From zero to one hundred – against human rights in record time
So the State Duma approved the “now complete” constitutional amendment law the very next day, the Council of the Federation the same day, and the 85 regional parliaments ?Three days later, the Constitutional Court “by chance without its critical constitutional judge Konstantin Aranovsky, excused by illness” declared the legality of the complete package, and only two days later “by chance on the sixth anniversary of the repatriation of Crimea”, the Russian president put his signature on the glorious document. What fundamental change has the constitutional amendment now brought about after almost a thousand proposed amendments and around 100 overhauls of old laws? The problem is that it does not bring any visible changes, but rather that it has tightened the screws in the state apparatus that Putin skilfully turned over the many years of his reign. Apart from codifying the above-mentioned trigger points of Russian society – fear of God, marriage between man and woman, minimum wage, and pension adjustment – the constitutional amendment serves above all to legitimately strengthen the position of the president, who, with the amendments, can appoint and dismiss pretty much all important holders of a state office. It also strengthens Russian statehood, both territorially and legally. The Crimea will then remain officially and constitutionally part of the Russian Federation and national law will in future take precedence over international law. What the USA reserves for itself as a world power, Russia may do the same as well. What does a world power care about the verdicts of a European Court about Human Rights?
Is Corona Putin’s new coup d’état putting a spoke in the wheel?
So is Putin’s autocratic rule now finally constitutionally dry? No, not yet. It was Putin himself who planned the applause of the audience in this scenario: the “Yes” from the population in a referendum on 22 April. But here, he had made the calculation without the host Covid-19 virus. In other words, the vote had to be postponed to an unknown time. That time could become a significant factor. After the time of ambush, empathy through interactive theater, towards time for questions, time for doubts, time for counter-arguments, time for consolidation of democratic forces. Time to say „no“ to curtailing your fundamental rights and freedoms.
– PhD Carmen Krusch-Grün, ISHR-Germany –