: Released by Putin

Amnesty Photo: Tvernews.ru

The decision on the “wide amnesty” or completely officially “on the announcement of an amnesty in connection with the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation” - was quite widely discussed in the mass media. It’s not to say that the opinion on the topic of amnesty was completely clear, the project was criticized a lot, but in general it was said a lot of words that even such amnesty, which is completely no, and that the mercy of the state is better than cruelty.

It is true, but instead of 200 thousand people (there were such options), 25 thousand will now be released at best. Moreover, a significant part of them did not sit at all - they are only suspected of committing minor crimes.

The draft amnesty was initially a two -part document. It actually contains two articles. One that minors, women with minor children and pregnant women, pensioners of both sexes, disabled people of the first and second groups, liquidators of the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, as well as “military personnel, employees of the internal affairs bodies of the Russian Federation, institutions and bodies of the penal system and other persons who participated in the fighting or in the actions of the protection of the protection of the protection of the criminal force or in the protection of the protection of the protection of the protection of the protection and other persons Fatherlands ”(Veterans of the Chechen and Afghan war, mainly, must be assumed). Moreover, they must be condemned for no more than five years.

The same groups of citizens will be added to them, only yet convicted of committed crimes, but who are under investigation and in court. All of the listed, of course, should not be convicted for the second time - the amnesty does not apply to recidivists, including those who have already fallen under an amnesty. What is understandable - if the law has begun for the second time, then the mercy of the state seems more likely stupidity.

This is, therefore, the first group of amnesty and everything is clear here: ordinary candidates for any amnesty. That is, for the first time, “stumbled” (so it is now determined on ordinary official jargon), who deserve gratitude from the state in the past or simply citizens who are among those who the state should take care of (mothers, disabled people, pensioners).

The second group is a little more interesting, and, we must think, more small. “To release from the punishment of persons convicted of crimes stipulated by parts of the second and third Articles 212, Article 213 and part of the first Article 264 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation” - here are explanations. Total: it is proposed to free citizens (here just all) convicts for an accident, resulting in grave consequences, but if there were no aggravating ones. They will not free drunk, they will not fall under an amnesty and those who knocked a person to death.

Further, the political part of the amnesty begins. Article 212 is an article about riots. The organizers of the riots are not amnesty. But ordinary participants and those who called for riots will be released. They will also let those who are convicted of hooliganism (in general, it seems). The most alarming part of the amnesty - hooligans are different.

But we must think that there is the main thing in a specifically political plan. The main substantial amendment was accepted by the State Duma (49 were 49 in total) that those who are just suspected of hooliganism will also be released. There was no such paragraph entered by the president of the amnesty. It was proposed only to be suspected in an accident without punishment.

Here, ritual drama, a kind of imitation of work and imitation of the political process were needed. This is how our real simulation democracy worked in the best traditions of the Soviet era and reproduced in the latest time during the time of Voloshin-Surkovsky. According to the political ritual, some of the “socially significant” and “resonant” landings should be canceled by the Dumans themselves.

And the day before, the leaders of the opposition factions in the State Duma performed one after another after voting on the amnesty project in the first reading approaches to journalists (this is a special genre, when an “important person” talks about “how to him” and will probably answer a couple of questions). During the approach, Sergey Mironov (those who watched Russia-1 could see the fragment in the evening, but the “Channel One” somehow stated all this very inaudibly), supporting the amnesty, suggested that Greenpens’s detained detainees on the “pre -ry” Greenpeisers, Gennady Zyuganov suddenly solidarized with “representatives of some liberal forces” and asked to release the “prisoners” and asked for “prisoners” Bolotnaya ”, and Vladimir Zhirinovsky stood up for convicts under the 282nd“ anti-ethnic ”article of the Criminal Code.

The proposals of Zyuganov and Mironov were included in the second reading, they decided not to free the “extremists”. True, the author of the amendments was not at all the leaders of the factions, but even the members of the relevant committee led by United Russia Pavel Krasheninnikov. Well, such a ritual - “a discussion was held, as a result of which the proposals of other Duma factions were taken into account by the party of the parliamentary majority.” In general, in the first reading, the deputies voted for the project unanimously.

This is such a standard setting. Actually, Putin promised to amnesty the same “prisoners of Bolotnaya”, but this is not a political, because the deputies accept amnesty. So they were amnestied - exactly in accordance with Putin’s proposal not all, but those who did not fight or are accused of this - deputies. Get freedom, citizens, but from the hands of Gennady Andreyevich Zyuganov - democracy is so Russian.

In general, the “wide amnesty” is not quite wide, and by order and under the dictation of the current government passes. Everyone whom the authorities considered it possible to release everyone, including Pussy Riot participants - they, however, would have been released soon. Although, by the way, it is not a fact: after all, the amnesty does not apply "to convicts, maliciously violating the established procedure for serving a sentence." You never know what the bosses in the zone will come up with. Moreover, Pussy Riot Putin simply spared, but did not order an amnesty.

For the authorities, the current amnesty, of course, is far from a significant moment. To release a couple of hooligans-ecologists, and a pair of “swamps”, who screamed something inability to the riot police, and then they started things to do it-definitely safely, but weakly or in no way affect the opponents of the authorities. A little can be corrected by the media flame, in terms of hysteria for each sob from the “swamp process”, but actually it was possible to simply not bring to obvious excesses of the investigators. That is, there is a political meaning in the release of “political prisoners”, but he does not say that in the relations of the authorities to opponents, something has changed. And the rest-of course, powerful mercy is better than powerful cruelty and it is good that someone will come out of prisons. The mercy of Putin, of course, is ostentatious and about “reassure the media hysteria” and “not to annoy”.

Otherwise, the population of the domestic “Gulag” is already in the trend for reduction. This is the policy of recent years, supported, even not least, the FSIN. Do not load the zones with excess people there, not to produce recedives - this is today the main mercy of power. The amnesty in this regard only fits into the general “liberation” trend. 25 thousand convicts of almost seven hundred thousand are not so many, given that since 2008 without “wide amnesties” (though with the humanization of a number of articles of the Criminal Code), the population of zones has decreased by two hundred thousand and without “wide amnesties”. So here, rather, a show, but still a pleasant shows. Probably pleasant for the authorities, for the "progressive public." Another thing is that the dynamics of the population of zones in the 20th and early 21st centuries seems to show that “punitive” always comes behind the “liberation” trend. I must say that our government has plenty of funds for this.