Senators stood their ground – Kommersant

The Federation Council (SF) on Wednesday approved a new version of the law “On Citizenship of the Russian Federation”, which expands the list of criminal offenses that entail the termination of citizenship of naturalized persons. Now such crimes include, in particular, discrediting the army and calls for extremism. A number of senators were outraged that this mechanism divides Russians into citizens “by birth and by entry.” But their colleagues explained to them that this has always been the case, and this does not contradict the Constitution.

The law was introduced by Vladimir Poletaev, First Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Constitutional Legislation and State Building. He listed in detail all its provisions and separately dwelled on the most discussed novel – on the expansion of the grounds for the termination of acquired citizenship.

According to the law that is still in force, such grounds include the commission of a crime under the terrorist and extremist articles of the Criminal Code. IN new edition The list will be replenished with a whole range of additional compositions.

It will include crimes against sexual integrity, illegal arms and drug trafficking, treason, espionage, incitement to extremism, discrediting the army, damaging military graves, encroachment on the life of a law enforcement officer and other grave and especially grave acts.

“The law under consideration, just like the current one, does not use the term “deprivation of citizenship,” Mr. Poletaev drew attention. He recalled that since 2017, when the institution of the citizen’s oath was introduced, a court verdict for a number of crimes has been equated to the fact of “reporting knowingly false information regarding obligations to comply with the Constitution and legislation of the Russian Federation.” “Thus, no new mechanism for the deprivation of citizenship is established, but the existing one is specified,” the speaker emphasized, adding that “taking into account modern realities,” we are talking about additional prevention from violation of the obligations assumed by new citizens.

Despite the explanations of Vladimir Poletaev, the new version of the law worried the senator from the Crimea, Sergei Tsekov. “In general, I am positive about the fact that the termination of citizenship is allowed,” he admitted. “But for those who received it by birth, this rule is excluded. No matter what crimes you commit, you will still remain a citizen. But those who became citizens as a result of the so-called option, that is, after the entry of the territories – the Republic of Crimea, the Donetsk People’s Republic, the Lugansk People’s Republic, the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions – how are they?

Valentina Kazakova, head of the Migration Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, who was present at the meeting, explained that the commission of certain crimes is considered as a violation of the oath given by naturalized Russians.

But Mr. Tsekov was not satisfied with this answer: “The one who by birth can commit any crime and will not be deprived of citizenship. And we (Crimeans.— “b”), who, in fact, are also citizens of the Russian Federation, can be subject to this punishment. There is no equality here. And I’m all for equality.”

“Citizens of Crimea, new regions are full-fledged citizens of the Russian Federation, and all constitutional norms should apply to them,” said Federation Council speaker Valentina Matvienko, trying to close the discussion. But then Lyudmila Narusova, a member of the constitutional committee, took the floor: “According to Art. 6 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, citizenship is single and equal, regardless of the grounds for acquisition. Regardless of the acquisition: by birth or entry!

In response to this remark, Ms. Matviyenko made a remark to the chairman of the constitutional committee, Andrey Klishas: “Either you don’t discuss the laws in depth and don’t explain them at a committee meeting, or something else. You discussed this law at the committee.”

“Twice!” said Mr. Klishas. He promised to give Mrs. Narusova a textbook on constitutional law so that she could “understand some elementary things,” but nevertheless undertook to explain again what the law was about: “Equal citizenship means that a citizen has the whole set of civil and political rights. For example, he has the right to elect and be elected. A number of states adhere to a different constitutional doctrine, whereby only citizens by birth can hold certain elective office. For example, USA. And there are many such states. The fact that a citizen can lose citizenship as a result of various reasons is also present in the legislation of most states, and we have had it since the emergence of the institution of Russian citizenship.”

After that, 161 senators voted for the adoption of the law, another abstained.

Andrew Ashes