Paul
Goble
Staunton, October 23 – On Friday,
the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) handed down a
decision that may trigger what challenges Moscow’s view of the country and that
many Russians and non-Russians are likely to see as ushering in a new parade of
sovereignties by the non-Russian republics of the Russian Federation.
The court declared that “all the
territory of Yakutia is the historical motherland of the Yakut people,” a
finding that echoes for that enormous republic in the Russian Far East calls
among Russians for a ‘Russia for the [ethnic] Russians” (sakhalife.ru/konstitucionnyiy-sud-vsya-territoriya-yakutii-eto-istoricheskaya-rodina-yakutskogo-naroda/).
The decision came about in the
following way: Mikhail Gabyshev, a
deputy in the republic’s parliament, asked the court to clarify the meaning of Article
42 of the republic constitution in which “the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia)
guarantees the preservation and re birth of the indigenous peoples [of the
republic] as well as of Russians and other older residents who respect the
traditions, culture and customs of the native peoples” of the republic.
In an appeal to the republic’s
constitutional court, Gabyshev said that these “constitutional norms are being
interpreted in various ways” and that this has limited the development of the republic’s
legislation to protect the native population.
He asked the court to clarify matters.
The court held a hearing on his
request on October 12 and nine days later issued its explanation. The justices declared the following:
·
First,
the court declared that the first paragraph of Article 42 of the republic’s
constitution legally means “the recognition of the territory of Yakutia as the native
land and historical motherland of the Yakut people, the source of its economic well-being,
its unique cultural and linguistic identity” as a legal structure within the
Russian state.
·
Second,
the justices held that the second paragraph of Article 42 should be understood
as providing the foundation for the protection of “the complete set of natural
collective rights of the indigenous people of Yakutia” on the territory of the
Republic of Sakha (Yakutia)” and provides for the maintenance of “its
territorial unity, socio-economic, state-legal, national-cultural and
linguistic identity.”
·
Third,
the justices held that the entire article is intended to “guarantee the preservation
and rebirth of the indigenous peoples of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) which
involves all the actions taken by the organs of state power of the Republic of
Sakha (Yakutia) directed at the realization of these goals under conditions of the
observation of the principle of constitutional-legal equality and with regard
to the numerically small indigenous peoples on the basis of the possibility of
legally establishing preferential rights for their preservation and
development.”
·
And
fourth, the justices said that Article 42 must be read as requiring the
development of such measures for the numerically small indigenous peoples of the
North and the defense and securing of their inalienable rights.” And they specified that this ruling was
obligatory for all state agencies in the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia).
At the very least, this decision puts the
republic authorities on a collision course with Moscow and with Russian firms
and organizations which in recent years have run roughshod over the rights of
the numerically small indigenous populations of the Russian Far North. But its
ultimate consequences are likely to be far larger.
Other non-Russian republics inside the
borders of the Russian Federation are likely to be inspired by this in two
ways. On the one hand, officials in them will be under some pressure from their
populations to follow suit. And on the other,
activists will see that at least in principle, they can make use of the courts
to achieve their ends.
No comments:
Post a Comment