Putin's reforms: Authoritarianism or protection of democracy? JP/7/RIA

Putin's reforms: Authoritarianism or protection of democracy?

Dmitry Rogozin RIA Novosti Moscow

Russia has been discussing the political reforms proposed by President Vladimir Putin for four months now. Putin has been accused of authoritarianism, of suppressing democracy and reviving the grim era of communist rule.

What is the president proposing?

He has proposed that governors be elected by the legislative assemblies of Federation entities upon the president's recommendation. The regional oligarchic clans and economic elite denounced the idea as undemocratic. The regional authorities are formed now predominantly on behalf of this narrow group of citizens.

In a democratic society, the authorities should above all serve the interests of broad sections of the population and not exclusively the interests of big business, mostly created in the questionable and frequently criminal privatization drive of the mid-1990s. The elected authorities in several Federation members have established a nearly absolutist regime, which clamps down on opposition political parties and media freedom.

This is particularly true of the so-called national republics, where the titular nation seldom accounts for half of the population. In the 1990s, these territories adopted their own laws that sometimes overruled federal ones, including with regard to civil rights. Such liberal values as press freedom and public organizations suffered the most in these regions.

However, clearly only compliance with all federal laws throughout the territory of Russia can guarantee real equality for citizens irrespective of their ethnic and social origin. Only respect for federal laws can ensure an effective struggle against terrorism, crime and corruption, the real development of institutions of civil society, and media freedom.

Will appointed governors solve these problems? The effect will not be immediate, but new conditions will be created where the responsibility of each leader for adopted and implemented decisions will become clear.

The proportionate representation principle of elections to the State Duma and regional legislative assemblies (Putin's second proposal) will preclude the election of independent candidates to the legislative branch. I have been elected three times in a single-mandate district and can tell you that the voice of independent deputies is lost in the polemics of powerful factions. The so-called independent deputies in the State Duma are doomed to being dependent on somebody. Their freedom is easily sacrificed when factions lobby for federal investment programs for their regions. According to the new rules, the Duma will focus on lawmaking based on a competition of political views.

The interests of territories in the Federal Assembly can be represented by the upper house, the Federation Council, which is empowered to do so by the Constitution. The president has proposed forming the house from governors and heads of regional legislative assemblies. But we, an opposition party, believe that it would be better to elect members of the Federation Council by direct vote. In this case, the new model of Russia's political system will be logically complete.

One more proposal made by the president is based on the joint initiative of the State Duma deputies who represented the party of power and the opposition. It entails enlarging and strengthening political parties and hence reducing their number. There are over 40 political parties in Russia, but many of them have no influence on social and political life. Yet they take part in elections, confusing the voters, many of whom cannot make a conscious choice from the list of fifty parties and organizations.

I believe that there should be no more than six parties in parliament. The experience of developed democracies shows that there cannot be dozens of real political parties. The Russian authorities should complete the formation of a healthy and strong multiparty system. We need civilized and responsible political parties capable of forming shadow cabinets, suggesting alternative opinions about the authorities' projects, and ready to control the work of law enforcement and security structures effectively. These parties should work for the national interests of the country and advance realistic and appropriate proposals.

The law on political parties must guarantee that society will have the possibility to enter a thorough discussion of outstanding and strategic issues in the country's life. These discussions should be open to all concerned citizens, and all political parties (or at least those represented in the parliament) must have equal access to the press, especially electronic media.

We, representatives of the opposition, will only support the president's initiative if the above conditions are met.

The writer is leader of the political party Rodina (Homeland).