Many pro-democracy analysts reacted to the court decision with dismay. Olekisy Haran, professor of political science at Kyiv Mohyla National Academy, an independent university, said the constitutional change was “essentially a usurpation of power [that] moved Ukraine one step closer to authoritarianism”.

Ukraine’s president Viktor Yanukovich has won much expanded powers, fuelling opposition criticisms that he is displaying authoritarian tendencies.
Kiev’s constitutional court on Friday abruptly cancelled a constitution adopted in 2004 that shifted many powers from the president to the parliament, and reinstated the previous 1996 version built around strong presidential powers.
The change came as Mr Yanukovich attempted to counter international concerns that he was tilting Ukraine back towards Moscow after a series of economic rapprochements with Russia since he won presidential elections in February.
Speaking at a high-level conference in Yalta, Crimea, he insisted Ukraine remained committed to closer integration with the European Union, including moving towards a free trade agreement.
“The European choice is an unchanged priority for the Ukrainian government,” Mr Yanukovich said.
The constitutional court ruling, which was sought by Mr Yanukovich’s coalition, gives the president powers to appoint government members, with only his choice of prime minister needing parliamentary approval. He also has the right to dismiss the government without parliamentary approval and can cancel any government resolution.
Politicans from many parties as well as foreign investors have criticised the 2004 constitution – which Mr Yanukovich originally supported – for creating a dysfunctional system. It is blamed for fuelling the political infighting and chaotic government that followed the 2004 Orange Revolution.
But critics said it was wrong simply to return to the earlier 1996 constitution, rather than carry out constitutional changes in consultation with Ukraine’s parliament and civil society.
Yulia Tymoshenko, the former prime minister and Orange Revolution leader narrowly beaten in February’s election by Mr Yanukovich, said the change had “killed democracy” and marked the establishment of “dictatorship”.
Mr Yanukovich told reporters at the Yalta European Strategy conference that he was bound by the constitutional court’s ruling.
“Ukraine must follow the rule of law,” he said. “This is the main principle of democracy. So the president, parliament and the government must fulfil any decision of the Constitutional Court.”
Kostyantyn Gryshchenko, Ukraine’s foreign minister, also insisted the constitutional court took “decisions by itself without consultation with the president”.
It was unclear what implications the move might have for Ukraine’s relations with the EU. It comes amid warnings from opposition parties, journalists and non-governmental organisations that Mr Yanukovich’s coalition is attempting to create a system of “managed democracy” similar to that established by Vladimir Putin in Russia. People close to Mr Yanukovich deny the claims.
Stefan Füle, EU enlargement commissioner, said the court ruling was a “serious decision” of which the EU had “definitely taken note”.
“Notwithstanding this decision, it is obvious that the need for broader constitutional reform remains a priority in Ukraine,” he added. “We believe that this should be carried out through an inclusive process.”
Many pro-democracy analysts reacted to the court decision with dismay. Olekisy Haran, professor of political science at Kyiv Mohyla National Academy, an independent university, said the constitutional change was “essentially a usurpation of power [that] moved Ukraine one step closer to authoritarianism”.

By Neil Buckley in Yalta

Additional reporting by Mark Rachkevych in Kiev