Military Review

Legal facts of the occupation

36



We, the multinational people of the Russian Federation, united by common destiny on our land, affirming human rights and freedoms, civil peace and harmony, preserving the historically formed state unity, proceeding from the generally recognized principles of equality and self-determination of peoples, honoring the memory of ancestors who gave us love and respect for Fatherland, faith in good and justice, reviving the sovereign statehood of Russia and affirming the inviolability of its democratic basis, striving to ensure the well-being and prosperity of Russia , proceeding from the responsibility for our Motherland before present and future generations, conscious of ourselves as a part of the world community, we accept the CONSTITUTION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

Here are considered the most glaring, in terms of the sovereignty of the state and common sense, articles of the Constitution.

Chapter 1. Fundamentals of the constitutional system (Art. 1-16)

Article 2

Man, his rights and freedoms are the highest value. The recognition, observance and protection of the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen is the duty of the state.

The article gives a list of quite ephemeral higher state values ​​- “a person, his rights and freedoms”. There is no place in this value series either for Russia or for the sovereignty of the Russian state, family, national and cultural traditions. The 2 article demonstrates the winged phrase of the Marquise de Pompadour “after us even a flood” (Apres nous le deluge), which became the personification of selfish aspirations and moral depravity. That is, it is precisely the freedom to be selfish and to disregard the future we defend as the highest value!

Article 5

2.Republic (state) has its own constitution and legislation. The region, region, city of federal significance, autonomous region, autonomous region has its own charter and legislation.

3. The federal structure of the Russian Federation is based on its state integrity, unity of the state power system, separation of competencies and powers between the state authorities of the Russian Federation and the state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, equality and self-determination of peoples in the Russian Federation.

Obviously, it was not necessary to write that way - “the republic (state)”, and to write about the self-determination of nations, in the first chapter of this deliberately laid mine.
For example, in the USSR Constitution, the mechanism for the exit of republics from the USSR was not described, but there were words - they have the right to exit (Constitution of the USSR 1977, Article 72)that played a role in the collapse of the USSR.

Article 6

3. A citizen of the Russian Federation may not be deprived of his citizenship or the right to change it.

That is, if a citizen engages in espionage against the state, for example, by subversive activities, and in a direct and indirect sense, commits any other crimes, it cannot be deprived of citizenship ...

Article 9

1. Land and other natural resources are used and protected in the Russian Federation as the basis of the life and activities of the peoples living in the relevant territory.

2. Land and other natural resources may be in private, state, municipal and other forms of ownership.

That is, in Russian, any resources can be in any form of ownership. The second point of this article is in discord with the first one; an individual doesn’t care about the interests of the people; private property is needed where there is a fair competition. With exclusive ownership of the resource there is no competition. Particularly outraged by the vagueness of this article - "private, state, municipal and other forms of ownership," it is very interesting to know what the constitutional writers suggested under "other forms of ownership." In the property of a foreign state or what? It turns out that this is also a “different” form of ownership.

Article 13

2. No ideology can be established as a state or mandatory.
According to wikipedia, the word “ideology” comes from the Greek word “ιδεα”, which Yandex translates as:


1.idea, thought, intent
2.concept, concept
3.presentation

and the words “λογος“, which is translated simultaneously as a “word” (utterance, speech) and a “concept” (judgment, meaning)

The word "ideal", by the way, comes from the same "ιδεα". It remains only to substitute these values ​​under the ban specified in the Constitution and everything will become clear. The 13 article prohibits the goal of the existence of the state, the concept, the vision of the future, the ideal to be pursued.

This means that in Russia anyone can engage in ideological propaganda, including representatives of foreign states, but not the Russian state itself. Nobody forbids anything, except the right to establish the state ideology as a vector of development of the country.



Article 14

1. The Russian Federation is a secular state. No religion can be established as a state or mandatory.

A clarifying addition to the 13 article, because traditional religions contain a set of values, moral norms, a certain ideal.

Article 15

4. The universally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation are an integral part of its legal system. If the international treaty of the Russian Federation establishes other rules than those provided for by law, the rules of the international treaty are applied.

For a start, let's deal with the concepts. This article identifies three concepts separated by the union “and” - generally accepted principles, norms, agreements. To learn the meaning of these concepts, turn to

Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated October 10 2003 N 5 Moscow

Courts interpret laws, having learned that courts understand concrete terms, we can understand how the system works.

The first paragraph of this decree says:

The generally recognized principles of international law should be understood as the fundamental imperative norms of international law, accepted and recognized by the international community of states as a whole, deviation from which is unacceptable.

The generally accepted norm of international law should be understood as a rule of conduct that is accepted and recognized by the international community of states as a whole as legally binding.
Pro treaties are discussed in the following paragraphs.

Vague terms, it is not clearly indicated how many countries should recognize these norms and what is meant by “the international community of states”. In essence, the “community of states” should designate all states. In fact, some countries often speculate with this term to declare rogue states to others, “excluding” them from their community, which they themselves call “world-wide”. It is very strange that such vague wording is used, given the level at which they are put in the constitution - they become part of the legal system. And in the resolution, in the same first paragraph it is written:

... human rights and freedoms in accordance with generally recognized principles and norms of international law determine the meaning, content and application of laws, the activities of the legislative and executive authorities, local self-government and are secured by justice.

It is not clear why the rights and freedoms of a citizen of Russia should be determined by some principles and norms, it is not clear which countries are recognized if the people are the source of power, because freedom is the ability to make independent decisions.

Also in the first paragraph it is written which organizations can produce these “generally accepted principles and norms”. If treaties need to be signed, ratified, then “generally accepted principles and norms” do not need this.

The content of these principles and norms of international law may be disclosed, in particular, in documents of the United Nations and its specialized agencies.

Again, vague terminology, which can be “particulars”, if they “determine the meaning, content and application of laws, the activities of the legislative and executive authorities, local self-government and are secured by justice.”

В "specialist. UN agencies enters quite a lot of organizations. One of them - IMF, Russia's influence on which is minimal. The highest governing body of the IMF is the Board of Governors. Decisions in the Board of Governors are usually taken by a simple majority (at least half) of the votes, and on important issues of operational or strategic nature, by a “special majority” (70 or 85% of the votes of the member countries respectively). Russia has only 2,64% votes in this organization. Only one country in this organization has the ability to impose a veto on strategic decisions, even if all the rest vote in favor - the United States. US have 16.85%. 100% - 16.85 = 83.15% - less than you need to make a decision. In addition, 29 member countries Economic Cooperation Organization and development have in aggregate 60,35% of votes in the IMF and can push their interests, countries BRICS have only 10% of votes in total, less than needed for the right of veto. That is, in fact, the IMF serves the United States, although the GDP balance has changed a long time ago, this balance of votes has nothing to do with the economies of the countries.

Chairman of the Investigative Committee of Russia - Alexander Ivanovich BastrykinPhD in law interview to the Russian newspaper and when speaking in
at 10, the minute said, “There is an opinion that the establishment of the primacy of international law over national law, as a basic constitutional value, was also skillfully presented to us by United States advisers as the adoption of the 1993 constitution of the year. I personally have no direct evidence of this, but some observers believe that it is not at all accidental that the report on the draft constitution, which was published in the Russian newspaper in 1993, proudly emphasized that its provisions were examined abroad. "

Further, when speaking at MGIMO - “If we turn to Article 6 of the US Constitution, we will see that, in accordance with this provision, an international treaty and federal law are equally valid.”

Further, with reference to the book "The US legal system" W. Burnham (see Biography William Burnham) said, “The American constitutional legal doctrine divides international treaties into self-enforceable and non-self-enforceable, in the case where the norms of international treaties are non-self-enforceable, they generally cannot be applied until they are implemented, that is, are introduced into national legislation, through the domestic legislative process. As a result of the functioning of the described legal mechanism, the question of the contradiction between the norms of international law and national law, as a rule, does not arise.

In the same case, when there is a competition between the norms of a self-enforceable international treaty and domestic American law, taking into account their equal legal force, the act that was issued later applies.

A contract is concluded, it becomes a federal law of the United States, and then when a problem arises with its execution, they adopt a new federal law and refer to the fact that it was adopted later, thereby they neutralize the international treatywhich somehow they don’t like. ”

Further, Bastrykin gave examples of regulating this issue in other countries - “In the US Constitution and in the acts of the constitutional level of Great Britain and a number of other countries, there is no provision for the unconditional priority of the norms of international law over national law. In the constitutions of Norway, Finland, and Sweden, it is stated that the norms of international law, in order to acquire legal force, must necessarily be implemented in national legislation, and until this point, national legislation has priority. In the constitution of Denmark, Iceland, this question is not settled at all. Of the European states, only the Netherlands, even more so than Germany, are in favor of the unconditional priority of international law over national law. Unconditional priority of national law is directly established in Brazil, in India and China ... ... in Germany, where the priority of international law is very clearly stated, it is the responsibility of the constitutional court, if in doubt, upon the application of the relevant objects of law, carefully check the not yet signed and not ratified an international treaty on the conformity of the German constitution, although you know, the Germans recorded very hard, even more rigidly than we. The Germans wrote in their constitution that the international treaty is part of the law of Germany ... ... Discover our law on the Constitutional Court. We have written so gently, carefully, in the spirit of 90's, “The COP may consider an unsigned international agreement on the subject of its compliance with the constitution, but under the condition ...”, and a bunch of conditions are called until you fulfill these conditions, forget why you even came to court . "

In addition to 15 articles, the concepts of “generally accepted principles and norms” are used in the Constitution in articles 17, 55, 63, 69.

Chapter 2. The rights and freedoms of man and citizen (Art. 17-64)

Article 29

1. Everyone is guaranteed freedom of thought and speech.

5. Freedom of the media is guaranteed. Censorship is prohibited.

Unchecked media freedom leads to the erosion of information sovereignty and the mental health of Russian society. It is the absence of state censorship in the media that makes it possible to disseminate information that is harmful to a person, his health, and promotes cruelty, violence, debauchery, and antisocial behavior. And all this threatens the foundations of statehood, traditional values, culture, stories, family and future generations. Media freedom is a ban on ensuring information security and protecting its sovereignty. A critical assessment of the outcome of this state of affairs can be seen on the YouTube channel and in the Vkontakte group of the “Teach Good” project.

Article 62

1. A citizen of the Russian Federation may have the citizenship of a foreign state (dual citizenship) in accordance with a federal law or an international treaty of the Russian Federation.
The presence, along with the Russian, of another citizenship detracts from such notions as Fatherland, Motherland, patriotism. Many states of the world, including a number of post-Soviet states, do not recognize dual citizenship.

Article 63

1. The Russian Federation provides political asylum to foreign citizens and stateless persons in accordance with generally accepted norms of international law.

Such a rule in our Constitution means that any state, supported by the UN, may demand to extradite any person who applied for political asylum in Russia, and we, according to the priority of international norms and rules over national legislation, cannot but give up.

Russia, giving political asylum to foreign citizens, should be guided not by the generally recognized norms of international law, but by Russian legislation and its own state interests. Moreover, there is no single generally accepted position on this issue in international law.

Chapter 3. Federated device (Art. 65-79)

Article 75

1. The monetary unit in the Russian Federation is the ruble. Monetary issue is carried out exclusively by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. Introduction and issue of other money in the Russian Federation are not allowed.

2. Protecting and ensuring the stability of the ruble is the main function of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, which it performs independently of other government bodies.

It is completely incomprehensible what this article does in the “Federative Order” chapter. Based on the meaning of this article and the federal law on the Central Bank, we can conclude that the Central Bank is not significantly dependent on the state and is not responsible for the result of its work. State authorities are significantly limited in influencing the policy of the Central Bank, in the Central Bank Law it is written about the accountability of the Central Bank of the State. Duma, it is written about the "interaction of the Central Bank and the government," but "interaction" is a vague wording that does not mean submission.

The Central Bank performs the main function independently of the state bodies, as stated in the article, but according to the 15 article ch.4, it obeys the “generally accepted principles and norms” that the IMF can produce, for example, because it is also special. UN agency.

Article 79


The Russian Federation may participate in interstate associations and transfer to them some of its powers in accordance with international treaties, if this does not entail restriction of human and citizen rights and freedoms and does not contradict the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation.

The article says that the Russian Federation may transfer part of its powers (for example, military) to interstate associations. Whether anybody’s rights are violated due to this or not will be decided by international bodies (see Art. 15, p. 4). It is worth noting that this situation is in the Constitution of Austria, and it appeared as a result of defeat in the First World War.

Chapter 4. President of Russian Federation (Art. 80-93)

Article 83

President of Russian Federation:

a) appoint, with the consent of the State Duma, the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation.
The president cannot independently appoint a prime minister.

d) submits to the State Duma a candidate for appointment to the post of Chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation; puts before the State Duma the issue of dismissal of the Chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

The President cannot independently appoint and dismiss the Central Bank Chairman. The Federal Law on the Central Bank in the 14 article lists the conditions under which the Chairman of the Central Bank may be dismissed.

The Chairman of the Bank of Russia may be dismissed only in the following cases:

expiration of the term of office;

the impossibility of performing official duties, confirmed by the conclusion of the state medical commission;

submitting a personal resignation letter;

the commission of a criminal offense established by a court verdict that has entered into legal force;

violations of federal laws that regulate issues related to the activities of the Bank of Russia.

From this it follows that without force majeure, the Chairman of the Central Bank can not even dismiss the State Duma, not that the President, who has the right to only offer.

e) on the proposal of the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation, appoints and dismisses the Deputy Prime Ministers of the Russian Federation, federal ministers.

In the appointment and release of the Vice-Presidents of the Government and the ministers - the President is only a “drive belt”.

f) presents to the Council of the Federation candidates for appointment to the post of judges of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation; appoints judges to other federal courts.
The president cannot independently appoint people to the above positions.

Article 84

President of Russian Federation:

c) appoints a referendum in accordance with the procedure established by federal constitutional law.

And if you look FKZ "About the Referendum of the Russian Federation"then among the initiators of the referendum there is no President in it. That is, the President does not have the right to hold a referendum.

e) addresses the Federal Assembly with annual messages on the situation in the country, on the main directions of the domestic and foreign policy of the state.

The President’s address is not a regulatory act binding on government bodies. The message is only a subjective opinion of the President, which no one is obliged to execute. That is why most often what the President talks about is silenced or soon forgotten, frankly sabotaged on all the levels of power.

Article 90

3. Decrees and orders of the President of the Russian Federation must not contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws.

According to the current Constitution, the President does not have the right to change the Constitution (see Chapter 9 of the Constitution), nor to repeal the Federal Law (see Art. 107). It follows that the president in Russia can solve little, and no matter how many bills the president submitted to the government of the Russian Federation, there is no guarantee that laws will be passed.

Chapter 5. Federal Assembly (Art. 94-109)

Article 107

1. The adopted federal law is sent to the President of the Russian Federation for five days for signing and promulgation.

2. The President of the Russian Federation, within fourteen days, signs the federal law and promulgates it.

3. If the President of the Russian Federation rejects it within fourteen days from the moment of receipt of the federal law, the State Duma and the Council of the Federation re-examine this law in accordance with the procedure established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation. If, when reconsidered, the federal law will be approved in the previously adopted version by a majority of at least two-thirds of the total number of members of the Federation Council and deputies of the State Duma, it must be signed by the President of the Russian Federation within seven days and made public.

The head of state, in fact, has no right to finally reject the law. If during the second vote, the Duma and the Federation Council approved the law - the President is obliged to sign as a notary within seven days.

Chapter 9. Constitutional amendments and revision of the Constitution (article 134-137)

Article 135

1. The provisions of the chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation cannot be revised by the Federal Assembly.

2. If the proposal to revise the provisions of chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation will be supported by three-fifths of the total number of members of the Federation Council and State Duma deputies, the Constitutional Assembly is convened in accordance with federal constitutional law.

What is interesting is not so much the sense as the fact that since 1993, the law on the Constitutional Assembly, with the help of which it is possible to lawfully change the 1, 2 and 9 chapters of the constitution, has not been adopted. 01.12.15 discussed the bill "On the Constitutional Assembly" in the State Duma, but was rejected (see report, questions).

Part of the material is taken from the article - "Constitution: the rules by which we live" http://nodnn.ru/.

Additional material: Presentation of Bagdasaryan V.E. in pdf format >>>, Video recording of Baghdasaryan V.E. performance... >>>, The Constitution of the Russian Federation as the constitution of a defeated state.
Speech by the Chairman of the RF IC, A. Bastrykin, on international law having priority over Russian legislation.

[media = tthttps: //www.youtube.com/watch? v = D8qJZS9dLfg]

On state ideology, which is absent in Russia.

Author:
Originator:
http://rusnod.ru/novosti/v-rossii/nod-rossii/yuridicheskie-fakty-okkupatsii/2016/03/07/yuridicheskie-fakty-okkupatsii_16619.html
36 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 29 November 2017 15: 34
    23
    Now we can say that the Constitution of the Russian Federation contradicts the interests of the country and the people and that it cannot be changed! But let us remember who accepted it and will make a popular decision to repeal articles violating our interests of both the country and the people of Russia! Or words that the highest is the expression of power a people or is it just another empty words? These "Western democrats" are constantly "spoiling" our heads, and what should we put up with? To change this disgrace imposed on us by the USA and the West and do it without looking back at international crooks, but to take into account the will and interests of our people and our Russia! Everything else is the chatter and betrayal of Russia!
    1. Buffet
      Buffet 29 November 2017 16: 43
      +2
      About the appointment of the Constitutional Court and judges, this is an excess. Interfering in the courts, I believe, is impossible. Will lead to usurpation.
    2. Sotskiy
      Sotskiy 29 November 2017 18: 50
      +9
      Quote: kartalovkolya
      Now we can say that the Constitution of the Russian Federation contradicts the interests of the country and the people and that it cannot be changed!

      Can).
      We need a second Khrushchev (so dearly beloved by our liberals) who would condemn and stigmatize all the crimes of the previous government. If he does not appear now, then he will appear later and will already condemn the two previous authorities.
      And you just need nothing). Recognize at the official level that in the 91 year there was a coup d'etat that brought anti-constitutional power to the USSR to power. And then ... All decisions and laws written by them automatically become illegal.
      How do you like such a democracy, and liberals? Ready to discuss the "options"?)
      PS These questions are not for "kartalovkolya".
      1. kartalovkolya
        kartalovkolya 30 November 2017 09: 51
        +1
        Thank you for asking your questions not to me, but Khrushchev’s number 2 for the country at the moment is very, very dangerous! Your truth: to declare the 91-year coup unlawful and all questions will disappear like burdocks from a dog and all business, as Yakovlev used to say in the role of Ivan the Terrible!
  2. Dimy4
    Dimy4 29 November 2017 15: 40
    +1
    A lecture on constitutional law however.
    1. Dr_engie
      Dr_engie 29 November 2017 20: 53
      +4
      Not really. Here it’s rather someone’s very subjective opinion and I don’t understand why everyone agrees with him that way.
      1. alma
        alma 30 November 2017 20: 07
        +2
        do not understand why

        I always said that our Constitution, at a minimum, requires adjustment. And at the expense of those who disagree, for example, white spots and a double interpretation are shown in the examples.
  3. andrej-shironov
    andrej-shironov 29 November 2017 15: 45
    27
    Dear author! Thank you very much for the review of the articles of the Constitution and the work on the comments. Unfortunately, the Constitution was not written by the people and it was not written for the people, but for a narrow circle of people by prior conspiracy (I write as a lawyer in one of the entities)
  4. DanSabaka
    DanSabaka 29 November 2017 16: 03
    +4
    That is, if a citizen engages in espionage against the state, for example, by subversive activities, and in a direct and indirect sense, commits any other crimes, it cannot be deprived of citizenship ...

    What do you dislike here? let him sit in OUR prison and answer according to OUR laws ....
    1. Buffet
      Buffet 29 November 2017 16: 45
      0
      This is not the point, but that he will then get out of prison and is unlikely to recover. About terrorism in general tin. As if this would already change a dead terrorist ... And if he were deprived of his family, then yes.
      1. DanSabaka
        DanSabaka 29 November 2017 17: 46
        0
        it doesn’t get better, it starts to spoil again - it sits down again .... then they and the special services to watch .... and it’s more difficult to keep track of the spoilers from far away ....
      2. would
        would 29 November 2017 18: 14
        0
        This is not the point, but that he will then get out of prison and is unlikely to recover.


        So it's the opposite, good! More precisely, it would be good if the enemy’s reconnaissance were worthless. After all, after a spy has served spying on him, there will definitely be surveillance by special services and he will definitely not be allowed into state secret, and if the enemy’s intelligence contacts this person, our counterintelligence will know about it. And this is good. But the problem is that they do not use exposed agents because they are, by definition, “under a hood”.

        Therefore, very often nobody spends and judges real spies. Because through them you can view the actions of the enemy’s intelligence and feed the misinformation to it.

        "Keep your friends close, your enemies even closer."
  5. free
    free 29 November 2017 16: 49
    +3
    No words only emotions!
  6. Lnglr
    Lnglr 29 November 2017 17: 08
    +4
    Something the number of possessed on the sidelines of power is multiplying ..... Poklonskaya, Fedorov ......
    1. Sofa General
      Sofa General 29 November 2017 17: 30
      +1
      and the same climb there ... old people - a clear example
      1. Antianglosax
        Antianglosax 29 November 2017 20: 13
        +1
        Quote: Sofa General
        and the same climb there ... old people - a clear example

        As soon as you hear disgust about Starikov, it is only in this vein, they say, an eccentric and a point. But even in the internet you will not find adequate reasoning for such nonsense. The typical approach of a ossified liberalist, in fact, others do not revile him viciously in vain!
        1. Sofa General
          Sofa General 29 November 2017 21: 17
          +2
          Want to talk about the old man? Please ...
          Let's start with the odiest pearls ...
          PGR - union of Russian citizens - union, Karl ...
          To sue Gorby ... - Victor’s son was torn off his knee from the people, oh torn off. by the people it is necessary to understand that the trial of Gorbi is the trial of Yeltsin and his protege Putin. Pure Populism
          The Englishwoman shits, but nevertheless, the old man’s daughter studied in England. Why?
          And the simplest and most important question: HOW is he going to win the election with the air defense, if, according to him, EP controls everything around.
          Explain to me...
  7. sergo1914
    sergo1914 29 November 2017 18: 25
    +4
    Where can I take my share of natural resources?
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 29 November 2017 20: 37
      +2
      Quote: sergo1914
      Where can I take my share of natural resources?

      At the reception at the GDP, personally in the hands of it, there are still a miller and Sechin will give bonuses ... laughing
  8. solzh
    solzh 29 November 2017 19: 34
    +1
    Article 29
    1. Everyone is guaranteed freedom of thought and speech.

    This article does not work in Russia.
  9. The comment was deleted.
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 29 November 2017 20: 39
      +1
      Quote: Antianglosaks
      or in the footsteps of Gaddafi, Saddam, Milosevic

      But you do not touch these, have not grown yet. Or do you want to do nationalization together with NATO?
    2. Zefr
      Zefr 30 November 2017 01: 49
      0
      From the training manual.
      1. To spoil readers' brain, choose a patriotic nickname.
      2. Scolding power emotionally and with anguish, do not spare the colors.
      3. Introduce into the consciousness of associative ranks to achieve the desired perception - say "thief", and then in the same sentence - "Gaddafi."
      All fulfilled, well done. But too primitive. Trololo
  10. MOSKVITYANIN
    MOSKVITYANIN 30 November 2017 00: 15
    +1
    Man, his rights and freedoms are the highest value. The recognition, observance and protection of the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen is the duty of the state.

    The article gives a list of rather ephemeral higher state values ​​- “a man, his rights and freedoms”. There is no place in this value range either for Russia or for the sovereignty of the Russian state, family, national and cultural traditions. The 2 article demonstrates the catch phrase of the Marquise de Pompadour “after us at least the Flood” (Apres nous le deluge), which became the personification of selfish aspirations and depravity of morals. That is, it is freedom that we are selfish and do not care about the future that we uphold as the highest value!

    After this paragraph, you can’t read the rest, the “person” wrote this comment on the article indicated by him, the concept doesn’t have what it is - NATURAL HUMAN RIGHTS and what is law in particular .....
    Meanwhile, the sanctions for violation of the above rights in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are assigned a whole (19-i) chapter ....
    http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_10
    699 /
    You may not be much surprised at what is written in modern Russian media, but it seems too much to me to insist on the Basic Law of the Russian Federation adopted through a referendum (one of the (two) highest forms of will of the peoples of the Russian Federation) ..... however, gentlemen, moderators .. ..
    1. nov_tech.vrn
      nov_tech.vrn 2 December 2017 02: 52
      0
      Well, about this "referendum" you don’t need to tell tales, we participated and where we knew what
      1. MOSKVITYANIN
        MOSKVITYANIN 2 December 2017 12: 17
        0
        Quote: nov_tech.vrn
        Well, about this "referendum" tales do not need to be told,

        That is, the value of the referendum does not mean anything? Liberoids always talk about fairy tales, when it comes time to act according to the law ....
        participated and where it was worth know

        Well, if you specifically poured a glass for attending a referendum, this does not mean that everything happened like that ....
        some stupid trolls went ...
        1. nov_tech.vrn
          nov_tech.vrn 3 December 2017 09: 04
          0
          you are strange ... you don’t know about the events of 1993, or don’t you want to know? to tell you how the police dispersed market traders, whether it was a vote or a carousel, your voice cost a bottle of cheap vodka, so you’ve cheapened it, and you need to rule the constitution, you can now hold a referendum, people have come out of a coma
  11. tasha
    tasha 30 November 2017 05: 31
    +1
    Indeed, an article from the OPINION category. Did you watch videos about the viewer from Taganrog? The level is not the same, but reminiscent.
    Do not be lazy, read the text of the Constitution with comments.
  12. Cxnumx
    Cxnumx 30 November 2017 06: 48
    0
    reading is interesting of course, but ... you have to be skeptical about this analysis. eg:
    1. The Russian Federation provides political asylum to foreign citizens and stateless persons in accordance with generally accepted norms of international law.
    Such a rule in our Constitution means that any state, supported by the UN, may demand to extradite any person who applied for political asylum in Russia, and we, according to the priority of international norms and rules over national legislation, cannot but give up.

    in fact the same Snowden no one gave out; nor do we extradite criminals to countries with which we do not have an extradition treaty; plus we have the right of veto in the UN Security Council, and all sorts of resolutions (or whatever they are called there) are not binding; and indeed I don’t remember that the UN demanded that someone be extradited to them and everyone would gladly do it. such extraditions were made only taking into account the political interest of the issuing party.
    in general, such a ... subjective article that needs to be sifted.
  13. CONTROL
    CONTROL 30 November 2017 09: 27
    +2
    The Constitution of the Russian Federation was written by A. Sobchak, than his daughter - "secular mare" - is very proud! In addition, A. Sobchak - "pestun" and "roof" of the current guarantor ... was!
    ... it is of course, the political situation, and political views and preferences are changing; and life dictates ... so - a "guarantor" could be understood! And although we all want everything at once - but, still! ... maybe it’s impossible - all at once? Or nothing, is it possible? ...
    Nevertheless, the “guarantor”, in addition to the “dictation of life”, must also overcome itself - its long-standing strong friendships - and financial ... - ties and dependencies, step on your own "throat" ... And this is not easy for anyone to do ...
    --------------------------
    ... maybe change the "guarantor"? Which, it seems, he himself understands perfectly ...
  14. Nemesis
    Nemesis 1 December 2017 01: 49
    +1
    There is a point that has long been beyond my doubt and I don’t intend to discuss it with anyone, because for me this is a settled and fundamental issue ... I don’t consider persons with dual citizenship as patriots of Russia ... I believe that dual citizenship is harmful for the Russian Federation and it should be abolished ... In the USA, a person receiving US citizenship takes the oath of the USA, in which he swears to protect the USA with arms in his hands, including from his historical homeland, if he is a migrant ... I see no reason why in the Russian Federation it should be different ... In the Russian Federation there are already quite a few people who have Russian citizenship, but who consider themselves patriots of foreign states ... This already creates problems, it is not right and not normal ... It should not be so. ..
  15. cedar
    cedar 2 December 2017 06: 46
    +2
    The Constitution of the Russian Federation, which secures Russia the status of a colony of the unipolar world of bankocrats, must be changed to a sovereign one.
    The world is multipolar, consists of sovereign countries, one of which is our Russia. This is Putin. For this, the bankocrats sharpen his teeth on him. This provision of multipolarity should be enshrined in its new Constitution.
    The people of Russia must correct their mistake of voting for colonial
    The 1993 Constitution, held simultaneously with the "election" of the President of the Russian Federation, when Yeltsin "won" ...
    The 2018 election should primarily be a referendum of the people of Russia on the adoption of a new Constitution, in which the President will be vested with power, along with legislative, judicial and executive.
    If the President does not become real power and remains the screen behind which banks operate, then the people will not be able to exercise their right to power in their country, on their land. As a result, he will have neither his own land, nor his own country, nor his own right to life. There will be no people themselves.
    It is vital for everyone to exercise their right to a referendum on the new SOVEREIGN Constitution of Russia!
  16. Brigadier
    Brigadier 2 December 2017 11: 13
    +1
    Yeah ... Borkin’s constitution will come back to haunt our people for a long time!
    I hope that now in hell the devils have provided him with the hottest pan.
    I really hope ...
    1. MOSKVITYANIN
      MOSKVITYANIN 2 December 2017 12: 19
      0
      Have you respected (?) Read other versions of the Constitution?
  17. Leo Zhavoronkov
    Leo Zhavoronkov 2 December 2017 21: 37
    0
    Having made a STATE COUPLING in the 91st, the YELCINOIDS imposed on the castrated state the so-called paper shredded on his knee by Shakhrai under the dictation of US consultants: "We, the multinational people of the Russian Federation ... accept the CONSTITUTION of the RUSSIAN FEDERATION ..." It was not the PEOPLE who took this shameful scribble, but a small bunch of criminal elements led by Yeltsin, because the PEOPLE were NOT VOTED AND THE REFERENDUM WAS NOT HELD! ALL the troubles of today's Russia from this worthless pile of pieces of paper! Because of THIS, we and our country are spread rot by all and sundry. And if you don’t stop now, don’t dump THIS YARMO under the Yeltsin constitution, don’t admit that in the 91st there was a coup d'etat RUSSIA WILL BE PERFECT SHOCKS: the next collapse of the state in national apartments, which the overseas imperialists and their gay European so seek mongrel, another robbery of territories and national wealth. The Kremlin clearly understands this, but, unfortunately, nothing is being done! Or not interested? Or vice versa, where will the curve lead?
  18. VladGashek
    VladGashek 2 December 2017 21: 40
    +1
    In a year we will celebrate the quarter century of the Constitution. As the ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus said: "Everything flows, everything changes," and therefore the time comes to change state-forming legal documents. A new generation of Russians has grown up who have entered into legal relations with the state. The world itself has changed, its political structure. And much more has passed, so you need to change the Basic Law of the Russian Federation. In an extreme case, following the example of the United States, it is necessary to make a bunch of amendments, additions and exceptions that create new constitutional foundations of the Russian Federation. The Constitution is not a “sacred cow,” which must be allowed to go anywhere without any control by the state as the constituent subject — the Russian people.
  19. chetverikova
    3 December 2017 12: 05
    +2
    Russians who do not know, we have THREE INDEPENDENT branches of government (Article 10 of the KRF):
    LEGISLATIVE (State Duma - adopts laws that international specialized organizations write to us,
    EXECUTIVE (Government, whose function is domestic policy, working under the IMF's DIRECT guidance) and
    JUDICIAL, subordinate to EXTERNAL GOVERNANCE, according to Article 15.p.4. (Generally recognized principles and norms of international law having priority over Russian legislation)

    The President AUTHORITY IS NOT! He is obliged to OBSERVE the execution by all branches of government of the CONSTITUTION OF RUSSIA.
    According to the Constitution written by the Americans by the Americans and adopted in the 1993 year as a result of the dispersal of the Congress of People's Deputies and the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation and the shooting of the "White House",

    The Constitution does not promise a bright future for the peoples of Russia, but obliges it to recognize the superiority of some other powers over ours. Even more than that, signed by all the people, it is a surrender to the winners of the 1991 in the Cold War by the United States of America.