The exclusion of the Russian Federation from the Council of Europe “for gross violations of the Charter” will undermine Russians’ belief in the state’s protection of our rights within the country.
NATO finally made it to the Council of Europe and, as the statement of the Russian Foreign Ministry stated, it was defeated … “destroyed its unifying potential.” And the European Court did nothing but mischief, as it “turned into a structure to impose a neoliberal approach to human rights” and “began to be used systematically to pressure Russia and interfere in its internal affairs”. “We engage with such a European Council without regret,” she told the State Department.
There is a question: “we” – who is this? If it is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, then there is a cunning here – hundreds of diplomats, experts and even simple secretaries associated with it, who work in dozens of structures of the Council of Europe or regularly travel to Strasbourg, are hardly happy with this decision, not even their superiors. And if we are “we” the multinational Russian people, who, according to its constitution, “the sovereign and the only source of power” (Article 3), but for some reason managed to send tens of thousands of complaints against Russian courts to the European Court of Human Rights, did you ask anyone?
Meanwhile, on March 16, Sergey Lavrov clarified that “the decision was made a long time ago.” More precisely: for a long time,
Since about 2007 everything has been moving towards this, but the original scenario for “Special Operation” apparently didn’t state:
If it had been developed according to plan and completed in a few days, Russia would have been reprimanded at the Council of Europe, but they would have tolerated it more, and she herself would not have paid any attention to the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. This decision was implemented only at the time when, on 15 March, the members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe began to debate an appeal addressed to the Russian Federation with a request to be released from their presence. While it was 167 deputies from the PACE party who registered to speak in line, the Russian Federation closed the door. Then followed a psychological counterattack: the decision to exclude the Russian Federation was already adopted by the EU Commission of Ministers on March 16, which is bad, because it can immediately deprive the Russians of the right to apply to the European Court of Human Rights from tomorrow, although From the usual enshrined in the charter (but only once it was submitted to Greece, and then adopted again), the exit procedure assumed the termination of the RF’s membership in the Council from January 1 of the next year, which means that complaints can be submitted to the European Court of Rights human until then. In this regard, we still have to wait for an official explanation from the European Court of Human Rights: perhaps the deadline for submission of complaints will be extended, and those already submitted should be considered in any case (for the prospects for the implementation of such decisions by the European Court of Human Rights, see column yesterday).
Another question, if properly asked before the Source of Power, would be about where the boundary is between “internal” and public affairs. In Strasbourg, they would have answered: “Ca dependent” (“It depends”). If the spouses swear in a neighboring apartment, it is none of our business, if the husband kills his wife or vice versa, it is also ours, and if he has not yet killed, but only now beats, the answer depends on legal and cultural traditions. After World War II, European countries agreed that human rights take precedence over national borders, and in 1998, after Russia ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Russia also agreed to this.
The question of the relationship between private law (our case) and public law (the public case) in its most trivial form begs the question of whether society, and in this case the international community, should limit countries that violate human rights within its jurisdiction. As for the neighbors, there is no doubt here, and today’s decision, sad for the Russian Federation, is based on this.
You can talk about a “special path”, but then you have to keep in mind that when we are robbed and beaten at our entrance, our state is unlikely to help either.
He has other principles – they were already spelled out by one of the subjects of our friendly union, and then, as they say, everywhere.
No one can yet explain the passage in the official letter of the Foreign Ministry that “Russia reserves the right to withdraw from the Council of Europe on its own terms.” This certainly means that the Russian Federation does not intend to pay an annual contribution of 33 million euros in 2022. Of course, the Charter of the Council of Europe and the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms will be denounced, however, today the Russian Federation is a party to about 80 other relevant European conventions, Withdrawing from it can lead to the most unexpected difficulties for state bodies of the Russian Federation and individual citizens: from the Agreement on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters to the Agreement on Equivalency of Certificates, etc.
Undoubtedly, the judge of the European Court of Human Rights from the Russian Federation, Dmitry Didov, will be summoned, and even if he does not like it, he will not be recognized. One of the active developers of the 2020 constitutional amendments, academician and director of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law, Talia Khabrieva, will stop participating in the Venice Commission for “Democracy through Law” – however, according to the Yabloko Center for Anti-Corruption Policy, it maintains an apartment in Geneva, but in Europe, is now unlikely to continue teaching. Most likely, the representative office of the Russian Federation in Strasbourg will also be dissolved, but the Russians take part in several commissions and committees of the Council, the case of which must be decided separately. There are also citizens of the Russian Federation – employees of the Center of Excellence and the European Court of Human Rights in the status of international personnel, their fate is not yet clear, but now Novaya’s readers are unlikely to worry most of all.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs stressed that the Russian Federation’s withdrawal from the Council of Europe “will not affect the rights and freedoms of Russian citizens” because “their constitution provides guarantees no less than the European Convention.” It is not entirely clear to whom this message is directed: whether Europe, enlightened, but captivated LGBT people, NATO, or in fact the citizens of the Russian Federation. In the latter case, I invite readers to think about it for themselves, hints are made in a note published on our site earlier on March 16.
Leonid Nikitinsky, columnist in Novaya
On the evening of March 16, the European Court of Human Rights announced the suspension of consideration of all complaints received from the Russian Federation. It’s too early to panic: this is obviously due to the necessary pause, there are no precedents, and the Council of Europe must decide how to consider Russian complaints without a Russian judge (or specifically allow them such issues), and how to be employees with citizenship Russia, and to respond to many political and legal issues such as technical issues. We are waiting soon for news from Strasbourg.
Source: Novaya Gazeta