Made by the head of the CEC of Russia E. A. Pamfilova, the idea of citizens ‘ electoral rights in the election duty in the case of legislative implementation is very promising and give rise to numerous consequences of the decision. Confused by the reasoning: to get people to come to the polls, according to E. A. Pamfilova, the need to justify those large financial costs borne by the state for the holding of elections.
photo: Natalia Muslinkina
In our opinion, there is another, equally important reason: to demand from the authorities of the results and to draw positions of authority of persons responsible have a moral and legal right of citizens who participated in the choice — the political party of the President, the head of the municipality… If the man did not come to the polls — is it a kind of “choice”, but to demand from the government something, in our opinion, the frustrated voters can not. The suggestion of E. A. Pamfilova in a timely manner: perhaps even five years ago it would have been before him to do, and in five years it may be later.
Historically introduced as a means of dealing with the absenteeism of voters, compulsory voting ensures high voter turnout and as a result virtually eliminates the unproductive outcome of the electoral process. However, such measures have many side effects:
— for failing to appear for such binding election citizen based on the experience of foreign countries, such as Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Cyprus, Ecuador, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Uruguay, Singapore and even North Korea) faces a fine. Imagine the situation when a Russian citizen went to the polls and was not fined. He has two options: to remain silent, knowing that if the fine is not imposed, it is likely that his voice someone is using, or go out and swing right, figuring out the fact of illegal use of the Bulletin, but in this case he gets on fine because the polling station was not;
— forcing voter to vote will inevitably cause the extinction of the qualitative interest of the voter to the election that casts doubt on the sincerity and validity of his will. In other words, the number of voters will increase and their quality (intelligent, informed choice) will crash;
— so, in the case of realization of the idea E. A. Pamfilova citizens who previously did not go to the polls, showing the power of their negative or indifferent attitude to it, will now be required to do, in fact, unpredictable choice (happiness vs. desire).
Of course, now this will sound provocative, but after some time must come the understanding that the constitutional right (in the future — the duty) to choose should not belong to all the citizens of Russia. The fact that many citizens voluntarily renounced (yet) the right to elect, — present reality and statistics. And, as a rule, refused — uneducated or simply indifferent to politics part of society.
Why not think through while of a new legal instrument — educational qualifications? Vote consciously can and should people with higher education (qualitative decline of which is a separate issue). Higher education gives a person the system of values, the ability to perceive and analyze information, to think and to draw conclusions.
Of course, many will object to. This is normal: new legal instruments for the development of democracy will have to get used to. Optionally lead a cynical example: if a person in the Russian hinterland to offer for a vote at the polling station 5 thousand rubles., which will he choose?
If educational level might seem unfair idea, what would be unfair in giving man a choice: get 5 thousand rubles. (in fact — to sell their votes) and not go to the polls or to go and exercise their passive electoral right and duty to yourself, your family and country?
This all — new technology electoral democracy, which is lacking in Russia.
GRUDTSYNA Lyudmila, doctor of legal Sciences, Professor, expert of the RAS