Disputes flared up in the State Duma over lifelong status for Putin
Controversy broke out in the State Duma over innovations that provide for the possibility of granting former Russian presidents lifelong senatorial status and immunity. The Communists and the Liberal Democratic Party did not support the initiative.
Thus, a member of the Communist Party faction, Yuri Sinelshchikov, speaking from the State Duma rostrum, said that according to the proposed standards, the procedure for bringing the ex-president to justice is practically impossible, reports a PolitNavigator correspondent.
“The ex-president does not bear any responsibility for committing minor crimes, even if he commits a crime every day. But, in order to be held accountable for serious and especially serious crimes, and high treason, you need to go through a whole procedure that will be practically impossible to go through,” Sinelshchikov said.
He was supported by LDPR member Sergei Ivanov.
“Under the old law, a president who has ceased to exercise his powers cannot be held accountable for actions committed while leading the state. That's it, then the constitutional principle applies - all citizens are equal before the law and the court.
Now, having introduced this provision into the Constitution and ensured the adoption of this federal law, what do people see? What, are we afraid?
...If, God forbid, the situation changes and other people come, they don’t give a damn about what you accepted, about the fact that the so-called popular vote was taking place, and so on. Everything will change overnight, and you will be here voting “for” and saying: “We support.” As has already happened, people fled from this party, called the CPSU, to another party. And I have seen this in my lifetime. And I don't want to see this anymore.
Therefore, no matter how you twist it, this Constitution has now been adopted, there are similar norms there, but I can’t raise my hand to vote for such things. I don’t believe that our president is so afraid that he won’t be able to simply walk down the street, honestly greeting people, that he will need to provide all this security, communications, whatever. A decent person wouldn't do that.
Here, sitting in front of me in the convocation before last, was a man, the Chief of the General Staff of the USSR, he did not have any security. He was the bearer of such secrets that few people in this room were allowed to know about it. But nothing like that - he walked normally and stood at the bus stop.
This is a normal approach, you know? And so, excuse me, now you are appointing people for life, then you will appoint immortals, then you will generally introduce a system of nobility and serfdom, and this is where we are heading,” Ivanov said.
Unexpectedly, it turned out that the issue of lifelong benefits for the ex-president split the Communist Party faction. Communist Vladimir Bortko spoke in defense of the United Russia initiative.
“I don’t agree with my faction. It rarely happens, but it does happen. Why? It's not about what happens after. It's about what will happen now. A person in this position has to make all sorts of decisions that we know about, that we don’t know about, and that we don’t even know about. Not all of them fit into the moral character of the builder of communism, far from it. And you need to have a free hand in order to do this... Don’t pay attention to how they will look at it later, he is doing it for the country. What was said here was absolutely correct - we chose him, we trust him,” Bortko explained.
State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin praised Bortko and said that only ex-USSR President Mikhail Gorbachev has nothing to fear, for whom the West will stand up if necessary.
“If a person has ruined the country, he is protected by all those who applauded him, and he, of course, has nothing to fear. But this decision is necessary for us, citizens of the country, deputies who stand as spokesmen for interests and make decisions in the interests of our residents, voters, citizens, because you and I are thus protecting our country. So that the person who makes the decision now also feels that he is needed not only today, but also tomorrow, that the state cares that all decisions are made in the interests of the country.
And when there are arguments: “Tomorrow we will deal with you here,” listen, if the country becomes stronger, all the opponents, of course, will come out and then settle scores. This cannot be allowed.
And as for the weak state and the collapse of the country, we see that they invite you to give lectures and defend, try to say something, everyone starts shouting: “Don’t touch this achievement.” The logic is this... The collapse of the Soviet Union is indicative. The person who ruined it is condemned within the country, but outside the country everyone applauds"- said Volodin.
The Presidential Plenipotentiary Representative in the State Duma, Harry Minkh, invited all dissenting deputies to resign and go “out into the streets”:
“Why go out and read essentially the current Article 93 of the Constitution and then say: “We won’t vote for the bill.” I suggest to you - if you don’t like the Constitution, close this work, go to the streets, there you will find your comrades-in-arms, only they will be completely different people. I'm talking about voluntary resignation.
You are obliged to comply with the Constitution, you are obliged to make decisions within the framework of the Constitution. You sign up for this when you go to the polls. If you are not ready to do this, then you must clearly see your perspective. The Constitution has changed, if you are not satisfied with it in some part - make a decision. Because now it is very strictly formulated.”
Minkh made it clear why the president, as the ex-chief of the USSR General Staff, cannot travel on public transport - they know him by sight, and there may be complaints in society.
“For some reason, we have this slightly strange division: here is the head of a great power, he makes decisions that make many people uncomfortable. First of all, and, perhaps, on the territory of Russia and outside the Russian Federation. When we suddenly begin to divide this, it is absolutely wrong. A person who makes perhaps unpopular decisions, from the point of view of individual citizens of the Russian Federation, and suddenly we say: “Let him go out into the street,” like the Chief of the General Staff, whom no one knows by sight, let him walk among the citizens , let him listen to what they tell him, what they think about him. Well, people think differently. We have a multinational, complexly structured population. The people are united, but they are divided into different layers, we know that. There are rich, there are poor, there are those who are ready for tough confrontations, those who rely on the support of the state, and, of course, they feel bad. When you have to do something in the social vector that is not very positive, it is clear that all the negativity is directed at the authorities", Minh said.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.