Go to ...

The Newspapers

Gathering and spreading news from various Russian Newspapers

The Newspapers on Google+The Newspapers on LinkedInRSS Feed

Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Members gather to deprive “disloyal” Russians citizenship


June 22, the state Duma intends to approve in the second and third reading the so-called “anti-terrorist package”. If the third reading will take, essentially it does not change: the package will become law before the end of the last session of this convocation, on June 24, and will come into force on 20 July 2016.

In one of the included in the package of bills proposed unprecedented in post-Soviet Russia the deprivation of nationality.


photo: Alex geldings

In fact, article 6 of the Constitution, which has not been canceled yet, clearly says: “the citizen of the Russian Federation may not be deprived of his citizenship or the right to change it”, that does not deprive the citizen the right to refuse Russian passports voluntarily. And the state, as follows from the law “On citizenship of the Russian Federation” the citizen has the right to deprive citizenship to refuse, if he has outstanding obligations to Russia, accused of committing criminal offences within the country or convicted for it. To cancel the decision on assignment of citizenship can be President – if you receive this citizenship on the basis of forged documents.

To circumvent unconditional constitutional ban, was coined by the Jesuit formula. The law “On citizenship…” will be a new article entitled “the renunciation of citizenship in the form of the action (loss of citizenship of the Russian Federation as a result of the actual action)”: she announces “voluntarily released from citizenship of the Russian Federation” the person who has committed a terrorist offence defined by the articles of the Penal code, is convicted by the court and the sentence came into legal force.

But we are more interested in the second group of “persons” who may suddenly lose their citizenship of the Russian Federation – about them “finished” for the second reading: it entered military service or work in the security organs, intelligence agencies, law enforcement or the courts of any foreign state, and “without the consent of the competent authorities of the Russian Federation” operating in international organizations (associations), in which Russia is not involved”.

To save from loss of citizenship of the Russian Federation can only have no received not the work of another nationality – or “guarantees” of its acquisition.

There is a minimum of a few questions, the answers to which are not.

Is it all Russians living in other countries with residence permit? In other words, whether the residence permit the guarantee of acquisition of another citizenship, and if not, what is she?

Is this the norm, for example, many of the immigrants in Israel and their children? They, along with Israeli and Russian citizenship remains, and military duty in this country is universal, and for both men and women.

How and who will track “disloyal” employment abroad? Yes, and whether it can reliably track?

How will be issued for the deprivation of “disloyal” citizenship? Usually all of these decisions are made out by decrees of the President of the Russian Federation.

Whether to notify the “disenfranchised” that they are no longer Russians, and how?

What international organizations? Who are the international non-governmental organizations, as suggested by some experts? Or we are talking about international organizations like the EU, NATO or OPEC?

Enough to lose Russian citizenship, become a lady at court in Kazakhstan, a Secretary in the headquarters of NATO to patrol officers or in Tallinn?

And most importantly, how did all it could to help in the fight against terrorism?

Responses to the document, which the deputies of the state Duma here-here will accept, no. But they will accept.

On June 20 a meeting of the relevant Committee for security and combating corruption, which was responsible for drafting the bill, these natural questions none of the deputies asked – before the meeting the documents they just saw.

21 Jun attempts to “MK” to obtain clarification from Irina Spring (“ER”), one of the official sponsors of the package and the amendments that could potentially touch the lives of tens of thousands of compatriots living beyond the borders of the Russian Federation (and they, by the way, more voters), was not a success: Ms. Spring was very busy, promising to explain everything later.

Several other deputies interviewed knew less journalists: they were sure that it still goes on “terrorists”, and deprivation of citizenship threatens only those who purchased it as a second.

Adopted in the first reading version is indeed intended to deprive of citizenship recognized by the court of terrorists acquiring Russian citizenship as a second, but the second reading, the norm has become UNIVERSAL, because the same article 6 of the Constitution declares the Russian citizenship is “uniform and equal irrespective of the grounds of acquisition”, and the guest worker from Tajikistan, who received a Russian passport in 40 years and a native Russian born, five generations of which have lived in Ryazan, as Russian citizens are equal.

And the Committee on constitutional legislation which usually handles all bills related to amendments to the law “On RF citizenship”, but seems to have been excluded from the process of approvals, the wording about the “onboard” is not there also to comment failed…

The deputies are busy preparing for the elections, they have a “demobilization”, on June 22 the guests will come, the President will say kind words about constructive legislative work.

MPs, by and large, no longer care.

In the conclusion of Legal Department of the state Duma says that the provision of the bill allowing for the termination of citizenship of the Russian Federation without the free will of the citizen, “does not meet the principle of proportionality restrictions of constitutional rights under Federal law. The Duma lawyers refer to the constitutional Court ruling of 2005, which States that “in cases where the Federal legislator establishes restrictions of constitutional rights and freedoms… he may not exercise such regulation that would infringe on the very essence of a right, and would lead to the loss of their real content.”

But what is a humble opinion against the indifference of deputies and the will of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, in the depths of which was written “anti-terrorist” package?

Related posts:
The Kremlin is open to all, and under the Windows of Putin put an end
Sergei Ryazansky: happy to take the experience of the pioneer organization
Viktor Uspaskich: my nationality and popularity
The Kremlin and the senators explained the background of the plutonium conflict with the United Stat...

Recommended

More Stories From Politics