Tatarstan clings to the president – Picture of the Day – Kommersant

The profile committee of the State Council (parliament) of Tatarstan did not approve the draft amendments to the constitution of the republic, which, among other things, suggest renaming the President of Tatarstan as its head. Some deputies proposed to come up with the name of the head of the region in the Tatar language, others even advocated retaining the name “president”, recalling that this position was “established by the people” in 1991. As a result, the authors of the amendments were asked to withdraw them. Whether a new version will be submitted to the December 23 session, the State Council does not comment.

Having discussed the draft amendments to the constitution at a meeting on December 22, State Council Committee on state construction recommended to its authors “to withdraw the draft law in the proposed wording.” This proposal of the head of the committee, Albert Khabibullin (United Russia), was supported by the majority of the committee members. He himself, being one of the co-authors, abstained from voting.

The co-authors of the draft, which appeared on the website of the State Council on Wednesday evening, are 37 deputies (mostly from the United Russia), including 2 vice-speakers and chairmen of all committees. It was prepared to bring the basic law of Tatarstan in line with the updated Constitution of the Russian Federation and the federal law on public authorities in the regions (this process must be completed before January 1, 2023). According to the document, from January 1, the highest official of Tatarstan will be called not “president”, but “head”.

References to sovereignty, references to an agreement with the Russian Federation on the delimitation of powers, an article on citizenship of the republic, and a clause stating that a candidate for the post of head of Tatarstan must know its two state languages, Russian and Tatar, are also excluded from the text of the constitution.

At the same time, the amendments will allow the President of the Republic, Rustam Minnikhanov, who has held this post since 2010, to go to the 2025 elections, since the previous terms for him are “reset”.

The main object of criticism at the committee meeting was the point about the new name of the president.

“Will our president be called the president or the head of the region? How do we explain to the public? Nikolai Rybushkin, a member of the Tatarstan-New Century deputy group, was perplexed. “All this should be clear not only to us, but also to our voters!” The MP said that he considers it wrong to “automatically accept” such amendments. “Does our constitution not work? She works! If we accept this, what will it give us in the future? – he said. “Unfortunately, not all of our proposals were taken into account at the federal level,” and deputies are forced to be guided by federal laws that “restrict” Tatarstan, Albert Khabibullin tried to explain to his colleague.

“This is a very important issue and it is impossible to solve it with a tip!” – Mr. Rybushkin did not give up, proposing “to remove this bill from consideration of the current session.”

“We now have more important concerns, we are now having a military operation,” the deputy recalled.

Deputy Rimma Ratnikova (ER) complained in response that Deputy Rybushkin “as if he had remained in the last century.” “We have nowhere else to go. We must complete this work by the end of the year,” she said. Admitting that she also had a “deep dissatisfaction” about the name of the head of the republic, Ms. Ratnikova recalled that under federal law, an additional name for the head of the region is possible “taking into account the historical, national and other traditions of the subject of the Russian Federation.” And she immediately offered options in the Tatar language: “il bashy” (head of the region), “deulet bashy” (head of state), “khakim”, “amir” and “yul bashchy”. The latter, the deputy explained, was always used in the sense of “leader”, but literally translated as “who leads us along the road.” Therefore, she proposed to postpone the bill “until tomorrow” in order to come up with an additional name for the head of the region. “And then there is nowhere to retreat, no matter how we seethe here, no matter how indignant,” Ms. Ratnikova warned.

Deputy Marat Galeev objected that the name should be universal and understandable, including in neighboring regions. He recalled that the post of president of Tatarstan “appeared through the establishment of it by the people in 1991, by popular vote (meaning the first presidential election, which was won by Mintimer Shaimiev.— “b”)”, and “the will of the people has legal supremacy”. “How can we take and change it if the people voted for the presidency?” – Mr. Galeev was surprised. He also did not agree with the exclusion from the constitution of a reference to an agreement on the delimitation of powers, which, according to the deputy, is a “founding document” for both Tatarstan and Russia (the first such agreement was concluded in 1994, but in 2017 the federal center did not extend it).

“If we cancel all this now, then we question the entire legal foundation regarding the entry of Tatarstan into the Russian Federation,” warned Marat Galeev, who is also among the co-authors of the amendments he criticized.

“We are now usurping, without asking the people, we are making changes that are of a cardinal, historical, political nature,” Hafiz Mirgalimov, head of the Communist Party faction, supported his colleague. The word “president” “should be abandoned,” said the Communist, because “there are exceptions to every rule.” Other members of the committee also opposed the amendments, citing the opinion of voters that they “need a president.”

The next meeting of the State Council is scheduled for December 23, but the issue of constitutional amendments is not yet on its agenda.

Formerly in parliamentary leadership spokethat this issue can be introduced at the meeting “by vote”. It is not yet clear whether an amended bill could appear on Friday. The press service of the State Council told Kommersant that they “have no such information”, recommending that they contact the members of the initiative group. However, its representatives either declined to comment or did not answer Kommersant’s calls. “Tomorrow (December 23.— “b”) we will decide, ”an interlocutor in the leadership of the State Council told Kommersant.

Kirill Antonov, Kazan