Military Review

Return of sovereignty: the Constitutional Court has the right to recognize the decisions of the ECHR as impracticable

117
Behind the ups and downs associated with Syria, Turkey, and the terrorists of the Jemilev Mejlis, an event has remained somewhat in the shadow, the importance of which in terms of strengthening Russian sovereignty is difficult to overestimate. We are talking about the adoption by deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation in the second and third readings of the draft law, according to which the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation has the right to declare decisions of the European Court of Human Rights impracticable if such decisions contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation. It would seem that the adopted bill is of a purely technical nature and is not capable of bringing about fundamental changes at the defense platform of the Constitution and the sovereignty of the Russian Federation. However, by and large, this is a real legislative revolution. In fact, Russia has finally gathered strength and made the first (but very important) step towards demonstrating that Russian legislation is of paramount importance for the state and the population, in contrast to the so-called “international” legislation.


Return of sovereignty: the Constitutional Court has the right to recognize the decisions of the ECHR as impracticable


The idea of ​​the need to put the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation above the same ECHR was not born last week. In fact, it has been in the air for years, especially considering the fact that European judicial institutions for all the time Russia fulfilled its obligations as part of them very (well, very highly) rarely decided to make any decisions in Russian favor.

In July of this year, the judge of the Constitutional Court of Russia Sergey Mavrin announced the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation that the decisions of the Strasbourg court should be executed by Russia only if they do not go against the Russian Constitution.

From the comment of the judge of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation:
Russia's participation in an international treaty (an agreement on the execution of decisions of the Strasbourg Court) does not mean a rejection of state sovereignty.


From the July ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation:
The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the legal positions of the ECHR based on it cannot cancel the priority of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. (...) The Human Rights Convention is an integral part of the legal system of the Russian Federation, while Russia can retreat from the obligations imposed on it, when such a derogation is the only way to avoid violation of the Basic Law. (...) The national authorities should resolve the issue of applying national legislation.


And this initiative of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation was decided by the deputies of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation to implement at the legislative level. The initiators of the consideration of the relevant draft law were Vladimir Pligin, a deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, chairman of the committee on constitutional legislation and state construction, and Senator, Andrei Klishas, ​​authorized representative of the Federation Council in the RF IC and Prosecutor General’s Office.

From the explanatory note to the bill adopted by the State Duma of the Russian Federation in the second and third readings, and amending the constitutional law on the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation:

At the request of the federal executive body vested with the competence to protect the interests of the Russian Federation when the intergovernmental body for the protection of human rights and freedoms is examined, complaints filed against the Russian Federation on the basis of an international treaty, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation resolves the possibility of enforcing the decision of the intergovernmental body for the protection of rights and freedoms person


Further, it is reported that if the decision of the ECHR is recognized by the judges of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to be inconsistent with the Russian Constitution, such a decision by Russia will simply not be executed.

Even before the discussion of the draft law on amending the law on the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the deputies discussed the issue related to the fact that the decisions of the Strasbourg court, to put it mildly, are often aimed at “diluting” Russian sovereignty. To understand how the ECHR is concerned about the “human rights situation in Russia”, it is enough to cite interesting statistics. For a number of years, Russia has been ranked first in the number of complaints filed with the ECHR, as well as in the first place in the number of satisfied claims against Russia. The largest number of lawsuits against the Russian Federation was noted in 2010 year - 14309 (this is almost 40 lawsuits per day!) On average, over the past ten years, the number of lawsuits filed against Russia is about 10,5 thousand per year. At the same time, the ECtHR accepts claims against Russia not only in civil but also in criminal cases. Arbitration decisions rendered in Russia, the European Court of Human Rights also proposes to reconsider if suddenly the Russian decision is not satisfied with someone. And if the “political” component is suddenly found out in the claimant, then for the ECHR this is a tidbit at all, which will be licked and sucked from all sides to exaggerate the process, giving it almost a global scale.

At the same time, the decisions of the ECHR were made in such a way, as if Russia had no Basic Law at all, that is, the Constitution. European judges, among whom a Russian representative was invited more for pro forma, acted according to the principle: the Constitution of the Russian Federation? No, we do not know ...

Here is just one example of the ruling of the Strasbourg Court.

The “V.Gusinsky v. Russia” process.

In June 2000, Mr. Gusinsky was arrested on suspicion of fraud. The investigation gathered a lot of evidence that, while creating various commercial projects, Gusinsky, through fraud, transferred broadcasting functions from the state-owned Russian Video company to the private company Russian Video. As a result of this transaction, the state-owned company lost an 11 TV channel with an estimated cost of $ 10 million. After that, Gusinsky left Russia and moved to Spain, where he was first arrested by local police and then released with a refusal from Russia to request extradition.

In 2004, the ECHR, in which Mr. Gusinsky (now, by the way, the owner of News.ru), who previously represented TC NTV (under the direction of Mr. Gusinsky, the television channel, as you know, widely covered the Chechen campaign, and on the side of the militants, showing exclusively "atrocities of the feds"), rendered the following verdict:

a) the defendant in the person of the Russian state has to pay 88 thousand euros over three months in compensation for costs and expenses, which must be converted into the national currency of the respondent state at the exchange rate on the day of the decision (plus the amount of all taxes that can be deducted when currency conversion).

b) after the aforementioned three months before the final payment, interest will be charged in excess of the amount at a rate equal to the ECB's usual credit rate for the specified period, plus 3%.


That is, the ECtHR sided with Mr., against whom Russian investigative bodies collected numerous volumes of evidence on charges of fraud and misappropriation of state property. But do the proofs of the Russian investigation have any significance for the Strasbourg judges, for whom the protection of human rights is far from the first place.

Russia was forced to pay compensation to a person suspected of fraud against Russia! This is five points, of course ...

No, of course, there were cases when the ECHR took the side of what is called the working people - when ordinary citizens lost due to the fault of the bureaucracy from the bureaucracy of the shelter or were forced to make ends meet in connection with the bank frauds whose victims were. The Russian justice, frankly, far from always stands on the side of such plaintiffs, and therefore they are forced to seek the truth even in the same ECHR. But the rulings of the ECHR in favor of such plaintiffs are unlikely to somehow contradict the Russian Constitution. The thing is different. - The fact that through the ECHR they often try to push through the cases of outright fraudsters, accomplices of terrorists, adherents of all sorts of sectarian trends, trying to pretend to be “victims of the regime”. And such “victims” in Strasbourg are strangely supported.

And now the Constitutional Court will have every reason to be able, as they say, to separate the wheat from the chaff and to make its verdict regarding the ruling of the ECHR. It is assumed howl of Russian “human rights activists” feeding on foreign grants ... Well, nothing ... They will calm and calm down, all the more so it is necessary to recall that constitutional institutions have a higher status than the ECHR status in a number of European countries, including, for example, Germany and Britain. So Russia is just learning to adopt the advanced European experience ...
Author:
117 comments
Ad

Our projects are looking for authors in the news and analytical departments. Requirements for applicants: literacy, responsibility, efficiency, inexhaustible creative energy, experience in copywriting or journalism, the ability to quickly analyze text and check facts, write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. The work is paid. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. avvg
    avvg 7 December 2015 06: 42 New
    19
    The process has begun! I have a negative attitude to Gorbachev, but the words are appropriate.
    1. KOH
      KOH 7 December 2015 07: 00 New
      48
      Finally, slowly, but the noose around the neck of Russia, draped over by the Gorboeltsin period, crackled ... I’m very glad to hear such a news ...
      1. Dembel77
        Dembel77 7 December 2015 07: 24 New
        70
        The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is granted the right to declare unenforceable decisions of the European Court of Human Rights if such decisions contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation
        Finally. Thank God - wait! And I want to believe that the adoption of this amendment to the law on the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, important for Russian statehood, is only the first sign in a series of other important laws that should serve to strengthen the true sovereignty of our state. It is a pity that some laws are not retroactive. How many crooks like Gusinsky could be brought to justice.
        1. _Vladislav_
          _Vladislav_ 7 December 2015 11: 22 New
          +7
          Quote: Dembel 77
          Finally. Thank God - wait! And I want to believe that the adoption of this amendment to the law on the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, important for Russian statehood, is only the first sign in a series of other important laws that should serve to strengthen the true sovereignty of our state.

          What is the ECHR? This is an international institution that is a legislator of international law.
          What is happening with international law today? It is all sorts of broken. So one asks why such a right should prevail in Russian.

          In our country, laws are violated much less frequently than Americans step over international law.
          1. your1970
            your1970 7 December 2015 12: 51 New
            12
            "What is the ECHR - is an international institution that is a legislator of international law."

            ECHR IS NOT THE LEGISLATOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW !!!!
            We have signed an agreement on the execution of judgments of the ECHR and, according to it, we undertake to execute court decisions.
            No in the world lawmakers basically.
            There is a priority of an international treaty (it was the same in the Constitution of the USSR) after which it is ratified (validated), and at the same time (or rather, before it is signed), it is checked for compliance with the Constitution and national legislation.

            The decisions of the ECHR are binding on us because we are members of the Council of Europe and upon entering agreed to abide by its decisions. But these decisions are not international law.
            To make it clear, the decision of our district court is strictly necessary for execution by all: state bodies, legal entities, citizens, etc. But at the same time it has no legislative power and does not create a precedent. They can be appealed, etc.
            So with the ECHR, their decisions, since we adopted their rules of the game, are binding in each case, but are not binding in other cases (they do not have the force of law).
            Having exited these agreements, we lose the right to appeal to international courts ... Therefore, in the case of the Mistral, for example, we would lose the right to sue.
            Another question is how effectively we use this right ...
            1. jjj
              jjj 7 December 2015 14: 52 New
              18
              Speaking of the Central Bank of Russia. Now he will have to share with the Russian State 90 the percentage of his profits. This innovation was also quiet and not unnoticed. But this is a step towards financial sovereignty.
              1. larand
                larand 7 December 2015 17: 31 New
                11
                Quote: jjj
                Speaking of the Central Bank of Russia. Now he will have to share with the Russian State 90 the percentage of his profits. This innovation was also quiet and not unnoticed. But this is a step towards financial sovereignty.

                But this is only in 2016 at the end of 2015 (previously planned 75%). And the cunning Nabeulins immediately reduced the profit of 2015 from 56 to 22 billion rubles.
                1. Derex
                  Derex 9 December 2015 14: 27 New
                  0
                  I don’t quite agree with you, the Central Bank’s goals are not in making profit, but: 1) maintaining and developing the financial system of the Russian Federation 2) and so on. listing is not their hunt there. 5 .2015 was for the Central Bank that period. So the decline in their income is understandable
              2. asiat_61
                asiat_61 8 December 2015 00: 19 New
                0
                Is it the task of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation to make a profit? Or are the functions somewhat different?
              3. 3axap82
                3axap82 8 December 2015 02: 49 New
                0
                Is that why he should share? How do you imagine that? Who will oblige him?
            2. WAP Master
              WAP Master 8 December 2015 13: 39 New
              0
              I will add ...
              International law is who is stronger and is right. He who is stronger will write a law not only for his country, but also for others.
              Our country is getting stronger. I’m sure that for other countries we won’t write laws, but soon we will be able to hint what exactly (to them at home) we need to write.
          2. Vohman
            Vohman 10 December 2015 02: 21 New
            0
            I read a few comments above, further reading is even scary ..
            ... Non-recognition of international law - after all, everything seems to be going to that and everyone here takes these governmental decisions with a bang, the president’s decisions are not to be considered and generally for Russia this international law is absolutely unnecessary ..

            My question is - I'm sorry - are you stupid people ?!

            And now the answer: Here Mr. President the other day explains to everyone that international law = this is dog crap, the Russian people do not need ...
            Now we recall the debt of Ukraine in 3 billion dollars. And now, when ANYONE does not need international courts, and this is bullshit, HE instructed Finance Minister Anton Siluanov to sue Ukraine in connection with the non-repayment of a $ 3 billion loan.
            And let me ask what court? In one of Moscow or something ?? Or where? I probably don’t understand something or is the president - sorry - something not quite consistent? Or is it for the common people - i.e. of such a b.d.la. — the “most humane” Russian court will be the only instance, and for some crowned ones - will an international one be needed?
            Here explain to me, a fool - in what court will they file against Ukraine? Or doesn’t the president understand that only in international courts ?! Or type of people holding an uneducated herd?

            Something starts to smell all this badly ... or they just lie to us, sweet so, noodles on our ears. well, cheers - soon only to bow to the king-priest. there will be no other ships.
        2. S_last
          S_last 7 December 2015 12: 49 New
          +2
          And why are you so excited? When joining the Council of Europe, the recognition of the ECHR is one of the conditions. Russia will come out of the Council of Europe and immediately the ECHR (European Court of Human Rights) will be up to us.
        3. bastard
          bastard 7 December 2015 19: 15 New
          +5
          Quote: Dembel 77
          It is a pity that some laws are not retroactive. How many crooks like Gusinsky could be brought to justice.
        4. _GSVG_
          _GSVG_ 13 December 2015 12: 02 New
          0
          You can add - cancel indicate nationality.
        5. Idiot
          Idiot 11 January 2016 19: 11 New
          -1
          Especially Article 75.2 bothers me.
        6. Idiot
          Idiot 11 January 2016 19: 11 New
          -1
          Especially Article 75.2 bothers me.
      2. Enot-poloskun
        Enot-poloskun 7 December 2015 07: 46 New
        47
        The decision is very important!

        For example, in the span of the Baltic states with their ideas about compensation for "oppression in Soviet times."

        In the span homosexuals.

        And finally, the soaring 50 billion dollars fly by so-called the Yukos case.

        All the nonsense are in line to receive ears from a dead donkey.
        1. cniza
          cniza 7 December 2015 08: 08 New
          13
          Quote: Enot-poloskun
          The decision is very important!

          For example, in the span of the Baltic states with their ideas about compensation for "oppression in Soviet times."

          In the span homosexuals.

          And finally, the soaring 50 billion dollars fly by so-called the Yukos case.

          All the nonsense are in line to receive ears from a dead donkey.



          Not everything is so simple, but a step in the right direction, I really want to believe that we will not turn off this path.
        2. Zoldat_A
          Zoldat_A 7 December 2015 08: 59 New
          16
          Quote: Enot-poloskun
          For example, in the span of the Baltic states with their ideas about compensation for "oppression in Soviet times."

          In the span homosexuals.

          And finally, the soaring 50 billion dollars fly by so-called the Yukos case.

          There are two ways - either to hammer on this court and then, due to the uselessness of throwing, all these nonsense themselves will fall off like warts. Or orient our best hooking forces to the fight - counterclaims, casuistry, etc.

          Ode paths are good, but the second path will last for decades. Of course, it is possible, but all this bunch of crochet hooks will need to be fed all these decades - once, and the second - making excuses, we de facto recognize the claims.

          And therefore - even visibility does not need to be created, that we somehow somehow, through the COP, consider something inappropriate there. To declare directly and loudly - we do not consider your court to be impartial, but consider it politicized and biased. Therefore, you can make any decisions - but on the drum!

          But property is scattered abroad to arrest - so let them try. We, in Russia, have accumulated so much foreign property thanks to "freedom and democracy" that we will still see who is re-arresting whom ...
          1. your1970
            your1970 7 December 2015 18: 43 New
            +1
            "There are two ways - either Score and then, in view of the futility of throwing, all these nonsense themselves will fall off like warts. "
            Score you can nail into the fence - here the situation is a little different what .
            In order not to comply with the decisions of the ECHR, we must withdraw from the judicial system of Europe and the world. What will be the consequences? Deprivation of the opportunity to assert our rights in court.
            Consequences: Mistral - as soon as the conversation about the court arose, Hollande ran to the airport with a quick gallop, and then sold them to Egypt. The question of backfill - where will Egypt get the helicopters - besides us and at OUR price? Or did the 404 country blather that it would go to court with a lawsuit and surplus? gone? no! - a counterclaim of Gazprom arose in arbitration.
            and there are many such cases ...
            Come out, let's say, and what to do? To fight every time how does someone owe us?
            How else to work?
            And what about the overall image of the country?
            Do you want the same as 404 country now?
            Still, I am inclined to the second option: "to orient our best hooking forces to the fight - counterclaims, casuistry, etc."

            And finally, about the Constitution of the Russian Federation, written under the dictation of the United States repeat
            The Constitution of the USSR 1977 (I hope everyone will agree that it was definitely not dictated by the US ???)
            “Article 29. ......; the conscientious fulfillment of obligations arising from from generally recognized principles and norms of international law, from international treaties concluded by the USSR.
          2. sharp-lad
            sharp-lad 7 December 2015 20: 35 New
            +4
            When politics judges, law disappears!
        3. jktu66
          jktu66 7 December 2015 23: 38 New
          0
          For example, in the span of the Baltic states
          What? And our "brothers" in vain check $ 300 billion for the "Holodomor" ??? laughing
      3. go21zd45few
        go21zd45few 7 December 2015 18: 05 New
        +5
        It’s time to change the constitution dictated by the United States and remove the Central Bank of Russia from the control of the US Federal Reserve and the IMF.
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 7 December 2015 21: 10 New
          +1
          We will live to see this.
        2. 3axap82
          3axap82 8 December 2015 02: 54 New
          0
          And all our oligarchs including the president will be left without their foreign assets and accounts. This is unlikely to happen. Well, maybe there are heroes like that.
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 8 December 2015 06: 13 New
            +1
            Quote: 3axap82
            oligarchs including president

            Does he have them?
            1. Derex
              Derex 9 December 2015 14: 36 New
              0
              I doubt that the GDP. It is painful for many oligarchs to withdraw their assets from abroad and invest in the Russian Federation. It feels like they stupidly explained: either you are for us or against.
        3. Bayun
          Bayun 9 December 2015 01: 02 New
          0
          I agree. Oh, and WORKS ... Get rid of someone else’s system of power ("democracy"), someone else’s laws and money of others. Right, some kind of battle between Ivan Tsarevich (or the "peasant son," whoever you like) with a 3-headed snake takes place;) But, the course of history is JOYOUS!
      4. 3axap82
        3axap82 8 December 2015 02: 47 New
        +1
        For ordinary people in Russia, this was the only non-selling court where any citizen could appeal. If the Russian court did not help. He did not throw any noises. It would be better if the money ceased to be stored in. currency our officials. And the fact that some oligarchs about a court decision pay compensation to other oligarchs I personally do not care. The big word "state" in the person of the defendant of the ECHR is just a group of Russian oligarch czars.
    2. Mitek
      Mitek 7 December 2015 07: 16 New
      36
      It is high time. In the ass their laws! Still used mortal return and confiscation of bureaucrats and their relatives ... Oh, dreams, dreams))
      1. Junior, I
        Junior, I 7 December 2015 07: 28 New
        11
        Sometimes thoughts are material, life will show.
        That's when the government is re-elected, then their heads will fly. No one will write a law against himself.
        1. mihasik
          mihasik 7 December 2015 13: 47 New
          +4
          Quote: Younger, I
          That's when the government is re-elected, then their heads will fly. No one will write a law against himself.

          And when will they be re-elected? When "Do not hand over" will end?)
        2. asiat_61
          asiat_61 8 December 2015 00: 26 New
          +1
          The government appoints the guarantor, and the deputies "..OBBY .."
      2. H_l_o_p_e_C
        H_l_o_p_e_C 7 December 2015 22: 41 New
        0
        The main thing is to start, and there .....
    3. Vend
      Vend 7 December 2015 10: 25 New
      +4
      Quote: avvg
      The process has begun! I have a negative attitude to Gorbachev, but the words are appropriate.

      Russia is an independent country. Mattress justice in the furnace.
    4. yurii p
      yurii p 9 December 2015 08: 24 New
      -1
      went, but for how long, would there still be a law on CB and the Constitution of the Russian Federation change.
  2. Andrea
    Andrea 7 December 2015 06: 43 New
    +9
    Actions are taken for granted. Here it is necessary either to change the constitution, which is nonsense, or to implement the constitution, because it is the main law.
    1. beer-youk
      beer-youk 7 December 2015 10: 25 New
      +1
      Why change? There is an American amendment practice.
  3. subbtin.725
    subbtin.725 7 December 2015 06: 47 New
    +7
    Well, finally, it happened, the talker-deputies gave birth to a landmark decision. The alleged 50-yard lards of the green so-called shareholders of the ill-fated Yukos cried.
  4. DIMA45R
    DIMA45R 7 December 2015 06: 51 New
    +5
    How many years have you tried to push, and now the composition has started and is gaining speed and you’ll stop the hell ... For all, this direction has long been obvious and the legislative statement is the last link.
  5. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 7 December 2015 06: 54 New
    11
    It is high time!! At one time, a bunch of advisers of clearly non-Slavic origin around the President-bastards in the wake of gaining freedom from the "regime" were pushing laws by no means aimed at strengthening Russia. Now the time has come to become independent in their decisions without looking at the West, trying by all means to destroy us.
    Personally, my opinion hi
    1. BARKHAN
      BARKHAN 8 December 2015 18: 12 New
      +1
      This is because a fried bird with a sharp beak is attached to the rear with the aim of a point strike in the "top ten" ...
      As it turned out, now any ruler can easily be dragged out of the palace and torn (hanged).
      That is why they do not touch Serdyukov, Chubais ... So that there is no precedent ...
      Then there will be no untouchables, and hundreds of thieves can be driven to Kolyma.
      But the situation in the world has changed so much ... Now there is almost no quiet, secluded corner on the planet where you can hide all the "excessively acquired". And quietly in old age lie under a palm tree and warm your tummy.
      The era of a new shake-up of all goodness has come. And again, the "robbed loot" is relevant again. Remember the accounts with accounts in Cyprus, in Switzerland ... and this is just the beginning.
  6. Obstructia
    Obstructia 7 December 2015 07: 01 New
    +5
    Yes, nevermind myself) Finally I got it.
  7. Filxnumx
    Filxnumx 7 December 2015 07: 02 New
    +5
    Finally, Russia responded to the removal of the brain in a clear and understandable way: they all went to ... I hope that amateurs from the Russian Federation profit from their zeal will decrease.
  8. Bassoon
    Bassoon 7 December 2015 07: 06 New
    +4
    It's time.
  9. parusnik
    parusnik 7 December 2015 07: 09 New
    +6
    Finally .. I represent the collective howl of grant-eaters ...
    1. Serhio
      Serhio 7 December 2015 21: 43 New
      0
      Well, well, they get grants for howling. smile
  10. sa-ag
    sa-ag 7 December 2015 07: 13 New
    +3
    A strange thing, the Constitution is the Basic Law, and takes precedence over all national laws and other normative acts, if they had changed it, then it would have been really ... this is a real legislative revolution.
    1. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 7 December 2015 07: 56 New
      +2
      Quote: sa-ag
      Strange affair,

      I laugh and sad from your childhood joy .. In fact, they banned the only court that gave hope to find the truth to a simple citizen, when all Russian courts refused - therefore, Vasya Pupkin, if he loses a court in the country, he can smoke bamboo - it works against us ordinary citizens, and not Against the authorities, as always, sit and rejoice ....
      PS, the State very much and much lost in the ECHR - all the same, they managed to push this decision over to them .. and once again I will repeat any independence and there was nothing to stand next to .. hi
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 7 December 2015 08: 19 New
        +6
        Quote: afdjhbn67
        I laugh and sad with your childhood joy.

        What a joy there, I am mildly surprised at people who pay money so that they know the laws
        1. afdjhbn67
          afdjhbn67 7 December 2015 08: 57 New
          -3
          Quote: sa-ag
          What joy there

          Yes, I just pushed off your comment - the only one with a spark of reason for a moment .. For the delight that another right was taken away from people was incredible
      2. atalef
        atalef 7 December 2015 08: 19 New
        -9
        Quote: afdjhbn67
        Quote: sa-ag
        Strange affair,

        I laugh and sad from your childhood joy .. In fact, they banned the only court that gave hope to find the truth to a simple citizen, when all Russian courts refused - therefore, Vasya Pupkin, if he loses a court in the country, he can smoke bamboo - it works against us ordinary citizens, and not Against the authorities, as always, sit and rejoice ....
        PS, the State very much and much lost in the ECHR - all the same, they managed to push this decision over to them .. and once again I will repeat any independence and there was nothing to stand next to .. hi

        Good morning. Nicolae.
        You are absolutely right - this is not the return of sovereignty.
        This closed another door. when a person could simply complain about the arbitrariness of the authorities and get at least some kind of legal assessment and compensation.
        look what is happening.
        At first, Rosneft (the Cree state 0 grieved Yukos 9 despite the fact that some of the shareholders were ordinary depositors who had nothing to do with either Khodorkovsky or the oligarchy 0 - but reveling in their impunity and permissiveness. And did not give them the opportunity to return their money.
        Participating in a court of law (arbitration 0 and a priori confirming its legitimacy with its participation - when a case is lost) declared it was not legitimate and incompetent.
        it reminded me a bit of a card game. when when losing - suddenly someone said. that the roller debt is bullshit and he is not obliged to pay at all.
        Now the same thing happened with the ECHR.
        weird. what no one. except Russia, the same thought did not appear - that this violates and infringes on the sovereignty of the country.
        only in Russia - where the government wants to feel complete permissiveness - did this happen.
        well. what can i say? Slaves applaud the new collar.
        Bravo.
        1. afdjhbn67
          afdjhbn67 7 December 2015 08: 55 New
          0
          Quote: atalef
          well. what can be said

          Hello Alexander hi Which, unfortunately, has to be observed ..
        2. figter
          figter 7 December 2015 09: 15 New
          +6
          For a number of years, Russia ranks first in the number of complaints filed with the ECHR.and also the first place in the number of satisfied claims against Russia. The largest number of lawsuits against the Russian Federation was noted in 2010 year - 14309 (this is almost 40 lawsuits per day!) On average, over the past ten years, the number of lawsuits filed against Russia is about 10,5 thousand per year.

          These figures only indicate that there is no proper justice in the country. Appeal to the ECHR was the last hope of many "mere mortals" to achieve at least some justice. The pervasive disgraces in our courts are not included in any framework, and that is why so many appeals to the European Court are received. And no relation to the "fifth columns", "liberastam", "geyropam", etc. these people deceived by their state, on whose behalf often simply shameful decisions are made, did not have. If the decisions of domestic courts were justified, lawful and fair - no one would apply to the ECHR, they would simply not be accepted there and considered. And now it turns out that because of the handful of bullie, who ransomed the riches three times over-looted from each other, the common people lost their last help.
          The Russian justice, frankly, far from always stands on the side of such plaintiffs, and therefore they are forced to seek the truth even in the same ECHR. But the rulings of the ECHR in favor of such plaintiffs are unlikely to somehow contradict the Russian Constitution.

          Not a single Russian judge now even dares to go against the stream and make a decision in accordance with the decision of the ECHR, even if it is three times lawful and fair - he will simply fly out from this place which he occupies. And the place is very, very bread in our time and no one will risk it!
        3. 33 Watcher
          33 Watcher 7 December 2015 09: 49 New
          13
          And what do you think of the priority of American law over any other? AND?
          Although you can, do not work, and so I know, this is another matter! This is freedom! And you, you ... You are slaves, and you have a dictatorship !!! In! And all of you must be soaked, and Siberia is the property of all mankind! So..? wink
        4. provincial
          provincial 7 December 2015 10: 57 New
          0
          parusnik (2) SU Today, 07:09 New

          Finally .. I imagine the collective howl of grant-eaters ... It has begun.
        5. padded jacket
          padded jacket 7 December 2015 12: 21 New
          +6
          Quote: atalef
          Initially, Rosneft (the Cree state 0 fussed Yukos

          No wonder atalef is so worried about Yukos, because its main shareholders are Israeli citizens and it is they who should receive about $ 50 billion of "compensation" from Russia.
          For a long time it was necessary to "destroy" this yoke with the help of which the USA, EU, Israel strangled and robbed our country.
          1. 3axap82
            3axap82 8 December 2015 03: 18 New
            0
            Yes, even so. Did they SELL stocks? Or did they get them by theft and robbery? Probably sold.
            The yoke "by which they strangled" is our government with the president. In which children are abroad and money is also abroad. Because in Russia they do not produce even a third of the benefits of the material world that these officials strive for. Elite medicine in Switzerland, spa houses and castles, Bentley, Ferrari, private jets, catalogs with prostitutes of which you consider movie stars.
            1. padded jacket
              padded jacket 8 December 2015 13: 54 New
              +2
              Quote: 3axap82
              Or they got them by theft and robbery

              Without any doubt, they formed their Yukos from the former property of the USSR by stealing and being close to Yeltsin and his company of privatizers like Chubais.
      3. 33 Watcher
        33 Watcher 7 December 2015 09: 54 New
        10
        The state cannot violate the rights of Vasya Pupkin, only a separate official can. This time. And two, all of these characters like you most of all care for the rights that they will never use when they never. I wonder why?
        Although not important. Have decided and GLORY TO GOD!
      4. The comment was deleted.
  11. Born in USSR
    Born in USSR 7 December 2015 07: 21 New
    10
    They wrote us the Constitution in the USA. Che wonder then. It is necessary to change it for a long time. There are many things that are unnecessary for us. And the most interesting is that we should be sick for all of humanity. And ESPECIALLY FOR ITS PROGRESSIVE EXCLUSIVE PART.tan and geyropu.
  12. Shark Lover
    Shark Lover 7 December 2015 07: 23 New
    +8
    Another question would have been raised, secured about top-level officials. A ban on permanent residence abroad. As so, he was president and then dumped to live abroad. He was a deputy, dumped abroad, was the daughter of a chmyr, dumped abroad. By the way, that the ice has broken it says one more thing. There was info shuvalov bought an apartment in London, something half a billion rubles. Maybe also preparing for permanent residence?
    1. sa-ag
      sa-ag 7 December 2015 07: 33 New
      +9
      Quote: Shark Lover
      There was info shuvalov bought an apartment in London, something half a billion rubles. Maybe also preparing for permanent residence?

      To have an apartment in Londongrad is an indicator of status today, again, the sport of gentlemen is "running with the cash register" :-)
  13. uge.garik
    uge.garik 7 December 2015 07: 23 New
    +4
    ... Based on the fact that - “everything that is not forbidden” can be, it’s not time to introduce “Duties of a Man” into international law ...
  14. horoh
    horoh 7 December 2015 07: 24 New
    +1
    Hrenase, this is news, now only forward !!!
  15. afrikanez
    afrikanez 7 December 2015 07: 27 New
    +4
    If the Constitution were a little corrected and everything would be wonderful, well, you can still appoint a penalty for serious crimes.
    1. Saratoga833
      Saratoga833 7 December 2015 10: 58 New
      +4
      Quote: afrikanez
      Still a little amend the Constitution

      It is not necessary to correct it, but to develop and adopt a new one that meets the realities of today.
  16. SergeySeverny
    SergeySeverny 7 December 2015 07: 31 New
    +2
    good news! just happy!
  17. knn54
    knn54 7 December 2015 07: 45 New
    +2
    The Hague is in line ...
  18. Oml
    Oml 7 December 2015 07: 56 New
    +5
    I agree that Russia should be above all this zapadensky "justice", but our courts, which have no opinion, must somehow be changed.
  19. Bath
    Bath 7 December 2015 08: 05 New
    +3
    And in general, do not let the nasty geyropeytsy climb to the people who happily live less and less with the shadow of the fairest Yeltsin constitution, which the Americans, by the way, helped and write to, in which the Russians are deprived of their statehood
  20. aleks.
    aleks. 1986 7 December 2015 08: 36 New
    +4
    Quote: afdjhbn67
    Quote: sa-ag
    Strange affair,

    I laugh and sad from your childhood joy .. In fact, they banned the only court that gave hope to find the truth to a simple citizen, when all Russian courts refused - therefore, Vasya Pupkin, if he loses a court in the country, he can smoke bamboo - it works against us ordinary citizens, and not Against the authorities, as always, sit and rejoice ....
    PS, the State very much and much lost in the ECHR - all the same, they managed to push this decision over to them .. and once again I will repeat any independence and there was nothing to stand next to .. hi


    Nice to see an adequate opinion. For us, for civil society and for the common man who fell under the millstone of law enforcement agencies, there was at least some hope for the triumph of justice, even after years, but still. When its national judicial system does not exist, the principles that are laid down in the same Constitution are violated everywhere, the ECHR and its decisions were a clear example of the malfunctioning of the entire law enforcement system and some kind of guideline to which we should strive. Now the authorities, trying first of all to protect themselves from unprofitable decisions, are making an absurd decision that directly contradicts the Constitution itself.
    1. skifd
      skifd 7 December 2015 11: 34 New
      -2
      "Stpadalians" by "rights" ... "Many times" the mentioned "Pupkin" .. Vasya who ... "Rows" on the ECHR etu .. Since in real life he can’t "use" it in real life .. It’s not easy to get ( neither physically nor financially excessive). And therefore, it as the "Fermat's theorem" is just a "theory". And all this “cry” over the loss of something “ephemeral” is simply ridiculous. But - yes, people are financially and legally better off, perhaps to some extent they will be affected. Then “cry” for them, and finally leave alone the notorious “Vasya Pupkin”, to whom you really have nothing to do, he’s already been tormented by hiccups from your “worries” about him. negative
  21. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 7 December 2015 08: 41 New
    +3
    Krivenko, slanting, through opu, but better than nothing.
    What is it just now? Did the rooster come closer?
  22. Gardamir
    Gardamir 7 December 2015 08: 43 New
    +3
    Oh rejoiced, do not tell my keyboard. Have you even read your own constitution?
    Preamble of the Constitution of the Russian Federation latest update
    We, the multinational people of the Russian Federation,

    united by a common fate in their land,

    Affirming human rights and freedoms, civil peace and harmony,

    preserving the historical state unity,

    based on the universally recognized principles of equal rights and self-determination of peoples,

    honoring the memory of the ancestors who conveyed to us love and respect for the Fatherland, faith in goodness and justice,

    reviving the sovereign statehood of Russia and affirming the inviolability of its democratic foundation,

    Striving to ensure the well-being and prosperity of Russia,

    proceeding from responsibility for our Motherland before present and future generations,

    Conscious of yourself as part of the global community,

    accept the CONSTITUTION of the RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

    And now the preamble to the US Constitution
    We, the people of the United States, in order to form a better Union, establish justice, guarantee internal peace, ensure joint defense, promote common prosperity and consolidate the benefits of freedom for us and our offspring, proclaim and establish the present Constitution for the United States of America.
  23. imugn
    imugn 7 December 2015 08: 48 New
    +3
    But why did Russia refuse to extradite Gusinsky, and even paid him?
  24. Jurkovs
    Jurkovs 7 December 2015 09: 02 New
    +6
    I do not see any feat. You must immediately do any business to the end, and not chop the dog’s tail in parts. It is necessary to immediately introduce the concept into the Constitution that national legislation takes precedence over international, as this is done in the USA. In such matters it is not a sin to learn.
  25. antiexpert
    antiexpert 7 December 2015 09: 16 New
    16
    this is not enough - it is necessary to change the entire Yeltsin constitution, which is written under the dictation of the USA!
  26. Oleg1080
    Oleg1080 7 December 2015 09: 35 New
    +2
    Time will tell whether to rejoice or cry when all the pitfalls pop up. But at least we’re moving at least somewhere, otherwise it’s just some kind of stagnation.
  27. Zomanus
    Zomanus 7 December 2015 09: 36 New
    10
    Here you go.
    The Central Bank has already ordered 90% of the profits to be given to the state.
    Now we are untying ourselves from international courts.
    It remains with ideology and censorship to decide the matter.
    Whatever films and history books are released at the expense of the state,
    in which this state is watered by slops.
  28. pimen
    pimen 7 December 2015 09: 36 New
    +3
    in fact, such issues should not even be discussed
  29. Dimon-chik-79
    Dimon-chik-79 7 December 2015 10: 15 New
    +6
    Quote: figter
    Appeal to the ECHR was the last hope of many "mere mortals" to achieve at least some justice. The created outrages in our courts do not enter into any framework, and that is why so many appeals have been submitted to the European Court. And no relation to the "fifth columns", "liberals", "geyropam", etc. these people, deceived by their state, on whose behalf often simply shameful decisions are made, did not have. If the decisions of the domestic courts were reasonable, lawful and fair - no one would contact the ECHR, they would simply not be accepted into their proceedings and considered. And now it turns out that because of a handful of people who have seized "wealth" three times from one another, ordinary people have lost their last help.

    Hard to disagree with these! But there is hope that this decision will not apply to mere mortals. "As Pligin stated earlier, the draft law does not cause any damage to" investment activity or protection of private property "in Russia." Cases of possible non-execution or appeal to the assessment of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, of course, will be single. "
    But in any case, real sovereignty will be with us only when the number of compradors in power will be significantly less! What kind of sovereignty can we talk about if, on top of that, many of our officials at various levels have bills and housing abroad where their children study and live. Even without taking into account the source of their income, if any of them click on a bank account then what decisions will he make in his activities ?!
  30. Old warrior
    Old warrior 7 December 2015 11: 30 New
    +5
    The most important step will be the abolition of the moratorium on the Death Penalty and the beginning of the application of this cancellation against criminals who have inflicted Damage to the Country on a particularly large scale, maniacs, terrorists, etc. I like this definition - the Supreme Measure of Social Protection, there is something in it of justice ...
    1. sergach
      sergach 7 December 2015 12: 30 New
      0
      The death penalty will not solve anything. But the likelihood of a miscarriage of justice is high. In addition, it has long been proven that the death penalty does not affect crime statistics. Imprisonment is a rather severe punishment. Where does such an obsession with the death penalty from many of our citizens come from?
      1. sharp-lad
        sharp-lad 7 December 2015 20: 43 New
        -1
        As they say, life on Solovki for life-sentenced prisoners is worse than death itself. And this is the best punishment for criminals. Again, in the event of a miscarriage of justice, it is possible to restore justice. How many were shot Chikatilo instead of u-b-l-y-d-d?
      2. The comment was deleted.
  31. Captain45
    Captain45 7 December 2015 11: 36 New
    0
    Briefly, who was the initiator and who was against such a legislative initiative:
    Along with United Russia Pligin, the authors of the bill are the first deputy head of the Just Russia faction Mikhail Emelyanov, the representative of the Communist Party faction Vasily Likhachev, the first deputy head of the LDPR faction Alexei Didenko, as well as member of the Federation Council Andrei Klishas.
    Three deputies from Just Russia voted against the adoption of the bill. According to Dmitry Gudkov, he himself was against, Sergei Petrov and Ilya Ponomarev’s card in Gudkov’s hands.
    Those. as we see for certain sovereignty in the legislation of the Russian Federation from the decisions of the ECHR there were representatives of all parliamentary factions, in the Duma there is a certain unification of the interests of parties regarding the independence of Russia, that is, "as running bugs and marathons say we have hope for a chance" (c) Ilf and Petrov "Twelve Chairs".
  32. Maks-80
    Maks-80 7 December 2015 11: 42 New
    +1
    Gusinsky, Khodorkovsky and 2 other runaway former oligarchs put 4 minuses to this article lol
  33. AK64
    AK64 7 December 2015 12: 17 New
    +3
    It should start with the fact that no "international law" exists. Where is it, show me this code of laws?
    There is a certain amount of interstate agreements (bilateral and multilateral); but their observance is not necessary - any of them may be denounced by the participant.

    On the whole, the thesis of the primacy of "international law" over local (1) contradicts the basic principles of democracy ("the mayor is more important than the president in your city!") And actually means transferring control of the country's governance into the wrong hands. (And those who introduced this provision could not understand this.)
  34. sergach
    sergach 7 December 2015 12: 25 New
    0
    Hmm, I am only for such decisions. But nothing that the modern constitution clearly and unequivocally postulated the priority of international agreements over national law? That is, according to the current constitution, any decision of international courts cannot contradict the Russian constitution by definition. Deputies have a mess with logic.
  35. Belousov
    Belousov 7 December 2015 12: 30 New
    +3
    Why did only half the battle? Why not legislate the priority of national legislation over international? Why not return the Central Bank to the hands of the state? And many more why.
  36. rJIiOK
    rJIiOK 7 December 2015 12: 47 New
    +1
    The radio sounded in the background, was the transmission of the Echo of Moscow. There they screamed with foam at the mouth that the abolition of the supremacy of the decisions of the ECHR is savagery, it is uncivilized!
    And they say that we do not have democracy when frank foreign agents broadcast their point of view.
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir 7 December 2015 15: 49 New
      +4
      Echo of Moscow transmission ... foreign agents
      Just don’t talk. that you don’t know. Radio Echo of Moscow is supported by Gazprom money, that is, it is the Kremlin radio. They just imitate the opposition.
      1. rJIiOK
        rJIiOK 7 December 2015 23: 01 New
        +1
        Well, you know, obviously people believe what they say!
        Suppose it’s kind of funded by a radio there, although I don’t know that. But all those people who are invited to the studio are not financed, and they broadcast there.
        1. Kombrig
          Kombrig 8 December 2015 22: 12 New
          0
          Quote: rJIiOK
          Suppose it’s kind of funded by a radio there, although I don’t know that. But all those people who are invited to the studio are not financed, and they broadcast there.


          By your logic, if I allocated money to a certain terrorist organization, then I finance only this organization, and not its militants - performers ... belay Just the rule, "who feeds the girl - and dances her," no one has yet canceled ..
  37. sw6513
    sw6513 7 December 2015 13: 19 New
    0
    I have long been waiting for this good news! And the truth is that the kingdom of gays and lesbians can judge our absurd compatriots. Let them not poke their nose here, they are not welcome ..
  38. Denis Skiff
    Denis Skiff 7 December 2015 13: 38 New
    0
    Quote: Dembel 77
    The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is granted the right to declare unenforceable decisions of the European Court of Human Rights if such decisions contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation
    Finally. Thank God - wait! And I want to believe that the adoption of this amendment to the law on the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, important for Russian statehood, is only the first sign in a series of other important laws that should serve to strengthen the true sovereignty of our state. It is a pity that some laws are not retroactive. How many crooks like Gusinsky could be brought to justice.

    And those who are against the wall without trial.
  39. Kolka82
    Kolka82 7 December 2015 15: 18 New
    0
    Quote: Saratoga833
    Quote: afrikanez
    Still a little amend the Constitution

    It is not necessary to correct it, but to develop and adopt a new one that meets the realities of today.

    Fortunately, there is a "role model" ...
  40. Teplohod
    Teplohod 7 December 2015 16: 22 New
    0
    Sovereignty - when you can stop supplying gas at any time and they will be asked for it from an unscrupulous intermediary, or they will resort to apologize for their deeds and extradite criminals. Sovereignty - when citizens live luxuriously in any foreign economic situation, and hundreds of thousands of leading world scientists, engineers and other figures lurk about your borders waiting for citizenship. Sovereignty - when the decisions of your court are respected and enforced throughout the world.
    1. your1970
      your1970 7 December 2015 18: 53 New
      0
      Teplohod
      little things left - find somewhere a couple of carrier fleets and a couple of hundred military bases all over the earth, and then yes - there will be full sovereignty under your program. Besides the United States (and even there not all citizens live luxuriously, far from all) - there is no such sovereignty on Earth now - alas, alas ..

      In the meantime, we will not find, alas, and ah, we will do with the sovereignty that is repeat
  41. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 7 December 2015 17: 40 New
    +3
    At first, the ECHR looked very nice, until it took up rights thieves and homosexuals.

    And then it was not funny.

    How can a Strasbourg court make any binding decisions if the system of European values ​​contradicts Russian values? No defense of formally heretical and even blasphemous "of values".

    Well, talking about politics is generally not worth it. Let him protect Wahhabi refugees from burghers, the rights of caught and landed terrorists, the rights of same-sex "partnerships" from a minority of heterosexuals - if they so wish. But we will somehow decide their questions.
  42. Klibanophoros
    Klibanophoros 7 December 2015 18: 18 New
    -1
    Another blah blah on the topic of "Lift from the knees," and so 15 years in a row ...
  43. bsk_mna54
    bsk_mna54 7 December 2015 18: 36 New
    +2
    The Duma is engaged in nonsense. All whistling occurs by shifting problems to each other. You just need to cancel those articles of the constitution that prevent Russia from living:
    1. Spit on a gay court and forget about it
    2. From the central bank to expel all privileged fraudsters from the composition of the liberals, headed by "honored" (like Kudrin) Madame Nabiulina, stop feeding the economy nor, rather, engage in their own country.
    3. In all states there is a certain policy at the state level, and in Russia it is prohibited by the constitution. Send all such figures away. It is necessary to have our own state ideology, to fasten Russia on moral qualities.
    Such a constitution is not needed by the Russian people.
  44. 1536
    1536 7 December 2015 18: 45 New
    +2
    Good tidings! Still, a couple of Americans should be condemned under our laws for calls for ethnic hatred or for undermining the foundations of the state in order to see priority in reality.
  45. Jozhkin Cat
    Jozhkin Cat 7 December 2015 20: 13 New
    +1
    Will the next central bank be?
    1. Kirgoudou
      Kirgoudou 8 December 2015 22: 51 New
      0
      I would like to.
      Untie the country from the buck.
  46. pettabyte
    pettabyte 7 December 2015 20: 22 New
    -1
    Quote: larand

    But this is only in 2016 at the end of 2015 (previously planned 75%). And the cunning Nabeulins immediately reduced the profit of 2015 from 56 to 22 billion rubles.


    Undoing!
  47. potalevl
    potalevl 7 December 2015 21: 05 New
    +3
    What a cheer? What international law? Do not tell my slippers. The United States wanted to spit on everyone, the UN - "Uncle Sam's pocket dog." The US Federal Reserve is a private shop created by several wealthy swindlers and convinced the whole world that the pieces of paper they print privately are real money, for which the whole world should buy and sell wealth and goods. At the end of the fight-drunk era, GDP reported that in Russia all prices and economic indicators are only in rubles, so what next. Again, we appreciate the country's wealth in the "shares". As soon as they hinted that we will carry out trade operations in the national currencies of the counterparty countries, you will receive terror and other world tricks. As soon as the world abandons this "green paper", then immediately all the "rich Pinocchio", both our own and imported bottling will become poor, like church rats. Do they need it? They will fight for their good sparing no one and nothing. Until the Fed and others like us rule the planet, wars, terror, chaos and lawlessness will reign. Well, what awaits us in the future, God alone knows. Here is such a fairy tale.
  48. Slavianin_37
    Slavianin_37 7 December 2015 22: 23 New
    +3
    Gusinsky to be arrested, to his jail, and all the money to take, plus interest !!!
  49. unfriendly
    unfriendly 7 December 2015 22: 28 New
    0
    It was necessary to do this after the first precedent. Better late than never.
  50. Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 7 December 2015 22: 49 New
    0
    Quote: Mitek
    It is high time. In the ass their laws!

    Finally it dawned that being a country of not frightened idiots, besides, is very REMAINABLE!