So, the relationship with the Russian Orthodox Church is clearly given a special place.
I'm appalled you don't differ autonomy from autocephalia.
Of course the relationship with MP are "special", autonomy is part of her Mother. She isn't autocephalous.
That's what actually bothers many Ukrainian Orthodox. Why is Moscow "mother?"
Yes, that is the irony of the Ukraine-Russia issue. On the one hand, the Church services etc. refer to Kiev as "Mother of Russia/Russian cities", but Russia is refered to as "Mother Church."
A full answer would be political, but just in brief, the origin in the irony is that St. Jonah, the first autocephalous head of the Russian Church was actually the Metropolitan of Kiev (he replaced the apostate Greek Isodore of Kiev, later Cardinal Isodore. He later switched to the Latin rite and became Latin EP and Archbishop of Cyprus as well), as was St. Job, the last Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus and the first Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus. Constantinople, then under the Vatican, organized a successor to Met. Isodore, Gregory the Bulgarian, and that line got involved with the "Union" forced by the Polish crown. At the time that St. Job was elevated, Kiev was detached from, later reunited to, Moscow (at the time of the elevatio it wasn't within the Kingdom of Russia, but the Kingdom of Poland within the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Not a minor detail: the Tomos that the EP and his synod gave to Poland, a part of the Patriarchate of Moscow, states in pertinent part:
bowing before the demands of canonical obligations, which impose upon our Holy Ecumenical See concern for Orthodox Churches, who are in need; considering also the fact, which is not contradicted by history (for it is recorded that the first separation from our See of the Kyivan Metropolia and the Orthodox Metropolia of Lithuania and Poland, dependent upon it, as well as their incorporation within the Holy Moscovite Church was accomplished contrary to canon law, as also all that which was agreed upon regarding the full church autonomy of the Kyivan Metropolitan, who at the time had the title Exarch of the Ecumenical See), We and our Holy Metropolitans, Our beloved brothers and co-workers in the Holy Spirit, considered it our obligation to give ear to the request presented to Us by the Holy Orthodox Church in Poland and to give Our blessing and approval to its autocephalous and independent administration
which Ukrainians who have taken autocephaly use as a basis for canonical cover for what they have done.http://www.ukrainianorthodoxchurchinexile.org/1924_tomos_of_autocephaly.html
which has other repecusions: if Cyprus next month puts its stamp of approval on the EP's take on canon 28 and the canonical situation of North America, a pertinent part being the claim that North America doesn't fall within the boundaries of the Patriarchate of Moscow when it was created, the problem would arise that neither was Ukraine included within those boundaries, and would thus be technically "diaspora." With the EP's interpretation of canon 28, he would be free make a deal with the Ukrainian government of Yushchenko, as was done in Poland (the 1924 EP tomos refers to "the God-Protected Polish State"), and to do as was done in North America, including using the secular courts in the attempt to take over Churches that don't agree. That he is discussing with the Ukrainian President, and NOT with the canonical (even according to the EP) Ukrainian Primate, over opening a metochion, an ECCLESIASTICAL institution that requires the cession of territory by the canonical primate not the secular authorities, on the eve of the Cyprus meeting should give the Patriarch of Mosocw all the warning he needs (as if he needed any) that the agenda does not only involve the OCA.
And if the question is raised, "What does this have to do with the OP 'The Canonical Declaration of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kyiv Patriarchate)'," the document linked in the OP explicitely refers to the official acts of the EP (e.g. the Tomos to Poland above), explicitely refers to the words of the present EP Bartholomew (e.g. the reprimand of Met. Volodymyr of Kiev-MP, ironicly in an affirmation of Moscow's jurisdiction, an the claims of the jursidcition of the EP over "unity"), explicitely refers to the preparations for the All Orthodox Council by the All Orthodox Assembly (meeting next month in Cyprus), explicitely refers to certain acts signed by the Ukrainians explicitely in the presence of the EP having him (i.e. not Pat. Kyrill) for the ordering of the Ukraine's Church, etc., as the canonical basis of its autocephaly).
In other words, the primate of Kiev, which is in Ukraine, was made Patriarch of the Kingdom of Russia. To this day, the Patriarch of Moscow is enthroned by the Met. of Kiev giving him the staff of St. Peter, who moved the see of Kiev to Moscow (sort of like how the Patriarch of Antioch is now in Damascus). Met. Volodymyr said while handing it over
'Your Holiness! On behalf of the Local Council, which elected you, I solemnly hand you the staff of the Primates of Moscow on this joyous day when our Church got the sixteenth Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia.http://www.mospat.ru/index.php?page=44058
'This staff belonged to Metropolitan Peter of Kiev and Moscow, the miracle-worker, who transferred the primatial see to Moscow. We hope that you will continue the ministry of the holy Primates of Moscow who worked tirelessly to build and order the Church of Christ, who consolidated the unity of Holy Russia, which by God's Providence has begun its life in the holy baptismal font of Kiev. We promise to help Your Holiness in this sacred cause
with pictures of the handing off.
The situation, btw, is not dissimilar from how Old Rome felt about New Rome.