Teh legitimacy of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been repeatedly questioned by Russian officials, including Vladimir putin, who point to the postponement of the 2024 presidential elections as evidence of an illegitimate government. This argument conveniently overlooks the fact that Ukraine has been under martial law since February 24, 2022, the date of the full-scale Russian invasion, and Ukrainian law prohibits holding elections during a state of war.
This criticism stands in stark contrast to the methods employed by Putin to maintain his decades-long hold on power in Russia. Since ascending to the presidency in 2000, Putin has utilized a series of legal maneuvers to circumvent term limits and consolidate his authority.
In 2008, Putin served as Prime Minister while Dmitry Medvedev held the presidency, a move widely perceived as a pre-arranged power transfer. More significantly, in 2020, putin orchestrated a constitutional amendment, approved in a widely disputed “popular vote,” that effectively reset his presidential term count, allowing him to possibly remain in power until 2036. This amendment bypassed the constitutional two-term limit previously in place.
Moreover, the nature of presidential elections in Russia has consistently lacked genuine competition. While nominally multi-candidate,these elections have historically featured carefully vetted and largely harmless opposition figures. The 2024 election took this a step further by preventing Boris Nadezhdin, a candidate who openly criticized the war in Ukraine, from even appearing on the ballot, effectively eliminating any meaningful challenge to Putin’s rule.
The contrast between the scrutiny applied to Ukraine’s electoral situation and the acceptance of Putin’s methods reveals a clear double standard. While ukraine operates under the constraints of wartime law, Russia has actively reshaped its legal framework to ensure Putin’s continued leadership, raising serious questions about the democratic integrity of its electoral process.