| Opponents of the “autocitizen” reached the Constitutional Court The process that began yesterday in the Constitutional Court can be considered an act of last hope for opponents of the “autocitizenship”. Although, unlike previous attempts to adjust the law “On compulsory civil liability insurance of vehicle owners” at the level of the government or the State Duma, this time the defenders of Russian motorists demand that a bold cross be put on compulsory motor liability insurance. That is, to recognize the law and, consequently, the compulsory insurance system operating on its basis as completely unconstitutional.
Requests to the Constitutional Court came from the State Duma (mainly from communist deputies), the Volgograd Regional Duma, the State Assembly of the Altai Republic and from a private individual - driver Sergei Shevtsov, who was fined for not having a compulsory motor liability insurance policy. All statements present generally similar arguments, some of which actually undermine the entire law.
Thus, the applicants argue that the “motor citizen” restricts the right to use one’s own property: the law obliges to insure liability before registering a vehicle, “but no later than five days after the emergence of the right of ownership,” and the administrative code provides for a fine for the lack of a policy. “Disposition of property implies the right to independently decide on the insurance of one’s risk,” say drivers’ advocates from the lower house of parliament.
The second object of criticism from those who applied to the Constitutional Court is that the tariffs are too high, especially for low-income citizens, despite the fact that in the event of an accident, the insurance payment may not cover all the damage caused by the policy holder. Previously, drivers themselves chose the amount of liability insurance, but now they can purchase a policy only from members of the All-Russian Union of Insurers, which violates the rights of other participants in this market.
In addition, Sergey Shevtsov states that the liability of the driver, not the car, should be insured. Today, as he writes in his complaint, “the owner of two or more vehicles, using them throughout the year, is required to insure civil liability in respect of each vehicle.” He also states that in fact an illegal tax levy has been established that is not specified in the Tax Code. And as noted in the request of Volgograd deputies, “many citizens with more than ten years of driving experience have never been involved in an accident, and for them, civil liability insurance with the payment of an exorbitantly high insurance amount is regarded as illegal taxation.”
However, references to illegal taxation are perhaps the weakest arguments of opponents of the “motor citizen”, especially since the position of the Constitutional Court on this matter has long been known. In its letter sent to one of the complainants on June 15, 2004, the Constitutional Court already indicated that the insurance premium is not a tax, since it is paid not to the budget, but to the insurer. The opinion of the judges on other points of the complaints being considered will be known no earlier than in two weeks.
It is unlikely that the complainants will be fully satisfied, but the Constitutional Court may demand some relief for motorists from the executive branch. Moreover, representatives of government bodies partly agree with the accusations against the law on compulsory civil liability insurance. The head of the Federal Insurance Supervision Service, Ilya Lomakin-Rumyantsev, said at yesterday's meeting that his agency receives up to 1.5 thousand complaints from citizens every month, and admitted that the law needs to be adjusted. “The question needs to be raised not about the constitutionality of the law, but about its modernization, and now there is every reason for this,” said Mr. Lomakin-Rumyantsev.
By the way, State Duma deputies Georgy Boos and Ildar Gabdrakhmanov, apparently not relying on the Constitutional Court, in parallel with the consideration of the complaint on compulsory motor liability insurance, introduced amendments to the law “On compulsory civil liability insurance of vehicle owners” to the lower house, providing for a three-fold reduction in the base rate of tariffs. However, legislators have already taken up the task of adjusting tariffs several times, but the initiators of the amendments have not yet managed to get the number of votes required for their adoption. Yuri KOLESOV |
|
