Pre-election amendments to the law on the Russian Academy of Sciences

The other day, Putin submitted to the State Duma draft amendments to the law on the Russian Academy of Sciences. It aroused enthusiasm among some scientists, since the wording of the amendments hints at increasing the powers of the Russian Academy of Sciences. We tried to analyze the amendments, comparing the draft with the current law. We must warn you right away that our comment is very superficial. In order to properly assess the meaning of the amendments, we need comments from people who are better versed in the relationship between the Russian Academy of Sciences and the state.

Coordination of research for the defense-industrial complex has been added to the tasks of the RAS, and defense tasks have been added to many points at once. Forecasting the scientific, technological and socio-economic development of the country has been added to the goals section; scientific management of the activities of scientific and higher educational organizations (about the management of universities it sounds radical, but it is not clear how realistic this is and how it is done in general). The RAS is also entrusted with the examination of the scientific results of the above-mentioned institutions. This is better than the expertise of the Ministry of Education and Science or FANO, but we need to see how it will actually work. Popularization of the achievements of science and technology among children and youth has been added. Instead of participating in the development and coordination of a program of fundamental research for a long-term period, the organization of the same meaningless task is formulated. Instead of simply reporting to the President on the status of fundamental research and major achievements, we will have to report annually on the implementation state policy in the field of scientific and scientific-technical activities. Just like that! However, don't get used to it.

The powers of the Russian Academy of Sciences in terms of international cooperation have been increased, although in order to understand how much and how, a commentary from an expert who understands bureaucratic language well is needed.

Finally, the point that aroused the greatest enthusiasm in the academic environment: “ The Russian Academy of Sciences owns, uses and disposes of federal property assigned to it by the right of operational management and transferred to it for operational management, in accordance with this Federal Law, other federal laws adopted in in accordance with them, other regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation and the charter of the Russian Academy of Sciences .”

Alas, the institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences and their property are assigned to FANO, i.e. the main property is not protected from sale. There is currently a moratorium on the sale of institutional property, but it will not last forever. So there is no particular reason for enthusiasm.

The rule of “two keys” is more clearly stated: “ Decisions on reorganization, liquidation, changing the type of organizations transferred to the jurisdiction of the federal executive body specially authorized by the Government of the Russian Federation (i.e. FANO. - Ed.), amending the charters ( approval of the charters in the new edition) of these organizations are adopted in agreement with the Russian Academy of Sciences ." Nothing is said about the establishment of institutions. Now this is a function of FANO.

The termination of the powers of directors and the appointment of an interim are assigned to the FANO (previously nothing was said about the termination of powers). Nothing has changed about the elections of directors, but a strange remark has been added about scientific leaders: “ The Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences coordinates the candidacies of heads of scientific areas and scientific leaders of organizations transferred to the jurisdiction of [FANO] .”

That's basically it. Nothing radical is happening, although there seem to be some innovations that could at least slightly strengthen the position of the RAS. To understand how serious they are, you need to consult with more informed people. We hope to receive relevant comments for the next issue.

Editorial