COMMENTARY

Russia's reform law not likely to change anything

1/29/2012

The end-of-December, multi-thousand people demonstration in Moscow against the fraudulent parliamentary election has fizzled out.

But the hot spots could still reignite.

The tens of thousands of mostly young, middle-class Muscovites who demonstrated Dec. 24 preferred to stay home and celebrate rather than to continue with their protest against the rigged election that retained parliamentary control for the ruling United Russia party, led by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

The Kremlin, on the other hand, took heed and kept working, at least those responsible for the political reform draft that was presented to the public last week.

Presented by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who is yielding the presidency to Mr. Putin -- Russia's de-facto ruler -- in March, the draft changes Russia's election laws in a way that at a glance appears to be a major concession to the demonstrators.

Consider this:

● The draft law makes it easier to form new parties. Now it takes just 500 people to form one. It used to require at least 45,000 documented signatures to register a new party and 150,000 for it to run in parliamentary elections.

● Should a party gain at least 30 percent of the vote in at least half the constituencies, it would automatically get half the seats in the Duma, the lower house of the parliament, which would be more than enough to control it.

What is more, the draft law appears to reverse one of Mr. Putin's major accomplishments -- the abolition of election of provincial governors. Now the governors are supposed to be elected once again.

And finally, the draft law postulates independence of the judiciary.

So the Kremlin has tried to prepare itself for the eventuality that a follow-up demonstration scheduled in Moscow on Feb. 4 draws large crowds.

The new whip indeed looks rather like a carrot.

However, all the draft law would do once it is enforced is make it easier for the Kremlin to manipulate the political system while maintaining appearances.

First, in Russia, unwanted parties are routinely refused registration; the pro-forma lowering of the threshold does nothing to change this practice.

Moreover, with more parties, it would be easier for the Kremlin to buy or force the votes it takes to keep the ruling United Russia party in control of the parliament, because with more parties splitting the vote, it would take fewer votes to qualify for the parliamentary majority.

Second, the draft postulates that governor candidates have to be cleared by the president, effectively preventing a viable opposition figure from running for governor.

Lastly, nothing in the draft indicates that the independence of the judiciary doesn't remain just an empty declaration.

However, the good thing is that the December demonstration has impressed the Kremlin to consider any political reform at all.

This may inspire at least some of the young professionals of Moscow to keep the pressure up and may even result in the emergence of a viable liberal opposition.

Unfortunately, so far those who appeared to have the ear of the majority of the December demonstrators sound like die-hard Russian chauvinists.

Clearly, as long as this continues to be the case, the role the United States and its European allies can play in the support of the liberal elements within the Russian protest movement is very limited.

The White House and the State Department would be wise to tread very carefully. Any loud pronouncements in regard to what may or may not become the Russian Spring could be used by the Kremlin and the Russian chauvinists for their own interests.

Mike Sigov, a former Russian journalist in Moscow, is a U.S. citizen and a staff writer for The Blade.

Contact him at: sigov@theblade.com, or 419-724-6089.