In the opposition

The zone of turbulence

May 17, 2013 Alexander Ryklin

The Russian opposition world is pounding. The accumulated irritation is spilled into the pages of various publications, blogs, clearly manifested in certain programs “Echo” dedicated to the protest theme. Frequent sloppiness, weak motivation of mutual accusations only enhances the impression of the general rash. I will give only a couple of examples. Alexander Podrabinek in his article “As an anti -Soviet to the opposition”, published in the “Hedes”, violently criticizes the liberal opposition, accusing it of cooperation with left -wing and nationalists. The author of those speaking at democratic rallies, which allegedly usurped the right to contact the audience from the rostrum, are not satisfied. As an example, Alexander cites a case with his brother Cyril, a human rights activist with experience, who on December 11, 2011 during a large rally on Sakharov Avenue, a member of the then organizing committee, Sergei Parkhomenko, did not allow the picture of the current opposition movement in the event that the respected human rights activist received the opportunity to appeal to the audience, Nagobanek did not specify. He also does not consider it necessary to explain to readers why Parkhomenko stood his breast on his brother’s path to the podium. Well, then we are not too lazy to do this for him ... Sergey Parkhomenko, as one of the organizers of that rally, could not allow anyone to the stands except those who received this right when voting on the network. Such a procedure for choosing speakers was then invented. Invented and implemented. And Parkhomenko strictly adhered to her. What is the meaning of the current claim?

Another example. In the response , Alexander Podrabinek Viktor Shenderovich, listing those whose presence among the speakers also does not cause much enthusiasm in him (and in this part solidarized with Alexander), and Mikhail Kasyanov also mentioned, among others, whose speech called “ambiguous”. And in which, in fact, this “ambiguity” consists of, did not clarify. Meanwhile, it should be noted that the best opposition project of this year to support political prisoners (Prisoners of Bolotnaya, first of all) - the creation of a working group and a report of an independent commission to investigate the incident in Bolotnaya Square - was carried out by Parnas. With the direct participation and support of Mikhail Kasyanov himself. So who, if not him, should give a word a year after those tragic events? And he spoke at the rally about this. So what is the ambiguity?

I did not give these two examples at all in order to simply criticize my friends and colleagues for insufficient scrupulousness in the choice of journalistic means. Both of these authors are just different in a very reverent, neat and balanced approach to their texts and to everything that they write or pronounce. But the atmosphere in our opposition environment is now such that the best breaks up.

The reason is very accurately in the recent broadcast of Echo by political scientist Gleb Pavlovsky: the current protest movement does not have a clear political agenda. Without which, in turn, it is impossible to even outline prospects. Hence the nervousness, and irritation, and mutual reproaches ... The fault for this primarily ideological failure is entirely and completely lies with the coordination council of the opposition.

I’ll make a reservation right away. I'm not going to make individual claims to someone at all now. It seems to me that today it is much more appropriate and productive to talk about his future. So, we will use the well -known formula - the coordination council died! Long live the coordination council!

Let's start with why he died. Because you and I, dear electors, gave rise to an absolutely non-viable institute, already, as they say, on the shore, a dull existence, which he entails through the month of the month. The thesis popular among the members of the KS that we have “high requirements” (here Alexei Navalny used this phrase in the extensive interview), we will not leave the brackets and comment. Any requirements can be called “high” if you install the bar just above the baseboard, but below the threshold. The problem is that we never agreed, what this body was supposed to do. We did not agree in advance. Therefore, all those included in the Constitutional Court interpret his goals and objectives in completely different ways. And, of course, they are constantly quarreling among themselves about this. Over the past period, the Constitutional Court did not offer a protest community a single intelligible program, not a single opposition project and did not bother to at least try to describe the prospect of the opposition movement in our country. Even, I repeat, the project on an independent investigation of the tragedy in Bolotnaya was implemented without the participation of our elected institution. At the same time, his individual members conducted quite useful and important work. Nemtsov organized rallies, traveled around the country. Navalny continued to brand corrupt officials. Parkhomenko had a lot of effort to popularize a marvelous revealing project about the false dissertations of representatives of the so -called Putin elite. Kasparov, as he could, promoted the Magnitsky list around the world. But it is unlikely that all these successful steps can be recorded in an asset of the Constitutional Court - these people before its creation showed their readiness and ability to decisive action. Does this mean that the project to create the coordination council of the opposition should be considered a failure? I would not in a hurry with such a characteristic.

Today we can state that the current composition of the Constitutional Court has only one thing left. But a matter of extreme importance. Namely, to initiate a substantive discussion among the democratic public about how the next draft of this joint experiment will be. Not in composition, of course. In fact. According to what rules the elections will be held, what kind of body it will be, what goals he sets for himself, whether the forced rotation of the part of the composition will occur, what will be the new regulation, etc. Only the final decisions on all these issues should be made, of course, not the COP himself, but all the citizens who wished to take part in the next elections ...

In a nutshell I will dwell on those points that I personally consider fundamental. I can hardly manifest interest in the second elections in the Constitutional Court, if the new provision about this institute does not begin approximately the following words: “The coordination council of the opposition is the political body of the Russian opposition, which sets its main goal to create conditions for the peaceful and non -violent dismantling of the Putin regime with the subsequent transition period, necessary for the implementation of honest and free elections, after which it immediately complies with himself. All powers ... ”And then specific steps should be listed to implement this plan, including public and political projects. For example, you can try to describe a civil disobedience campaign ... The most important project is a pressure on power in order to release political prisoners. (I assure you that if the CS once in full force would go to the Investigative Committee with well -known requirements, then perhaps the protest Moscow would not remain indifferent to such a street activity of its leaders ... But we can only guess about this.)

The more specifics about the tasks and rights of the new composition of the Constitutional Court we will discuss and establish in advance, the easier it will be to evaluate his future work.

And such a perspective will undoubtedly be able to partially discharge the atmosphere that has recently infuriated in the protest community. Because when there is a general vision, when the goal is described, when the tasks are clearly formulated and agreed, then not to the squabble and mutual reproaches. Then everything is in business.

I really hope that the Constitutional Court, which, incidentally, has very little time left to solve these difficult problems, will immediately begin to discuss the above issues. Otherwise, since September, we all have to think about what coordination format should come to the existing. Not because we dream to quickly bury this story and forget about it forever - just no one will come to the polls in October. Which will be extremely annoying.

Photos of Maria Olendskaya / Hedgehog