Emergency

In the conditions of the epidemic, the authorities wanted to have rights and not have duties. The experience has taken root

As soon as the Russian political regime has been called in the past 20 years: “controlled democracy”, and “electoral authorism”, and “hybrid” (oh, how much we argued about this with Ekaterina Schulman), and “unworthy rule” ...

In recent years, they give reason to call it "a rule by concepts."

Three years ago, when the Covid epidemic began, the epidemic “Pseudo -Malawrchy” immediately began.

Neither the regime of a state of emergency (PE), nor the emergency regime (emergency) were introduced in Russia as a whole or in the regions. And quarantine was not declared. In almost all cases, the authorities introduced only the “increased readiness” regime (which means the presence of a “threat of emergency”).

However, the regulations of the government and the orders of the governors introduced numerous prohibitions and restrictions:

• to freedom of movement of citizens,

• for economic activity,

• to the work of enterprises and organizations,

• as well as fines for violation of these prohibitions and restrictions.

These prohibitions, of course, limited the rights and freedoms of citizens. What was the only requirement of “self -isolation” for the elderly (despite the fact that they are no more dangerous for others than young)! Or universal prohibitions to visit parks and squares (where the danger of getting infected yourself or infecting others certainly less than a similar danger in open to visiting grocery stores or public transport).

But the essence is not only in the absurdity of prohibitions. It is that these prohibitions could not be introduced at all: under the federal law on the protection of the population from emergency situations of a natural and technogenic nature, the “increased readiness” regime does not give the authorities the right to limit the rights and freedoms of citizens.

This right could appear among the authorities only in the case of the introduction of quarantine, emergency modes or emergency. But they, as already mentioned, were not introduced. But they introduced measures that de facto corresponded to them, although de jure could not be declared.

In the conditions of the epidemic, the authorities wanted to have rights and not have duties. They wanted, on the one hand, to introduce many restrictions and fines for violating these restrictions, and on the other hand, do not bear any costs.

Because, for example, if the authorities introduced the emergency, quarantine or emergency mode, it would be necessary, in accordance with the legislation, to compensate citizens with all losses from the restrictions and “emergency” measures taken. If these modes are not introduced, no one can pay anything.

In content, we, of course, had an emergency regime. And in the form - "High readiness mode."

In fact, there was one thing, and in terms of design - completely different. This means that the right is replaced by “concepts”.

The voices of skeptics - including the author - then, of course, sounded. And doubts were voiced. In response, we heard that the danger of Covid is so deadly great that not to legal subtleties and formalities. Efficiency is more important than formal legality. What is there to think - you need to shake, as in a famous joke ...

The danger was really great. But there were - and remains - and unintentionally doubts about the extent to which decision -making “according to concepts” helped to fight this danger.

And now - although in relation to a completely different situation - we observe a very similar phenomenon during a special operation.

The Federal Constitutional Law “On Martial Property” provides for restrictions on the rights and freedoms of citizens when the this provision is introduced. The corresponding list given in Article 7 of this Law includes 19 points.

However, in Russia as a whole, martial law has not been introduced now. It was introduced - by Decree of the President of Russia dated October 19, 2022 No. 756, - ​​only in the territories of the DPR, LPR, Zaporizhzhya and Kherson regions. In the Bryansk, Kursk, Belgorod, Voronezh, Rostov regions, the Krasnodar Territory, as well as in the Crimea and Sevastopol, an “average reaction level” was introduced, including the use of six of 19 points provided for martial law. In several regions, “level of increased readiness” has been introduced and four of the indicated paragraphs are involved. And in all other regions of the country, the “level of basic readiness” has been introduced (two of 19 points are involved).

Meanwhile, the mentioned law “on martial law” is no “average response levels”, “levels of increased readiness” and “levels of basic readiness”.

And the use of any points listed in Article 7, in regions where martial law is not introduced, is not allowed by this law.

And we also note that Article 8 of the Law “On Martial Property” allows us to establish some restrictions in those regions where martial law has not been introduced. But these are not at all the restrictions that are listed in decree No. 756. And therefore, the clause contained in the decree, according to which “if necessary, in the Russian Federation, other measures can be applied, stipulated by the FKZ“ On Martial Property ”, which allows, in fact, to introduce any elements of martial law throughout the country, it is poorly laid in the specified law in order not to say more.

All these doubts, however, are confidently ignored by the authorities who believe that in special operational times it is necessary to achieve their goals, not paying attention to formalities and legal subtleties. And, as in the case of Covid, the law retreats to expediency, and the right - to concepts.

In parallel, laws are adopted that criminalize any opinion on a special military operation and its participants, which differs from formulated by the authorities. What, of course, sharply limits the right of citizens to free expression of opinions and beliefs.

This is also possible only with the total introduction of martial law, and this is also introduced without its announcement.

And in general, "struggling with enemies, do not choose funds." No, this was not said by Stalin and not his associates. And not Lenin and his Bolsheviks. This was said by Saint-Zhust in the Convention 230 years ago. A year before you yourself go to the guillotine, we note ...

Of course, the rule “according to concepts” is much easier and easier than according to the law.

Even when - as now - the legislative design of any highest command is organized in two days in three readings.

When any doubt about the correctness of the highest command is punished as disobedience.

When the parliament is turned into an “applaising organ” and consists of five Putin parties in different costumes.

And when there is hardly a court that will decide to recognize the decision made “according to concepts” illegal.

But only with such a rule it increases sharply - due to the fact that all corrective mechanisms are disabled - the probability of errors.

And it decreases sharply - by virtue of the same - the probability of their correction.

With understandable consequences - which, in fact, we observe.