“Fedorov’s resignation could have been the real reason for the government reboot”: political scientist Oleksiy Haran

A large-scale reboot of the Cabinet of Ministers could be not so much a necessity to renew the government, but a political mechanism for the resignation of Mykhailo Fedorov. This opinion was expressed in an exclusive commentary by Oleksiy Haran, a professor of political science at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, a scientific advisor to the Democratic Initiatives Foundation.

According to the expert, there is a version that the complete reformatting of the government became a kind of “cover operation” that allowed to bypass the political risks of a separate vote for the dismissal of a minister.

“The president cannot single-handedly dismiss a minister. This requires a decision of the parliament. That is why a complete reboot of the Cabinet of Ministers could become a tool that allowed to implement the necessary personnel decisions,” the political scientist noted.

Haran also drew attention to the fact that the personnel reshuffle created a number of new management problems. In particular, after the changes, issues with the appointment of heads of certain strategic departments remained unresolved, and a situation arose when some ministries actually found themselves in a “suspended” state.

Separately, the expert emphasized that public protests could have had a significant impact on political decisions. In his opinion, the actions demonstrated the willingness of civil society, primarily youth and students, to actively respond to government decisions that cause public disapproval. At the same time, he warned against overestimating the role of the protest factor as the sole reason for personnel changes.

The political scientist also critically assessed the mechanism for forming a new government. In his opinion, many personnel decisions could have been implemented on a case-by-case basis, without the complete resignation of the Cabinet of Ministers.

“To change individual ministers, it was not necessary to dismiss the entire government. This created more questions than answers,” he emphasized.

Haran paid special attention to the constitutional procedure for appointing the government. According to him, the Basic Law stipulates that the formation of the Cabinet of Ministers falls within the competence of the parliament, but in practice these procedures are often ignored.

“Formally, even the Constitution is being violated. Candidates must be nominated by a parliamentary majority, and the relevant decisions must be properly formalized. Instead, we see political practice that does not fully comply with the constitutional model,” the expert noted.

At the same time, Garan positively assessed individual personnel appointments, in particular, candidates related to European integration and the government’s economic bloc. However, he emphasized that a final assessment of the new Cabinet of Ministers can only be given after the team demonstrates its ability to work as a single mechanism.

“So far, the changes look ill-conceived. I would like to be wrong, but this is exactly the impression that is formed today,” the political scientist summarized.