Drive America

The State Duma adopted a law on counter -sanctions in a very cut -out form

The new package of “antisancation” laws turned out to be so bad that even the Russian business loyal to the authorities allowed himself to publicly criticize it. As a result, laws on counter -sanctions and “responsibility for the implementation of sanctions” are adopted in a highly softened form. How sequentially they will be applied, in any case, depends on the political will of the Kremlin

Keep yourself within

On Tuesday, the State Duma adopted the law “On measures to influence the unfriendly actions of the United States and other states”, which allows the government to introduce a ban on the import and export of various products and raw materials from “unfriendly” countries, led by the United States. Among the authors of the document are the most influential persons in the State Duma: Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin and the leaders of parliamentary factions, so the bill passed all three readings in a week and was adopted almost unanimously. True, even before the readings, the proposals of deputies were faced with strict criticism from business and the public. Particular indignation was caused by the possibility of spreading the embargo for drugs and medical equipment from the United States. Another extremely controversial point is the ban on the export of titanium, which would destroy the business of the Russian producer of VSMPO-Avism.

The third reading from the document disappeared the mention of specific types of products that could fall under restrictions, and the total number of “response measures” was reduced from 16 to 6. The Kremlin did not appreciate the excessive zeal of deputies, according to the director of the Economic Politics program of the Moscow Center of Carnegie Andrei Movchan: “Almost everyone was emasculated and threw out of this law because they received a shout from the presidential administration”.

The final version of the law acquired the most “framework” and declarative nature: the government received the right to independently choose any targets for sanctions. The exception is vital goods whose analogues are not produced in Russia, as well as goods imported for personal use. But from a legal point of view, not so much has changed. In addition to the embargo, the law still implies the possibility of stopping cooperation between Russia and domestic companies with foreign states or organizations from "unfriendly" jurisdictions. There is also a item about “other measures” that the president can introduce and the list of which is not disclosed - anything can be implied here.

In general, the legislative efforts of the State Duma do not create new opportunities for waging a sanctions war with the West. The embargo for food products from the EU and the USA in 2014 was introduced without the help of legislators - through the presidential decree. Since 2007, the Law “On Special Economic Measures” has been in force in Russia, according to which the head of state can make a decision on sanctions on the basis of the recommendations of the Security Council of the Russian Federation.

“Let's put your hand on the heart: from the point of view of the possibility of someone to“ extinguish ”this law did not change anything. This is a political signal about the reduction of aggression, facing both outside and inward, ”says Oleg Buastlemishev, director of the Center for the Center for the Research of the Economic Department of the Economic Department of Moscow State University.

The parliament already had no influence on the course of the sanctions process, and now all responsibility is officially transferred to the level of executive branch. However, the “versatility” of the law allows us to hope that the most painful measures for Russian consumers and business will not be taken in the near future. General formulations, of course, increase the uncertainty of media and investors, but this is better than if the State Duma began to immediately stamp the prohibitions, said Valery Mironov, deputy director of the Higher School Development Center.

“If you do not respond to sanctions in any way, you will lose your face to voters. If you respond too much, you will damage the economy. I hope that in this case there are restraining levers - the government is faced with the task of ensuring the growth rate of the economy above the mid -world, so the ministers will be more restrained in the sanctions policy, ”the expert says.

Potentially counter -sanctions can be harmful not only to individual companies, but also by the Russian economy as a whole. The Retail Company Association (acort) has already warned that the increase in costs for control over suppliers and risk management would cause an increase in retail prices if one of the response measures is realized. Ideally, any measures of economic policy need to be calculated in terms of benefits and costs, says Mironov.

“All significant solutions should be based on specific numbers that would be posted into open access. Then we would see how the ban on imports in each case affects the Russian economy, ”the expert explains.

However, the existence of such calculations would most likely put the competence of the Russian authorities into question. The last initiatives of domestic deputies for the most part expand the effect of American sanctions, experts say.

“It turns out a very strange situation: those prohibitions that the United States have not adopted adopt the legislative bodies of Russia. Moreover, if Western sanctions are mainly directed against individual individuals, then the counter -sanctions are beaten directly throughout the population, ”says Paragon Advice Group, Alexander Zakharov.

Irresponsibility for sanctions

However, if the first bill did not raise any questions from business representatives, then the second initiative - about criminal liability for compliance with sanctions - demonstrated that representatives of business circles have a large and also public anxiety. What is not surprising: the State Duma in fact drives businessmen to the choice between the bad and the worst.

You do not observe foreign sanctions - you fall under them. Follow - you receive a punishment already from your homeland.

Therefore, business managed to make almost impossible and slow down the consideration of the bill: it passed the first reading, but the second reading appointed on May 17 was postponed due to the “large number of appeals” with the request “to conduct additional consultations”. Even the author of the idea of ​​depriving for observance of freedom for four years Vyacheslav Volodin trembled: it was he who proposed to other co -authors of the bill - Valentina Matvienko and the leaders of factions in the State Duma - consult a business before the second reading.

On Wednesday, May 23, the State Duma gathered a special council of legislators with the participation of business communities - “Supports of Russia”, RSPP and others. The business subjected the bill great criticism - but in the end it achieved only the division of responsibility into administrative and criminal. The first is provided for compliance with sanctions, and the second - for "incitement".

“If you analyze the points, then administrative responsibility for compliance with sanctions is a direct wrecking against Russia, since in fact this is the imposition of additional sanctions on domestic companies,” is grabbing the head of the Movcers. “How can one come up with a more effective way to help the United States if they impose sanctions on several companies, and we immediately impose sanctions on everyone else?”

With criminal liability, everything is even worse.

“This borders on criminal punishment for a different opinion. If a person believes-and this is his opinion-that someone against someone should impose sanctions, then, according to the All-Russian Fundamentals of Legislation and the Russian Constitution, he has the right to express this opinion, and no one can take this right to take away. The exception is some unique situations like the propaganda of fascism. Today we will introduce criminal liability for calls to impose sanctions, and tomorrow we will introduce criminal liability for calls to change something in the country. This is a very dangerous precedent, ”warns Movchan.

If it comes to the adoption of the bill, then it will become the first current “Law of the Stalin's Time”, but this seems to be no one.

The problem of this law is that in it, as in a sanction cheese, there are huge holes.

“It is not clear how one person can be attracted for refusing to work with suction companies and not attract another. There are no legal arguments to justify such selectivity, ”says lawyer Alexander Zakharov.

He clearly hints at VTB and Andrei Kostin that the bank was ceasing to work with Rusal after it fell under sanctions. It is appropriate to recall that VTB and Sberbank refuse to work in the Crimea, so that, in theory, they should be automatically to get under a new law. But this, of course, will not happen.

“If this law had already been adopted, Kostin would say that he is considering cooperation with Rusal, based on all the risks that are associated with this company,” says Valery Mironov from HSE. “That is, the law can be circumvented by simply by laying all sanctions risks in the cost of the loan and explaining it with market considerations.”

Theoretically, the law can be amused by the type of first: from it - according to the new shout of the Kremlin towers - all the risks for companies that have a good lobby in the State Duma and the Kremlin will be removed. Herman Gref from Sberbank has already publicly stated that such a shout is needed - otherwise a pipe is completely completely.

“The Law on Criminal Liability ...” will hit all public companies very much, I'm not talking about the banking sector. It will become a problem for all foreign investors. I’m afraid that in choosing to fall under American sanctions or to write off Russian investments, they will choose the second, ”Reuters quoted Gref as saying Gref.

However, even in the sooty law, disloyal or no attached business representatives will fall under the distribution. But this, too, will not give any guarantee that the final version of the law will not affect even the loyalists, therefore, large companies and medium -sized businesses in the case of a bill on criminal liability for sanctions went in a counterattack. Businessmen were even offered to ban officials to relax in “unfriendly countries” (the proposal, of course, was rejected, because it was a matter of “decency”, not legislation).

The division of liability into administrative and criminal looks in this sense an attempt to calm the business, which, in the words of Movchan, is "not in irritation even, but in despair." But the business is ultimately to blame for himself, Oleg Buklevshev adds harshly.

“Business begins to scream when it seems to him that he is completely clamped. But large and affiliated with the state of the state are trying to solve their problems through other channels, and small ones will immediately close if they are outraged. So from the point of view of the influence of business on politics, nothing changes, but he himself chose such a way. A business that we agree to all conditions should not be surprised that the lawmakers go to lawmakers who spread this business, ”the economist makes a verdict.