Conclusion

This study has explored the process of parliamentary institutionalization in the

context of wider institutional and political change by focusing upon the

development of two core internal institutions: factions and committees. It has

demonstrated that institutionalization occurred in the years following the first

(semi-)free elections, but that it was patchy, uneven and multi-directional. The

underlying causes of these processes are explained in terms of actors’

preferences mediated by (exogenous and endogenous) institutional constraints,

structural factors such as the nature of the party system and the strategic action

of President Kuchma. As internal institutions developed, their impact upon

parliament’s operation altered and this was demonstrated by an analysis of the

legislative process. The growing strength of factions vis-a`-vis committees

resulted in greater legislative capacity, but this occurred at the expense of the

quality of legislation. Ultimately, the example of the legislative process

illustrates how the uneven institutionalization of internal institutions influenced

the Verkhovna Rada’s capacity to exercise its constitutionally designated

prerogatives. In Chapter 1, the key research questions were defined to focus upon

the following themes: the relationship between institutions and behaviour;

institutional change (institutionalization); the role of internal institutions in

parliament; and how these institutions’ institutionalization and interrelationship

affected parliament’s role in Ukrainian politics. These core themes will now be

drawn together before considering the role of the Verkhovna Rada in state-

building and democratization in Ukraine.