Izvestiya (News), August 8, 1996
Ernest Ametistov, Justice of the Russian Federation Constitutional Court:
Freedom Should Have Strong Fists
The outcome of presidential elections of July 3 is not the first triumph of Russian freedom. It won on August 21, 1991 and on April 25, 1993 and on October 4, 1993. And each time the fruits of these victories vanished in no time and the country would once again be threatened by the ghost of totalitarianism.
This time it is our duty to establish such guarantees of democracy and freedom under which all subsequent changes and elections to top positions in the country, be it presidential, parliament or municipal, would only mean a change of personalities or an amendment (it may even be a serious one!) of the socio-economic or political course. But there should never again be a threat of great upheavals to the social and political system that has been chosen by the people of Russia.
Such guarantees can only be created under one indispensable condition: a strict observance of the current Constitution, laws and court decisions.
There is Such a Party
This party is called the communist party of the Russian Federation. Four years ago today's leaders of this party came to the RF Constitutional Court and spent almost half a year there (excluding weekends and holidays). During that time they assured the justices that the President of the RF was absolutely wrong by issuing a number of decrees in 1991 that suspended and later prohibited the activity of the communist party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), as well as the communist party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) which was part of the former one. They insisted that these decrees were unconstitutional and that today's communists cannot be held responsible for the numerous crimes of their older comrades although, at the same time, they do not reject this heroic past of their party. The communists also spoke about their respect for the decisions of the Constitutional Court, the Constitution and the country's laws.
The Constitutional Court has confirmed, in the main, the correspondence of three presidential decrees to the Constitution. It ruled that in the course of decades "the top leaders of the communist party initiated a policy of repression towards millions of soviet people which was implemented by the local communist party organizations" and "that the top echelon of the communist party assumed the role of governing bodies thus preventing the normal functioning of the country's constitutional bodies of power" and that "the CPSU played a role that contradicted the principles of a constitutional system."
The Constitutional Court concluded that the "unconstitutional activities of the leading bodies of the communist parties of the Soviet Union and the RSFSR (Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic, former name of the Russian Federation) ruled out the possibility of their restoration in their previous form. The members of the CP of the RSFSR only have the right to found a new party and this must be done in full conformity with the current Constitution and the laws of the Russian Federation and on equal conditions with other parties."
At the same time, the Court acknowledged that communist party primary territorial organizations have the right to continue their existence. Since these organizations were formed on the basis of a territorial principle they had preserved their public nature and did not replace state bodies.
This meant that communists, members of such primary territorial organizations, had the right to form a political party after a relevant decision by a founding conference. This way a new communist party could be founded in accordance with the Constitutional and the country's legislation.
However, instead of holding a founding conference of primary territorial organizations, in February 1993 the 2nd extraordinary congress of the CPRF was held which declared "the restoration of the party of Russian communists", which actually meant the restoration of the former CP RSFSR which was formed in the summer of 1990 at its 1st congress. The charter that was approved by this congress reads, in part: "The communist party of the RSFSR shall resume (!) its activity and form an independent communist part of the Russian Federation (CPRF).
However, the point here is not in the names of congresses and party organizations, but the fact of the restoration of the communist party. Without analyzing many other aspects of its program and practical activity we shall discuss only one: its traditional tendency to penetrate and control government bodies and to merge with them has not only been preserved, but is actively developing.
There are a lot of such examples: starting from the State Duma (Parliament) which has been turned into the election HQ of the CPRF and ending with the appearance of thousands of primary communist party organizations at offices, factories and educational establishments. What other party in Russia has similar primary organizations? And what about the equal conditions with other parties specified in the decisions of the Constitutional Court in regard to the case of the CPSU and CPRF?
We must admit that the decision of the Constitutional Court has not been fulfilled and is continuing to be grossly violated by CPRF apparatchiks. And this has been taking place in the course of four years while the authorities are looking the other way.
Several Suggestions to the Victors
Now is a good time to recall this situation. This would be especially useful for the Ministry of Justice. Since, according to Presidential Decree of May 2, 1996 "On measures directed toward the development of the system of justice in the Russian Federation" the ministry is provided with additional powers in regard to the issue we are discussing. The Ministry of Justice now has the right to request information from federal bodies of executive power concerning the activities of public organizations. This is a good chance to find out how many primary communist party organizations are functioning at factories and in offices. The Ministry of Justice may also be granted the right to hold inquests on cases connected with a non-fulfillment of a court decision. I, as a justice of the Constitutional Court who took part in making the decision on the case of the communist party, would very much want the case on the non-fulfillment of this decision to become the first such case of the Ministry of Justice.
Cadres Decide Everything
This is the famous phrase of comrade Stalin, the beloved leader of Russian communists,. And he was, undoubtedly, right for he was an expert in appointing cadres and, especially, in replacing them.
When the democrats won for the first time in Russia in August 1991 they decided not to resort to mass purges of the state machine, since they believed that this might increase social tension in the country. And they were right, since by that time Russia had exhausted all its limits for revolutions and social turmoil.
As a result, cadres were only replaced on the very top, while the middle and lower levels of power are still occupied by the former communist party/soviet nomenclature. First they hid their hatred for everything that the new democratic Russia had brought with it, but now they are coming out in the open. These people are the main supporters of the evolving opposition of all colorings - red, brown, etc., - because they have an excellent possibility to deteriorate the system from inside.
This gives rise to the following question: how can these people foster the development of a democratic state, something which they are supposed to do as part of their official duties?
Here is an answer. I am holding a small book entitled "The Prosecutor's Office and the Issue of Stirring Up National Discord and Violence. 1990-1994. A Collection of Documents". This is the sad story of a very persistent citizen who attempted to bring a suite against fascist publications which grossly violated the Constitution and the Criminal Code. I have read these articles and can attest that they would be envied by Hitler's chief propagandist Rosenberg.
The above mentioned citizen spent four year corresponding with prosecutor's offices of various levels, starting from local and ending by the General Prosecutor's Office. All was in vain, except for the humiliating replies he had been receiving all that time and which said that either the publishers were not found or there was an absence of corpus delicti in their actions.
Here is an example from another walk of life. For the past several years the country is being shaken by the problem of salary and pension arrears which has taken the shape of a national disaster. During the pre-election months and weeks all of us had witnessed the gigantic efforts of the government to solve this problem. And suddenly many curious details were revealed which, frankly speaking, could have become known long before: that salaries and pensions were delayed or not paid not because of the failure of the federal government to do so, but because the tremendous funds allocated by the federal government were placed by the local authorities on accounts in private banks at large interest rates. That the "red" directors of plants and factories paid themselves many-million salaries and set the hungry workers against Moscow. This was done not only in pursuit of selfish ends, but of political ones as well.
When government workers deliberately refuse to fulfil their duties and consciously cause damage to the state which pays them their salaries, this is called sabotage in political terminology and abuse of power in legal terminology (Article 285 of the new Criminal Code). But when such a phenomenon becomes a mass occurrence, which was especially obvious in the course of presidential elections, justice cannot reach everyone. Should people be driven to a situation of criminal offense? Perhaps some sort of preventative measures should be taken? God forbid, I've never meant purges. I am for an active cadre policy based on the law.
I am referring to the law "On the basics of government service in the Russian Federation" which enumerates the responsibilities of a government worker. The first responsibility is "to ensure the support of the constitutional order and the observance of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the fulfillment of federal and regional laws, including those that regulate the competence of the government worker". The limitations established by the law do not allow a government worker to "use his or her official position in the interests of political parties or public and religious organizations for advocating his or her attitude towards these parties and organizations". In the case of a failure to observe these and other responsibilities and limitations a government worker may be dismissed on the initiative of the head of a state body. This law is still in the waking-up stage, although by now it should be in full force.
From the Frying Pan into the Fire
From the very first days following the August victory the democratic and independent media launched an unprecedented campaign of criticism of the new state power. These democratic publications acted with good intentions and most of their criticism was right.
If we add to this the unruly propaganda of the opposing media which defamed the authorities proceeding from absolutely contrary political goals, we will see that this had lead to a quite curious effect.
Firstly, the mass media reality began to differ from objective reality to the same degree as it differed from objective reality during Soviet times, but this time the other way round. And if for some reason you had to spend a week at home only watching television and reading the press, by the end of this week you did not want to live anymore. Such a suicidal mood disappeared only when you went outside into the street and noted with surprise that the shops were full of goods, the streets were strangely clean, new houses were built everywhere, old mansions and churches were restored and the streets were full of handsome, happy and well-dressed people instead of only the homeless and beggars.
Secondly, the negative stereotype of the surrounding world was so aggressively instilled in the mind of the average citizen, that even owing a two-story dacha in the suburbs and a new Zhiguily car in his garage, when asked the simple question "How is life?" he would answer "Down with Yeltsin's gang!"
During the past five years a fierce battle for the minds and souls of the people has been raging in the country. And the government almost lost this battle. It only woke up on the eve of the parliamentary and presidential elections and, finally, has waged a counterattack.
The time has also come to solve the issue of totalitarian symbolism. The Constitution of the Russian Federation reads in part: "No ideology may be established as a state ideology or as an obligatory ideology", but the symbols of the former state's ideology pursue us at every turn. I refuse to understand why on the streets of every city and in government offices and community centers we must constantly encounter the sculptured figure of the bloody murderer personally responsible for the deaths and torture of thousands and thousands of people.
Proceeding from the constitutional principle of ideological versatility there are two ways of solving this problem. First, next to each monument to comrade Lenin a monument to the victims of comrade Lenin should be erected, which will be quite a burden on the not very plentiful state budget. The second way is more economical: to organize a special ceremony at which all these masterpieces together with the mummy of the beloved teacher and leader would be presented to his spiritual successors in the person of the CPRF. This party will preserve them in special communist reservations at its own cost.
Russia is going through an extremely difficult period of transition. The struggle between slavery and freedom is constantly unfolding in the minds of its citizens. This struggle cannot be lost. Freedom should have strong fists.
