In the opposition

My pinch in the discussion about June 12 (2)

June 15, 2017 George Satarov

We will consider the constitutional norms given in the first part of the text as an axiom (refresh them in memory) and move on to several theorems (given without evidence that are simple). Then - an important consequence of them.

First. If the constitutional norms of direct and direct action that we mean and need legislative clarifications, then only two varieties: (1) the regulation of the actions of the authorities to ensure and protect the rights and freedoms of citizens, including the right to a peaceful protest; (2) sanctions in relation to representatives of the authorities for anti -constitutional violations of these rights and freedoms.

The second. In negotiations with the authorities regarding the exercise of their rights to rallies, processions, etc. enter (after notification) in only two cases: (1) when objective circumstances arise that require clarification of the time and place of the shares (with the existence of an independent court, in which the actions of the authorities that impose the requirements outside objectively existing obstacles); (2) When the organizers of the shares have a need or desire to alleviate the authorities to protect their (organizers) of the right to a peaceful protest or other rights and freedoms.

The third. And the laws adopted by the Russian authorities, and everything that is done by it on their basis and contrary to them when it violates its own laws is not constitutionally. Simply put - criminal.

A thoughtful reader can ask: does this mean that the opposition entering into negotiations with the current government regarding the “permits” for the realization of his constitutional rights becomes an accomplice of a crime against the constitution? Formally - undoubtedly. But life is more complicated than any norms. Therefore, let's look at such an example. You are among the hostages captured by terrorists (many serious analysts believe that this model is very close to the situation in our country). Do you become an accomplice of terrorists, obeying their requirements? It does not occur to anyone to pose a question like that. You have the right to decide for yourself whether to obey their requirements or not, since not only your life, but also the life of other hostages depends on it. Readers have enough imagination to present circumstances and situations when consent to the requirements of terrorists loses its meaning, since this will not affect the inevitable tragic finale.

The analogy here is obvious. The organizers of the protest actions are forced to interact with the authorities within the framework of anti -constitutional laws in order to leave us all a chance for a more or less peaceful change in the current situation (in which power is likened to bandits or terrorists). But, as was the case in the case of the action on June 12, the authorities begin to prevent the normal conduct of the rally permitted by it, acting illegally and anticonstitutional. Moreover, this was a conscious provocation, which was confirmed by the "astronauts" without the tokens, bravely beaten young people and girls on the streets of Moscow. They beat people with Russian flags and sang anthem of Russia. They beat both accidentally tired and pulled out of the crowd, and on Sakharov Square - distanced from the call of Navalny.

Here is the situation. And if I were in the place of Navalny, I, too, would not without hesitation interrupt the game according to their shyra rules and would urge people to go out. The reason is obvious: I am able to present the consequences of a passive solution. Not for me, but for my country. And you yourself will figure it out if you take the work of thinking a little. Those. I would also choose between bad and dead end, hopeless in favor of the bad. However, I am not Navalny, which facilitates my life, for I am saved from the need to make such difficult decisions.

The authorities believes that she achieved her own - tore off Navalny from his supporters and intimidated the latter. Hope them freely. With their actions, they not only consistently increase the scale of protest, but also make it more fierce. This is a consequence of the fear and grayness of reason. They do not know that there are unrealized situations in social nature. Never do the authorities conquer the authorities anywhere. She either lost with a bang, or (which is less common and tragic), she died with society.

PS for some reason are those who believe that in my last posts I protect Navalny. Not at all, as Yegor Timurovich would say. (This is easy to check in my interview and other publications. At the same time, I do not consider it reprehensible to protect Navalny.) I protect two things. The first is the possibility of the future for my country. The second is the habit of using the mind.

Photo: Russia, Moscow, 06/12/2017. Alexey Navalny received 30 days of administrative arrest for violation of the organization of the rally. Pavel Golovkin/AP/TASS