Xenaval: Ponaroshka elections

Navalny could not intimidate the power, and in the ballots there will only be surnames inscribed by the authorities

Alexey Navalny. Photo: Evgeny Feldman, project "This is Navalny"

Too many bubbles around Sobchak and Navalny. It is necessary to dry the picture a bit.

1. Why should Navalny register

Clause 3 of Art. 32 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation: "Citizens recognized as incompetent, as well as those contained in places of imprisonment by the court sentence, have no right to elect and be elected." All. The Constitution does not provide for other reasons for the deprivation of a citizen of electoral rights. Plus, in it there is Art. 55 (paragraph 2), where it is said that in the Russian Federation "laws should not be issued that cancel or diminish rights and freedoms of a person and citizen."

Navalny is capable of, in places of imprisonment and is not contained. Legal acts that deprive him of the opportunity to be elected are unconstitutional, because they detract from his rights in comparison with the Basic Law. On this logic is his election campaign.

2. Why Navalny will not be registered

In addition to the Constitution, there is also the Federal Law “On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights ...” (2002) and the amendments adopted to it on December 5, 2006. Among them, under the first number, there is precisely the diminution of rights: persons convicted of imprisonment for serious and (or) especially serious crimes and those who have an incredible or outstanding criminal record on the vote day cannot be elected. Strictly speaking, this has nothing to do with Navalny. He was not sentenced to deprivation of liberty, and the preposition “and” without added in brackets “or” in the legal language means that we are talking about persons who have been in prison and (but not or! ) Having an uninhabited/outstanding criminal record. For example, who have served half a half and released at parole.

It is important not to prepositions, but a tendency to diminish civil rights neatly outlined in 2006, contrary to the spirit and letter of the Constitution. It is forbidden to run for not only those who are sitting, but also to those who came out after the imprisonment. But these are still flowers.

Strictly speaking, the ban has nothing to run to Navalny. He was not sentenced to imprisonment

On October 10, 2013, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation issues a decision to verify the constitutionality of the same paragraph 3 of Art. 4 articles of the Law “On Basic Guarantees ...” were the reason for the complaints of six different citizens from different regions, which were equally denied the right to be elected in the elections of different levels-just due to the former judicial verdict. Navalny among them is not; A month before the KS resolution, he managed to perform in the elections of the Moscow Mayor and scored more than 27%.

And, for example, citizen G.B. Egorov was deprived of the right to run in the election of the head of the municipality of Voskresensk (Moscow Region), because back in 1998 he was judged by heavy articles: “robbery” and “extortion”. The court gave him three and a half years conditionally, which in our realities means that guilt could not be proved. Moreover, a year later, even conditional condemnation was canceled by the same Resurrection City Court, and a criminal record with gr. Egorova G.B. was generally removed.

But they still do not let him choose, referring to the same paragraph 3 of Art. 4 of the Law “On Basic Guarantees ...” similar cases take place in the Oryol region with a citizen A.L. Kazakov, in the Kirov region with a citizen A.V. Kupriyanov, in the Irkutsk region with a citizen V.Yu. Sinkov and other citizens who decided to look for justice and protection in the Constitutional Court. For he is precisely the authority that owns the exclusive right to decide what is in the laws of the constitution and what is not.

In short, of many smart words in the resolution of the Constitutional Court of November 10, 2013, about constitutional values, social interests, the principles of proportionality, differentiation, individualization, etc., etc. It follows, in general, it corresponds. Once he got under the sentence according to a difficult and (or) particularly difficult article, albeit exclusively conditional and later protested (just a case of Navalny), you still do not have the right to run the right to run. But at the same time, do not think bad, this is not at all about lifelong disqualification! Novely my one! Our most humane and fair in the world of the Constitutional Court is by no means alien to the trends of time. He strongly defended the rights of the applicants in the part that concerns the duration of the defeat in the rights. No unlimited! The disqualification period, as follows from the resolution of the Constitutional Court, depends on the severity of the article (Navalny is especially heavy), the sentence, the behavior of the convicted person, and so on. Everything is strictly individual and differentiated. But no less than by sentence. Plus a trial period that can extend. Based on the reasoning of the Constitutional Court, it is easy to calculate that the electoral rights of a citizen Navalny A.N. (if in the language of the rule of law) the "ten" is scorching.

Legally, the issue was unambiguously resolved back in 2013. When the leadership of the CEC of the Russian Federation reports that the Navalny citizen is entitled to be elected and being elected in 2028, it just translates the norms established by the decision of the Constitutional Court a month after the Moscow mayor successful for the Navalny elections. Today, the CEC has no other options - how there is no right to neglect the decision of the highest court of the Russian Federation. Even if the CEC really wanted this.

3. How scary to live and what to do

Navalny lawyers (and he is a lawyer himself!) Could not know this story. It is difficult to say what they were counting on by noisily organizing the election headquarters and carefully avoiding questions about who and how will overcome the ban on the Constitutional Court. ECHR? International public? Come on. There is only one person in the country who has sufficient resources for this. And everyone knows what his name is. The power of vertical proceedings is that it protects not law, but interests. Moreover, mainly the interests of the one who is higher in the hierarchy.

Therefore, it is difficult to find a different explanation of Navalny’s election strategy, except for the hope of scaring Putin with a growing shaft of street protests and force him to give a go -ahead for registration. After that, of course, all legal paragraphs, articles and points go to dust, and the Russian Themis with a changed face hurries to the pond, where Navalny in the jets of the fountain breaks the mouth of the hydra of corruption. What, in fact, are the rights and paragraphs, if all the people are brothers?! We missed you so much, so missing, Alexey Anatolyevich !!

The power of vertical proceedings is that it protects not law, but interests. Moreover, mainly the interests of the one who is higher in the hierarchy

The trouble is that the strategy did not work. Putin was not afraid. Street protests were even tired of their participants, and the Kremlin administration in response made a strong move with a horse. Ms. Sobchak (in the broad sense of the word, along with the headquarters), too, cannot but know about Art. 4 of the Law "On Basic Guarantees ..." and on the decision of the Constitutional Court. Her selfless promise to get out of the distance, if Navalny is still registered, on the scales of eternity weighs about the same as the honor and dignity of the head of the Constitutional Court of citizen Zorkin.

A.A. Navalny will not be registered in the presidential election 2018. There are no legal grounds for this (if legal grounds were in our country), nor the political interest of the authorities (which interest is above all the grounds). From this quite obvious (at least during the year, when it became clear that a wave of mass protests on the tsunami does not pull) knowledge and it is necessary to build a strategy for behavior in March. As for K.A. Sobchak, its strategy is quite simple, cynical and, therefore, - in relation to Putin's Russia - rational. In the language of a media party, the concepts of which she lives and breathes, this is called to eat a rose on the cake. Or steal a cherry from a cocktail.

Do not worry, Alexey Anatolyevich! All that you worked on, prepared, risked, tormented - will be in value and preservation brought to the Russian voter. Even, maybe even more beautiful! Because from the lips of a bright and attractive woman who also has access to federal channels. By the way, she has a glory rating twice as high. He will say everything in the best possible way, with all directness and determination. Since she, unlike you, is allowed.

In the language of a media party, the concepts of which she lives and breathes, this is called to eat a rose on the cake. Or steal a cherry from a cocktail

So, you can not choose expressions: if anything, the senior comrades will correct in a good way. And about corruption, and about the cooperative "Lake", and about Crimea, and about Stalin. We were talking about explosions, about the fires composed TASS note ... Literally everything promises as it is, honestly looking at the camera. And, being a noble person, he will not even be afraid to mention your forbidden surname in the credits of your series.

We are not for ourselves, but for the good of the fatherland, right? And if so, what's the difference, who will tell the people the true truth. The main thing is that it be said. Just think, the author of the “Quiet Don” instead of Kryukov will be appointed Sholokhov. The text is it! And Nobel is also ours, after all! So with the elections like this: what is the difference, whom Putin will win. After all, it will win anyway. And with Sobchak he is humanly, it will be easier in family. So, both the people and the Fatherland are calmer. We are all for the Fatherland, you have not forgotten?

We are not for ourselves, but for the good of the fatherland, right? And if so, what's the difference, who will tell the people the true truth. The main thing is that it is said

In general, with all this, as with the Putin version of patriotism, more or less understandable. Another thing is incomprehensible: where is the place for a sane viewer in this insane circus with horses. Boycott? Vote? But for whom? Spoil the ballot? Enter the name of Navalny? By the way, according to the laws of most American states (there is no state, then its electoral law) inscribed in the ballot is considered a legal vote and is subject to official calculation along with all the others. But this is still not our homeland, son. Our homeland is here. Only those surnames that are inscribed by the authorities are considered here. For that, we have a constitution and a constitutional court.

* Politheograph, permanent author NT.