Putin Says Plan to Take Crimea Hatched Before Referendum

[JonLP24]

30. International law isn't something I'm well aware of

It only seems to apply when it is convienent & under US law that law is at a crossroads with something like than international law US law based on precedent US law has more legal authority over any law that applies to the US but I remember the Kosovo exception was specifically mentioned in Independence claim from Crimea.

There are many opinions from law professors you can read this one seems well informed. One quickly cited the Ukraine constitution as to why it doesn't matter what International law. One says Crimea is free to participate in elections but they haven't in awhile & Parliament threw out the person they voted for so I wanted to ask him how Ukraine specific circumstances apply to these so called precedents

Ascertaining the legitimacy of the interim government in Kiev is quite tricky. According to Article 111 of the Ukrainian constitution, the President can only be impeached from office by parliament through “no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition.” On February 22, 2014 the Ukrainian parliament voted 328-0 to impeach President Yanukovych who fled to Russia the night prior. However for an effective impeachment under constitutional rules the 449-seated parliament would have needed 337 votes to remove Yanukovych from office. Thus under the current constitution, Yanukovych is still the incumbent and legitimate President of the Ukraine.

This constitutional oversight puts the interim government in legal limbo as the bills that are currently being signed into law by acting President Turchynov are not carrying any constitutional authorization. This problem of legitimacy also undermines Kiev’s dealings with foreign governments, as the government appointed by Turchynov does not represent the de jure official government of the Ukraine. As such, foreign governments who are willfully recognizing and thereby trying to confer international legitimacy upon the interim government in Kiev, are indeed breaking international law by violating (1) the sovereignty of the Ukraine and the law of the land (constitution), (2) the principle of non-interference, (3) and the practice of non-government recognition.

Whether the interim government in Kiev has effective administrative control over state territory also remains highly speculative, given the unfolding situation in Crimea, civil unrest in the eastern part of the country, and the persisting confusion in the chain of command within the Ukrainian military and police force.

Accordingly, the interim government in Kiev does not fulfill any of the three factors set out under international law that would render it legitimate.

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2014/03/russia-in-ukraine-a-reader-responds/#more-33021

He actually legitimately applies precedents specifically applies it to Ukraine and he is 100% right when the 1991 Constitution is used to applied, however the 2004 Constitution allies more leeway if there is criminal charges so which one is Ukraine following? But anything regarding its government, structure, overall system is very troubling & overall there are very good reasons why a region would want to declare Independence from a government with simply a bad system of government. I forgot about the 1996 Constitution as well so Ukraine 90% like independence. The person who was the first popular elected leader who did better in the East than the West.

But politicians who did well in the east were accused of "vote rigging", the Supreme Court of Ukraine (and however legitimate they are said) said Yanukovich 2004 victory doesn't count because of "vote rigging" but given how easily a Constitutional Court judge can be dismissed for "oath violations" is it really legitimate? International law, which ideally would be argued in fair court, or now international law I don't see a lot of reasons to keep it together because it doesn't work out in the end for those who do well in the "popular vote" category except for the recent scaled back elections which less Eastern polls opened and none in Crimea which works out regarding how they dispute elections if the East votes one way when they vote another.