Кто владеет информацией,
|28 feb 2017|
Struggle for Restoration of Elections of the Mayor Started in Moscow
Termless public campaign for Luzhkov's resignation and returning of elections of the mayor of the capital starts in Moscow.
Following the results of last Day of Anger which took place on May, 1st in Moscow, Muscovites demanded federal authorities to dismiss the Mayor of Moscow Jury Luzhkov within a month. As this requirement has not been executed till now, representatives of Moscow public begin continuous campaign "Moscow without Luzhkov! Return us elections!"
On June, 8th representatives of Moscow public will sign open manifest "Let's Return City to Ourselves!" in which, in particular, said that "further stay of Jury Luzhkov and his "command" in power in Moscow is dangerous and pernicious for city. Recent tragic events in Mezhdurechensk definitely showed that refusal of authorities of real dialogue with society during critical moments leads to radical national actions. In order to avoid social explosion in Moscow we consider it's necessary - to dismiss immediately Jury Luzhkov, to investigate results of his activity as well as to carry out early election to Moscow City Council".
Participants of press conference will also tell about plans on carrying out of next Day of Anger and declare establishment of constantly operating round table "Our Moscow" where projects of reforming of various spheres of life activity in "postLuzhkov's" Moscow will be discussed: housing, town-planning, transport, scientifically-industrial, etc.
From editorial board: It is very essential - not resignation of aged Luzhkov which is just about to leave for natural reasons - not because of the decree of the president but by God's decision. Unless he is going to live eternally and to rush eternally about the city with a horde of assistants, deputies and simply spongers, saying that he lives on one salary and has no relation to billions of own spouse. I am talking about restoration of elections of the mayor of Moscow. As otherwise only the head under known to all cap will change, not situation. It even could become worse, as old mayor has wife - billionaire, while the new one - still doesn't have.
If to demand simply Luzhkov's dismissal - it will be the same as with "Russia without Putin". Unless Medvedev, the second successor, is better than the first? Do you think the third successor will be better than the second? These "Moscow Caesars" manage to bore stiff before they undergo inauguration procedure. The reason is one - we do not choose them, by voting we just confirm co-ordinated in advance person. In case with the president. While in case with appointment of mayor of Moscow we have no relation at all.
The story of appearance of Jury Luzhkov on "Moscow reigning" is algorithm of rolling-up of democratic procedures which have only just appeared in our country - free promotion of candidates, alternative universal suffrage, propaganda freedom and so on. Moscow became that range where mechanisms of suppression of democratic procedures and rolling-up of civil rights which late all the country began to follow were carried out.
Gabriel Kharitonovich Popov was the first and the only quite democratically elected mayor of Moscow. Unsuccessful choice made during unsuccessful time. Muscovites had no chance to improve what they've done - acting mayor, former vice-mayor Luzhkov appeared in the capital. How and whence he appeared - actually everybody knows it, in general - "strong executive manager" grown in bureaucratic capital environment who occupied after the first (and again - unique) democratic elections in Moscow City Council a post of the chairman of Moscow City Executive Committee. Later he together with Popov went on elections which were won - first of all, of course, not by him but by "Democratic Russia" and its promoted worker, professor of economy from the Moscow State University.
It is curious that "by post" J.M.Luzhkov was the deputy of Moscow City Council since 1977 till 1991 - till the first democratic elections when he didn't become the deputy again.
Popov was the mayor for a year, then he "conceded" the post to Luzhkov who, on legislative norm of that time, should have been organized elections of the new mayor in three-monthly term. The deputies of Moscow City Council tried to remind him about it constantly, they also tried to appoint elections of the new mayor which regularly fail to come true as executive power simply ignored it. As a result Moscow City Council was dispersed during revolution of October, 1993 and Luzhkov remained acting. However, in 1992 he was appointed the mayor under decree of president Yeltsin but legality of that decree was not confirmed either by the constitution which was cancelled in 1993 year, or the constitution which came into force in 1994. Moscow City Council tried to challenge the appointment as unconstitutional twice but it was not simply taken into consideration.
Only in 1996 "the best mayor" dared to go to elections in the city which, if to trust mass-media of that time, simply idolized him. The love of townspeople to the mayor was so high that 88,5% of electorate voted for him that vividly reminded Turkmenia and Uzbekistan - all subsequent elective companies of mayor Luzhkov (69,9%, 74,8% of electorate accordingly) were all the time compared to those two exemplary democratic modes. Including appearance of monuments to "the best mayor" of the work of known sculptor.
Later direct elections of the mayor of Moscow were cancelled and Luzhkov was confirmed in Moscow City Council upon recommendation of the president. It deprived at least 10 million Muscovites of constitutional law even formally to choose the head of city administration.
The result of single-source board of the Kremlin appointee whom, actually, Luzhkov was from the very beginning - is known. Having no feedback mechanism with townspeople in the form of alternative elections, city authorities have completely let themselves go and categorically do not wish to perceive any opinion which differs from their own. At that in the most different questions.
Authorities decided to build up Zamoskvorechie with "remakes" - actually the most ancient area of the capital is lost today as architecture monument, there's no historical building from the very Sophiyskaya Naberezhnaya and further from the Kremlin, there are only separate impregnations in-between "resin's baroque".
Authorities do not wish to give Triumphal Square to opposition - actions roughly breaking not only the constitution but also civil rights of citizens took place each 31st day of a month for already whole year in capital. It's like Teflon coating to authorities.
Authorities can confiscate any property, any real estate - and there is no place to complain, except web log.
Authorities appoint municipal tariffs, which origin and structure - a riddle for townspeople. But there's no one to ask from, so-called "deputies" are afraid of the government of Moscow, while they are afraid of public opinion.
For example, the deputy of Moscow City Council Cyril Shcitov easily starts action on "blood recovery" on Triumphal Square on his own behalf - the deputy is 25 years, there's nothing in his biography, except the fact that he graduated from MGIMO. How was he "elected"? Who from voters at least remembers surname of the "elect"? He hardly takes care of this fact. He tells about himself: "I have come to "Young Guards" in 2006, now is 2009. More than 3 years pass - I became the deputy". Actually, three-four years ago it was possible to become the mayor or even the president at such system.
Certainly, direct elections have own lacks but nothing better have been thought up for the present. Certainly, mechanism of promotion of candidates is also important - after all it is possible to block appearance of real candidates, figures of opposition in voting list and to carry out elections in get-together regime. Access mechanism to propaganda is important - it is possible to block appearance of "undesirable" candidates on the air and on the strips of the central newspapers. It is possible to remove the most rating figures for imaginary infringements of elective law. Eventually, it is possible to forge the voting.
The first and the most important step - restoration of this direct voting as that.
Аnatoly Baranov, secretary of ROT-Front
© 1998-2016 FORUM.msk