July 20, 2005, 16:49 From the editor

The President distorted the public

“Gazeta.Ru” And he proposed to develop civil society in Russia according to the Belarusian-Turkmen model.

In the characteristically decisive manner of a strong nationally oriented leader, President Putin spoke out against funding the political activities of public organizations in Russia from abroad. “No self-respecting state allows this, and we will not allow it,” the president said. And he explained that he was “reported that “money is being allocated from abroad for specific political activities in Russia, and in sensitive areas,” Interfax reports.

At first glance, everything is correct here. Indeed, what self-respecting state would allow financing of political activities from abroad? What self-respecting citizens will vote for political organizations that exist and operate with foreign money? There is both national pride and the concept of sovereignty here.

However, everything is not so simple. And, as often happens, the president’s words, which at first glance are correct, contain a small trick - a slight distortion.

Indeed, not a single self-respecting state allows financing of political activities from abroad, that is, the direct activities of political organizations that aspire to come to power in one way or another. However, the president was not talking about this, he was talking about the activities of public organizations.

According to formulations accepted in political science, public organizations (NPOs) are an element of the political structure of society. However, public organizations do not participate in the political struggle for power, although their activities are directly related to political problems. For example, civil control over the actions of certain government bodies is an integral part of the activities of civil society institutions, without which it is simply unthinkable, and, accordingly, a direct function of civil organizations. It may well be considered political, especially when this control turns out to be effective. How to determine whether, for example, the activity of investigating corruption in government bodies and political parties is political.

The traditional area of activity of civil organizations is monitoring elections.

Political subjects compete in elections, and we, ordinary citizens, vote for them. And control over the correct counting of our votes should, of course, be carried out by our representatives, that is, by civil organizations. Is this activity political? In particular, when violations are revealed that distort the will of citizens?

In general, we can say that the concept of “political activity of public organizations” does not exist legally and cannot be correctly defined. Unless, of course, we understand by civil society exclusively a collection of clubs of philatelists and dog breeders.

Once again, the president is right when he says that no self-respecting country allows foreign funding of political activities. But only in the sense that political activity refers to activities related to elections.

However, not a single self-respecting country, on the contrary, prohibits funding of public organizations from abroad.

<1>So far, even President Lukashenko, who, however, is the direct predecessor of President Putin in the charges brought against public organizations today, has not decided to legislate such a norm. The Belarusian president has repeatedly attacked them for conducting foreign-funded political activities.

However, there are such precedents in the territory of the former USSR. A ban on funding public organizations from abroad is practiced by Central Asian rulers who are concerned about the sustainability of their power.

Such a ban exists in Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan. With the light hand of President Putin, who devotes regular passages in his speeches to the development of civil society, Russia may soon join this elite club.

In the president’s words, as cited by Interfax, there is one characteristic slip of the tongue. The President was informed that public organizations are engaged in political activities “in sensitive areas.” And, as you can understand, he didn’t like it. The Putin-style model of civil society emerges quite clearly: it should act in insensitive areas and be financed from the Kremlin or on the instructions of the Kremlin. After all, if our political infrastructure functions in this way, then why should the structure of the activities of civil organizations be any different from it?