Semipresidentialism in Ukraine. A mixed assessment between institutional conflict and checks on president’s superpower

After the collapse of communist regimes, semipresidentialism – as a system of government with a two-headed executive and two autonomous powers: a popularly elected President and the legislative assembly1 – became the most widespread template in transitioning contexts2. In the Post-soviet area, Ukraine represents an interesting case. While problematic in its formal design and under strain in practice, as a reflection of a difficult and unstable transition, Ukrainian semipresidentialism proved to resist the test of time. Thirty-two years after Ukraine’s independence, and twenty-seven years after the adoption of a new Constitution, it managed to overcome major crisis – political, economic and military – without consolidating into an authoritarian regime3. Still, for some, a strong elected President had detrimental effects on the development of Ukrainian political and party systems and did not allow for real democratic consolidation.