"Losing trust"

Vladimir Putin, dismissing the governor of the Amur region Leonid Korotkov , used a rather amorphous formulation from subparagraph “d” of paragraph 1 of Article 19 of the law “On the general principles of the organization of legislative (representative) and executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.” Opponents of the new scheme for appointing governors pointed out that it is the reference to “loss of trust” that will most often be used when removing regional heads from power. Although, as is known, the law also contains very specific reasons that allow the head of state to refuse the services of the governor, in particular, the entry into force of a court verdict or the recognition of the head of a region as incompetent. However, as practice has shown, the president prefers not to wait for court decisions. And these features of the application of the law were commented on by famous lawyers to Vremya Novostey.

Yuri KOSTANOV, Chairman of the Presidium of the Moscow Bar Association “Advocate Partnership”:

-- Although criminal cases were brought against Governor Korotkov, he was officially removed from office “due to the loss of the president’s confidence.” The wording specified in the law is very vague. We do not know what actually served as the basis for the president’s decision, since it follows from the law that the head of state is not obliged to explain the reason for this decision. This circumstance once again forces us to pay attention to the quality of the work of our legislators - current deputies do not really think about the accuracy of wording. However, such an order is not new in the domestic legal tradition. Thus, a similar formulation - “dismissal due to loss of confidence” was previously present in labor legislation. Something similar took place in the Criminal Procedure Code.

Yuri SHARANDIN, head of the Federation Council Committee on Constitutional Legislation:

-- With fairly weak executive discipline, strict management is required. It should be taken into account that governors are not yet associated with parties. We are just beginning the process in which the candidate for the head of the region is proposed by the party that won the elections. Then a chain of responsibility will arise. There is no such chain yet. This means that someone must strictly control the governors. There is no other structure other than the president, the guarantor of the Constitution.

I am sure that the president had every reason to make such a decision. At the same time, it is necessary to separate the relationship between the head of state and the head of the region from the relationship between the head of the region and the Criminal Code. Let me clarify: I do not think that the president’s decision was related only to the criminal cases that were filed against this governor. Probably, these criminal cases were a certain result of certain processes. If you contact the presidential administration, it turns out that this, like any other governor, was repeatedly pointed out the mistakes he had made. It is impossible to say that the president’s decision was spontaneous under any circumstances. The entire history of Putin's presidency shows how balanced his personnel decisions are, although this is sometimes not clear at first glance.

Recorded by Mikhail MOSHKIN