REUTERS
The law violates numerous provisions of the Ukrainian Constitution, which is very important as it influences the legal system and the country's economy, the MPs say.
The Constitutional Court of Ukraine (CCU) has received a constitutional petition, signed by 64 Ukrainian MPs regarding compliance with the Constitution of the law "On Amending Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on Improving the Mechanisms for Regulation of Banking," its separate provisions, as well as the provisions of other legislative acts as amended by this law.
"Today, June 11, 2020, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine was seized with a constitutional petition of 64 people's deputies of Ukraine on the compliance of the Law of Ukraine 'On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine Concerning the Improvement of Banking Regulation Mechanisms,' its separate provisions, as well as the provisions of other legislative acts in the wording of this Law with the Constitution of Ukraine (constitutionality)," the CCU's press service said on its website on June 11.
Read alsoUkraine's parliament passes bill on banking regulation
According to the MPs, the law (No. 590-IX) violates numerous provisions of the Ukrainian Constitution, which is very important as it influences the legal system and the country's economy.
"The fact that law No. 590-IX, contrary to the Constitution of Ukraine, has actually retroactive effect, this can lead to irreparable consequences that will arise during its validity. Based on the foregoing and in order to minimize the consequences that may be caused by the law, there is every reason to determine the constitutional proceedings on this constitutional petition as urgent," reads the document.
As UNIAN reported earlier, on May 13, the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine's parliament, passed at second reading a bill on banking regulation. Some 270 MPs with the required minimum of 226 votes backed in the second reading the adoption of the bill (No. 2571-d) on amendments to some legislative acts of Ukraine regarding the improvement of certain banking regulation mechanisms.
According to the explanatory note to the bill, it provides for the inevitability of the process of withdrawing banks from the market, since the relevant decision of the National Bank cannot be canceled or suspended by a court judgment.
At the same time, the law clearly defines the prerequisites and procedure for former owners to receive compensation if they prove in court that the NBU's move was illegal.
During first reading, a number of lawmakers and experts labeled the bill unconstitutional, claiming it was at variance with many existing laws.