‘For Putin, Russian Constitution is Something Like the CPSU Program,’ Pastukhov Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, March 3 – Many people have difficulty distinguishing between a constitution and individual laws, failing to recognize that the former represents a framework within which the latter can arise and function by defining the precise functions of different parts of the government, their interrelationships, and what each can and cannot do.

            But Vladimir Putin, London-based Russian analyst Vladimir Pastukhov suggests, has another problem. For him, the Russian constitution is not a framework within which the state must function but rather “something like the CPSU program,” a constantly changing indication of political intent (mbk-news.appspot.com/sences/dlya-putina-vrode-programmy-kpss/).

            “However strange it may be,” Pastukhv says, “Putin in the amendments to the amendments revealed much more than he did in his project as initially announced. It has become obvious that he does not understand what a Constitution is and does not understand it as a legal act.  For him, this is something like a party program” with “false or real ‘goals and tasks.’”

            The Kremlin leader has already gotten what he needs. What matters is that the population is pleased and impressed. And that is why he may be quite willing to insert the word “God” in the document so that “in 2030, the state-forming Russian people thanks to God will live under communism.”

            The danger f some proposed changes, such as the ban on gay marriages, is clear because they attack fundamental rights however much they may be attractive to the Russian population, Pastukhov continues. But the real danger of most is that “it is completely impossible to predict how they will be interpreted or put into practice.”

            Making reference to God “will not harm anyone,” he suggests, “if there is no effort” to enforce something about it; and referring to Russians as “a state-forming people” won’t either until someone tries to insist that this gives Russians special rights relative to the non-Russians in the population.

            But the probability that both the one and the other will be used in a discriminatory fashion is “extremely high,” and therefore the inclusion of either represents a danger not only to the meaning of the document as a whole – they touch on the first two portions of the document which aren’t to be changed except by extraordinary measures – but also to society.

             As far as gay marriages are concerned, the Russian analyst says, he does not see that they represent a threat to the constitutional bases of Russian statehood. “But possibly, Russian society hasn’t matured to the point that it is prepared to decide to recognize single-sex marriages. In this case, the best decision would be to leave the question open” rather than set it in the Constitution.

            However, if one considers the constitution to be a program rather than a basic law, as Putin appears to do, then including all these things may not matter that much or that long however noxious they are to many. After all, Pastukhov suggests, a new constitution or party program can always be adopted later.