisions are made in the office the president, a team arrives, this team is quickly executed, there is no systematicity in this, it is a kind of kindergarten, the ministry was united, the ministry was united, just so you understand, it is not such a simple process, it involves millions of hryvnias, it takes months time this is the fate of hundreds of thousands of people, and this is lost time for work, and this is during the war, i am frightened by such personnel policy, its complete lack of systemic policy,

such government policy is frightening, because the fact is that there is no government, that is, andrii, there is no government as such , there is a parliament, but it is in manual mode works, five or six managers manage the state, this is all during the war. what is the danger of such state administration or, let's say, mono-power, as it is customary to say, but when we talk about mono-power, we should probably talk about mono-responsibility, because even i would argue that it is, of course, the only decision-making center, which is concentrated in the president's office, but to legitimize these decisions, parliament is needed, no matter how obedient it is, there are still people with... their own point of view, very often they are needed to convince, or with some other incentives to force a vote, that's why it was already known about kubrakov's dismissal, the truth

is that such a disinformation fake was spread that the ministry will be divided and he will be appointed to lead the infrastructure ministry again, but here is the part about development and restoration will be in the hands of another minister, or another person, this did not happen, as far as i know, there are no votes for his appointment, which means that the president's office does not really want to appoint him as a minister again, and so what it is about what is in the hands of this minister. the minister had the money, or at least the tools to spend multibillion-dollar tranches on reconstruction, and there were probably hopes that the reconstruction would be quick, that the war would end quickly, and that these billions would already be in the country, we see that the situation is dragging on, that it is possible this money will not be there for a long time, and in the meantime, the minister gained weight and, as my sources say, began

to communicate very ... with nabu, with the american embassy, ​​and of course, no, the president's office did not like this, in our in general, such a system of state management has been dual for a long time, it’s just that all the time there is this share of formal power structures and informal power structures, it happened in different proportions, if before zelenskyi, after all, formal authorities played a role and ministers had their own political weight had even now , under zelenskyi, we see that the government has actually turned into a decoration, instead of formal methods of managing the country , all kinds of advisers are flourishing, but now there, for example, they say about the ministry of defense of ukraine that there, the information policy is managed by advisers, not officially appointed persons, and about other ministries, i think you can also say the same, but kateryna, in this story with kubrakov

and in general. with other appointments and resignations, obviously the political responsibility rests with the leader of the state, because he has a monomajority in the verkhovna rada, he has a government that is appointed by a monomajority, he has his own managers who manage the state, but in all in these stories, let's say, where volodymyr zelenskyi bears political responsibility, president, we, well... we don't often see this direct political responsibility, because the same mykola solsky, who was the minister of agrarian policy, who is accused of embezzling 291 million uah of state land and attempting to embezzle another 190 million uah of land , that is, there is no such sign of equality, or is this sign of equality that what happened with solsky is a sign equal to...

zelenskyi’s team or zelenskyi directly, president zelenskyi, as ukrainians, they understand that these are the same thing , and what political responsibility is for the leader who, in fact, brought all these people to power, that is, it is not some kind of large majority, which consists of various political groups, it is not, it is not some foreign people, because they are all their own people, somehow everything - after all, 5 years in power and... this is not a government of national unity, and which can also be distributed there, for example, there would be this responsibility, because there are also such ideas, but here it is such a difficult issue, because on the one hand yes, everyone understands who the president is, who has the majority, and all the opportunities are there, yes, but on the other hand, well the president himself, he cannot be responsible for the actions of everyone, and he does not directly appoint, that is , where he directly appoints ministers, that is

one story, where it does not happen directly... in fact, i am legally and technically completely different there, then in why is there responsibility, the law must work, the investigation must work, the court must work, and this is how it happens there, so that society sees what the officials also saw, maybe the authorities saw that something will be done against the law, there will be corruption, well there will certainly be responsibility, too globally, the responsibility for this lies with the leader of the state, you can say for the individual actions of individual officials, well... this is a debatable issue, no one can control so much and everyone and guarantee that a person who is cool there today, whom you trust, will not do something tomorrow , well, some such illegal thing, and on the other hand, the question here in general , again, i return to the attitude to the ministers, because there is a story about how there is a shortage of personnel, which we know, we have a number of ministries without heads for a long time time, there is also a ministry, for example, culture, information policy, and it is very

surprising that at the moment when... for some reason it is impossible to find people.