#11 - JRL 9095 - JRL Home
RIA Novosti
March 17, 2005
KREMLIN OPPOSES CHANGES TO CONSTITUTION
MOSCOW, (RIA Novosti political commentator Yuri Filippov)

At a recent meeting with foreign reporters, Igor Shuvalov, a presidential aide, flatly rejected an idea to transform Russia into a parliamentary republic. "The Constitution will not be changed, and Russia will remain a presidential republic. The prime minister will receive no additional powers, and we will not adopt a parliamentary system of government," Shuvalov said. According to him, the idea of a parliamentary republic in Russia will not become a reality "under any circumstances," and discussions on the issue are all far-fetched.

Shuvalov's message is clear. The Kremlin will not initiate any constitutional amendments on redistributing powers at the federal level, and will not support them if they come from anyone else. This means that such amendments will not be passed given the current alignment in parliament.

In the past few years, Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said he is against the idea of a parliamentary republic and constitutional amendments. "It is dangerous for Russia to be anything but a presidential republic," he said, for example, at a Kremlin press conference on June 20, 2003, which was attended by over 700 Russian and foreign reporters. Putin spoke about this on other occasions, such as at celebrations marking the anniversary of the Russian Constitution and in interviews with foreign correspondents.

However, there are some questions that politicians in various countries are always confronted with. How serious is the threat of neo-Nazi revenge in Germany? Is not it time to abolish the monarchy in Great Britain? Are racial and ethnic tensions threatening America's existence? Although negative answers seem most natural, these questions do exist and are regularly asked.

And there must be a reason for this.

The question about the prospects of a parliamentary republic in Russia is connected with succession and the stability of political power in the country. Changes at the top of the political Olympus have often led to drastic and unpredictable twists. The state, and with it state policy, radically changed under Gorbachev, Yeltsin and has now done so in part under Putin. Hence the pressing question: is not it easier to change laws in advance to prevent any serious shifts in policy?

The people posing this question apparently expect another maneuver from Putin - the introduction of constitutional amendments making the presidential post formal and transferring the main authority to a prime minister approved by parliament. Then Putin, whose term expires in spring 2008, could become prime minister and continue his policy in his new post.

The mistake is that stability of the political system that Putin has been establishing for five years now (and that he is apparently resolved to consolidate) does not depend so much on the president but rather on the constitutional institution of the presidency. For Putin, changing the priorities and shifting the accents from the institution to the individual would mean abandoning all his recent key achievements in state development.

"The Russian Federation is a complex, multi-ethnic and multi-faith country," Putin kept saying during his first term. According to him, this fundamental fact breeds the need for strong presidential power in Russia - the only guarantor of national unity. The president should be elected by the people and should be above the government, parliament and regional governments that cannot be the key factors of its unity as such.

Putin has been developing this system of presidential power. The inherent elements of this system, which the terrorist threat among other things necessitated, are the new procedure of electing governors (while strengthening the federal center's influence) and the transition to a proportionate system for State Duma elections, which is designed to bolster nationwide parties.

The president plays a key role in this system of power. It is unclear how the development of this system can be continued (it has not been completed yet), while considering its abolishment and replacement.

As for the political succession, Putin has a tacit right here, which is not laid down in legislation or the Constitution. He is fully and informally entitled to propose and support a candidate he would like to see as his successor at the upcoming elections. Putin has already stated that he would not mind applying this right. This is logical, considering what he has done so far.

Perhaps, Igor Shuvalov was quite surprised by the foreign journalist's hackneyed question about the parliamentary republic and constitutional amendments. But it is part of a politician's job to say the same things once and again.

Putin can answer the question about his political future without any outside help. And the answer will evidently be rational and well judged.