New deprived

The deputies of all the State Duma factions decided to take away voting rights from Russians

Duma deputies from all four factions - United Russia, the LDPR, the Communist Party and the Just Russia, led by Vasily Piskarev, introduced the draft law on new "deprivs" to the parliament.

It is proposed to deprive the right to elect into the State Duma for a period of three to five years of all those involved in the activities of organizations that are declared “extremist” or “terrorist”.

At the same time, to prove the “involvement”, the fact of the donation of such an organization of money or to provide “advisory” assistance even before it was recognized as “extremist” or “terrorist”.

This applies not only to those who worked in “prohibited” structures, but also of a significant number of citizens who, sacrificing their money or other ways to organizations, at that time quite legal, could not assume a future defeat in electoral rights.

This is an unacceptable giving a repressive law of retroactive force that violates the fundamental principles of law.

And if in today's Russia the real Constitutional Court, this law (which, of course, will be unanimously adopted by the current State Duma) would not have a single chance not to be canceled with destructive formulations in the motivating part of the decision.

But with the current COP, no illusions should be nourished. This is the first.

And the second-what other arguments, taking into account the unanimous introduction of the project by representatives of all the Duma factions, are needed adherents of “smart voting” so that they realize that nothing will change from the mechanical replacement of a united Russia with a communist, Zhirinovtsa or Mironovtsa-Prilepin?

The submitted draft law suggests that a citizen involved in the activities of a public or religious association will not be able to elect into the State Duma, another organization in respect of which the court decision on the liquidation or prohibition of the activity of an extremist or terrorist organization has entered into legal force. ”

The restriction applies to persons who were “who were the founder, a member of the collegial governing body, the head, deputy head, the head of the structural unit, the deputy head of the structural unit, the member, participant, the employee of the extremist or terrorist organization or other person involved in the activities of such organizations (provided by funds, property, organizational and methodological, advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory or advisory, consulting or advisory consulting or advisory. other assistance in order to carry out appropriate activities). ”

The “leadership” is amazed in rights if he held these positions at any time before the court decision on the liquidation or prohibition of the organization, and within five years after the court decision cannot run for the State Duma.

Simple workers and other “involved” are affected in rights if they “guilty” during the year before the ban, and within three years after the court decision cannot run to parliament.

As already mentioned, giving reverse strength to defeat in electoral rights is a violation of the fundamental principles of law: when committing any action, a citizen should always be able, based on applicable laws, to foresee his legal consequences. And to clearly understand what actions are criminal and entailing punishment. And if the state gives reverse power to the repressive law, declaring the crime that at the time of its commission was not such - it ceases to be legal and becomes the state of “concepts”.

Yes, the introduction of this law is directly related to the process that has begun to recognize foreign agents and “extremist” organizations of the Fund for Combating Navalny’s corruption and the desire to bring all who are associated with it outside the legal political process.

Indeed, according to the logic of the law introduced, “deprivation” will be declared not only those who worked in these structures, but also those who have sacrificed the FBK at least the ruble over the past year.

But nothing will hinder-what I wrote about not so long ago in the “new”-and with the same “legal” (and actually legally absurd) grounds to declare any legal opposition party or socio-political organization in the same way as extremists.

It will be enough that it allows herself to criticize power, and - oh horror! - To declare that he wants to change her in the elections.

This, according to the Kremlin’s logic, is “extremism”.

After that, new hundreds of thousands and millions of citizens - members and supporters of these organizations will fall into the category of “deprived”.

In the “set” with the laws made by the same authors on the expansion of the category of “undesirable organizations” and simplifying the prosecution of their members to criminal liability, a new community of people is gradually being created - “undesirable citizens of the Russian Federation”.

Although, in fact, “unwanted” should be declared exactly those who introduce such laws, and those who determine such a state policy in which any opposition activity is criminalized and any critic of the state can be declared a criminal.

This is no longer an authoritarian regime (and not “hybrid”, as Ekaterina Shulman loves to reassure the public).

What we see are signs of a totalitarian regime, with a monopoly on the power and a monopoly of one party and ideology, preserved with the help of repressive bodies: any disagreement is not an opponent with whom it is necessary to argue and take into account his opinion, but an enemy and a criminal who is destroyed if he does not give up.

Of course, you can set (and legally solve) the task of mass elimination from the policy of all "disagreements", which include more and more active citizens. But this is the path to an absolute dead end. And not a single totalitarian system that tried in this way to ensure eternal existence, in the end, did not escape collapse. And very often, the collapse came much faster than his “unknown fathers” thought (recalling the “inhabited island of the Strugatsky), no matter how powerful their radiation towers were ...

Last. We very often hear that “there are no elections” that “the power in the elections will not change” and that going to the elections is useless.

So, the elections are important. If this was not so, the Kremlin would not fight so fiercely with any real political opposition and would not initiate laws one after another that limit the exercise of electoral rights and cut off the most dangerous competitors from the elections. This happens precisely because the elections - even those that they are now - is really afraid of the authorities. And that's why he tries to create a sense of “learned helplessness” in citizens, convincing them that everything is a foregone conclusion.

It is not all a foregone conclusion: the possibility of any imperious lawlessness is inversely proportional to the power of civil resistance.