Translated material
Under the load of legitimacy
In the opposition
Under the load of legitimacy
February 22, 2013 Alexander Ryklin
Time in Russia flies quickly, and, whatever one may say, we have already played the first time (in this case, of course). The Coordination Council of the opposition lived a third of the deadline, and is this not a reason to try to evaluate the intermediate result? It is on paper and is called the "Program statement by the Coordinating Council." There is no irony in my words - I really consider the appearance of this document the most important event in the life of our Constitutional Court. It’s just that the event is late for three months. Or maybe for a longer time. Whether it will be such a significant delay in the fatal for the entire project, today it is impossible to predict.
However, now we have finally got a completely clear idea of what political views most members of the Constitutional Court adhere to, what are their plans and views of the future, to the development of the opposition movement. What should we expect from us the chosen organ. The document, for which the COP voted, gives actually exhaustive answers to these questions. There is about the “illegitimacy of power”, and about the “anti -criminal revolution”, and about reforms at the stage of the transition period. Everything is extremely clear and absolutely adequate personally by my ideas about what the content of the memorandum of the Russian opposition at this stage should be. Perhaps there is only a section on the need for a detailed and full -scale revision of previous reign with an approximate definition of the format and volume of lustration procedures. But this is not a fatal omission - this gap is not difficult to eliminate at any time. Another question is: whether the opposition public has not lost interest in the coordination council, whose start is difficult to call successful. Exactly because he, as already mentioned, was late for three months. And life, meanwhile, did not stop life in Russia. No matter how trite it sounds.
Today it is pointless to once again discuss the reasons why the Constitutional Court, chosen by the opposition community in the middle of the fall, fell out of the Russian socio-political context for a long period, focusing on solving his own internal problems. For some time, part of the protest community watched with interest how the confrontation develops between individual groups inside the Constitutional Court, which, in fairness, is explained not by the absurdity of the characters of our politicians or representatives of the creative intelligentsia and show business, who entered the council, and above all, meaningful, ideological reasons. People argued there, mostly in essence! But, despite this, the interest in fierce intraspecific battles in the end gradually faded off even the most persistent admirers of the format and fans of certain media characters inside the Constitutional Court.
Some members of the KS love to explain the obvious disappointment from the Council, which came among civilian and political activists, "high expectations." Well, what can I say? If the expectations of any practical actions or the appearance of some realistic opposition projects are considered “high”, then this thesis will have to be agreed.
It was called “on the shore” that the coordination council, first of all, would take care of the organization (coordination) of street protest actions as a universally recognized main tool in the fight against the current government. But this did not happen. Moreover, the Constitutional Court, for example, quite defiantly evaded participation in the preparation of the “march against the scoundrels”, which took place in Moscow on January 13 and turned out to be very successful, thanks to the efforts of civilian activists and the “solidarity” movement. True, at the last meeting of the KS it was decided to hold a march and a rally on the eve of events on May 6. In other words, after two and a half months! Say, let's not, friends, partly! But it is obvious that Moscow will not sit out almost the whole spring to the houses! Moreover, reasons for performances are added every day. Why doesn't the body chosen do not want to take the initiative to organize a protest leisure in the fresh air? Or our glorious representatives of the "creative class", "angry townspeople", the founding fathers of the white-open movement, which entered the Constitutional Court, are tired of the tedious opposition everyday life and no longer fascinates the romance of street protest? It’s a pity if so ...
However, over the past four months, the Constitutional Court has not succeeded too much in promoting projects that are not directly related to the street activity of citizens.
More than once it is said that the main task of the opposition movement of our country at this stage is the struggle for the freedom of all political prisoners and, in particular, prisoners of May 6, the number of which is growing steadily. Indeed, at one of his meetings, the KS declared readiness and desire to show activity in this noble field, but if I am not mistaken, everything was limited to coordinating the work of the lawyer corps and raising funds. Meanwhile, today an interesting and large project is being carried out on the reconstruction of events on May 6 in Bolotnaya Square. The purpose of which is to establish the truth and convincingly demonstrate to society the engagement and bias of the investigation. Hundreds of witnesses have already been interviewed and a commission has been formed, which at one time will present a report on the topic on a specially convened civil forum. This huge work is carried out by activists from the May 6 group and Parnassus. At a meeting on February 16, the Constitutional Court of the opposition supported the initiative described above, but it was decided to remove the Parnassus abbreviation from the protocol. Say, why should we PR political parties? It looked a little childish ...
In a word, all these months, opposition activity in the country did not decline at all, did not fade away, but perhaps even vice versa - people participated in a large march, people stand in pickets, people make plans for the future, try to determine their place in the struggle with disgusting power. But the COP as an organization is in no hurry to show activity. Meanwhile, it is important to note that in personal quality or as the leaders of various political organizations, many of the members of the CS continue to remain leaders of protest and play an important role in a variety of opposition projects. This applies to Alexei Navalny, and Harry Kasparov, and Boris Nemtsov, and many others.
I think that the problems of the current COP are not at all in the composition of its participants. It seems to me that they are institutional. That is, the problem is not that you and I stopped the wrong people. We just chose the best. It’s just that neither we nor they still have a clear understanding where we chose them.
It is no coincidence that many members of the Constitutional Court often characterize this body as a kind of “proto -parliament”. It is clear why this is happening. They intuitively want to expel themselves part of the opposition legislative power. Since, as people are politically literate, they are well aware: there are no elections in executive structures. Especially - according to such open rules. But we also wanted to get the “coordination” advice ... But we received a group of people with very different, and often blurry ideas about the tasks and plans of the opposition, which, as it turned out, is not able to form a common agenda, nor become the flagship of the entire opposition movement. That is why the software statement was born for so long and in such torment. And a miracle, by the way, that this document was generally born.
So, the elections in the Constitutional Court were originally a mistake, and the entire project is doomed to failure? I think there is still no. Because the presence of a legitimate opposition body against the background of unbridled, illegal power has great psychological significance. It’s just that today it is clear that the next elections will have to be held according to a completely different rules. And the matter, of course, is not in the presence or absence of the so -called kuri, that is, individual voting lists.
The entire protest movement, that is, those oppositional citizens who consider it necessary to take part in the following elections in the Constitutional Court, will first have to be able to discuss and approve certain filters that need to be installed for those who want ... not to represent, not, namely, to coordinate the activities of various opposition groups of Russia. And even its individual citizens. For example, such a filter could be the very software statement already adopted by the Constitutional Court, its working regulations, etc. And each applicant for a place in the Constitutional Court, in order to be registered as a candidate and take part in the elections, will have to subscribe to these documents. Or under those that, according to obvious and simple procedures, will be agreed and adopted by the entire opposition community of Russia.
Of course, a democratic design - first elections, then the rules - turned out to be not working, which means that, erroneous. It was she who gave rise to all those conflicts that now permeate the Constitutional Court and prevent it from functioning in optimal mode. This design should be replaced by exactly the opposite - first rules, then elections. That is, elections according to the rules approved by the opposition. Not very democratic, many will say. I agree - not very. Well, we still do not choose a parliament!
The other day, a frank, detailed, detailed and interesting interview with the wonderful artist and dear man Mikhail Shaz, who, if anyone forgot, together with his wife Tatyana Lazareva, also also a member of the KS appeared. (I honestly admit that this pair is generally very pretty, and I voted for them in the past elections.) So, at the end of the conversation, Mr. Shatz says that they are not going to leave the country and go to Sheremetyevo with their family, only “when the tanks go through Moscow” ... Humanly, this is understandable and understandable, and, probably, the majority will do this. But I will still allow myself to ask: dear members of the coordination council of the opposition, and which of you will remain in my city when tanks will go along it? I would like to know in advance ...
So, maybe this issue should also be posed to all potential candidates for future elections in the Constitutional Court of the Russian opposition?