Trump's victory in the US elections was the main story of many world news. There is an opinion among some politicians and economists that he will not be able to “sit” in the White House for a long time. The American Congress has a serious political tool in its hands - the procedure for removing the president from office. As long as Trump's Republicans are in power, there may be nothing to fear. But what happens if hostile Democrats win the congressional elections? It remains a mystery. Reflecting on this, our citizens begin to wonder: does our country have a procedure for removing the president of the Russian Federation from office? We will try to answer this question.
Removal of the president from office, or who is in charge in the country
In our country, such a measure is provided for in the basic law. According to the Constitution, the dismissal of the President of the Russian Federation from office is possible with the participation of two higher state entities at the same time - the Federal Assembly and the State Duma. Learn more about how this happens.
Procedure for removal (impeachment)
The legally legal early removal of the head of state is called impeachment. The procedure for removing the President of the Russian Federation from office is as follows: the State Duma brings charges against the head of state.
This could be high treason, as well as other serious crimes. After that, a special commission is convened within the legislature. Then the discussions begin. Authorized persons from the group that made such an accusation, the chairman of the special commission, other deputies, called experts, judges, etc., speak. The president, through his representatives, as well as representatives of the Federation Council, also have the right to appeal to people's deputies. After all discussions, the issue is put to a vote. A minimum of two-thirds of the votes are required to approve this procedure.
Court Participation
After the dismissal of the President of the Russian Federation was supported by the Duma, the decision goes to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. He issues an opinion on the observance of all necessary procedures in accordance with the fundamental law of the country. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation also participates in the procedure, which must find signs of corpus delicti in the actions of the head of state. Only after that the decision goes to the Federation Council.
Discussion in the Federation Council
At meetings, the Chairman of the State Duma is the first to start his speech. He reads the accusations to the president, the results of the vote. The chairmen of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court take part in the discussion. Each of them read out the conclusions, whichhave been de alt with before in these courts.
In the Federation Council there is a commission on constitutional legislation and judicial and legal issues. Its chairman also read out the conclusion. Both the president himself and his representative can speak in the discussions.
Final decision
After that, the issue is submitted to a secret ballot by ballots. If two-thirds of the members of the Federation Council supported the accusations, then the president was removed from office. The head of state must resign. Acting at this time, the chairman of the government of the Russian Federation until the urgent election of a new head.
However, the procedure for removing the president from office is such that if the Federation Council delays the consideration for more than three months, all charges are automatically dropped. All of the above suspension actions must be re-executed.
Why is there no vice president in Russia
Few people remember this now, but Russia initially developed precisely as a parliamentary republic, and not a mixed one. Although in fact we have a presidential one.
In Russia, after the collapse of the USSR in 1991, the post of vice president was introduced on the American model. They became G. I. Yanaev, who was elected at the Congress of People's Deputies. He supported the GKChP coup in August 1991 and even declared himself acting president.
A. V. was elected the next vice-president of the RSFSR. Rutskoy on June 12, 1991 as one candidate with B. N. Yeltsin. However, after a political confrontation between the head of state and the Congress of People's Deputies, the latter initiated the removal of the president from office. Rutskoi, according to the Constitution, became not only vice president, but also acting. However, Yeltsin was not going to cede power. Tanks were brought into Moscow, which opened fire on the building of the Congress of People's Deputies.
Just imagine for a moment, the highest body of power under the current Constitution is being shot from tanks with direct fire on the orders of Yeltsin, who was removed from power. After these events, the Congress of People's Deputies did not dare to start a bloody civil war and meekly surrendered. Power was usurped by Yeltsin, who introduced the new Constitution of 1993.
According to the country's new basic law, the post of vice president was abolished, and a new body called the State Duma began to have much less powers. When evaluating these events, we rely only on the legal aspect, without taking sides in the conflict. In fact, Yeltsin's power was illegitimate until December 1993. But as they say, winners are not judged.
Who came up with impeachment
Impeachment, or removal of the president from office, was invented at a time when such a position did not exist. The first country where this concept appeared was England. It was back in the 14th century. However, it was not the monarch himself, who, as you know, “from God”, but his favorites, was subjected to the impeachment procedure. The problem was that only the king personally could appoint himselfministers. Therefore, only he could remove them from their posts. This state of affairs did not suit the citizens, as they were subjected to lawlessness by the ministers. Appeals to the king were ignored. Then the House of Commons decisively took the initiative into its own hands and legalized the removal of ministers from office without the permission of the king. The golden time for favorites is over, and the procedure itself has become known as impeachment.
Precedents in Russia
In the recent history of Russia, the dismissal of the president has never been practiced. Only in the Soviet Union, as a result of a political conspiracy, was the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee removed from office once. Just think, in an authoritarian regime, democratic peaceful impeachment procedures have taken place, which have never happened in the “standard of democracy” in the United States.
In the modern history of Russia, this also did not happen. The only impeachment of Yeltsin that took place led to the shooting of the Congress of People's Deputies from tanks. As a result, the latter was liquidated. In 1998-1999, there was another attempt at impeachment by the State Duma. However, the matter did not go beyond a vote within the country's legislative body.
Impeachment and "sex scandal" in the US
There have been only three cases in US history when impeachment proceedings were initiated. None of these attempts were successful. Evil tongues joke about this, that they prefer to shoot American presidents than to remove them.
If the first twoattempts to impeach were in the distant past (1868 and 1974), the last one took place relatively recently - in 1998-1999. It is associated with the name of the president from the Democratic Party - Bill Clinton. The House of Representatives charged him with false testimony in a high-profile criminal case.
Clinton was accused of harassing an Arkansas government official in 1991. Then the future president was the governor in it. In a hotel room, Bill Clinton offered Paula Jones (that's what her name was) an intimate relationship. After a long time, the girl sued the current president for harassment. The story, perhaps, would have remained fiction, rumors, if not for the scandal with another young girl from the White House apparatus - Monica Lewinsky. Rumors leaked to the press that she and Bill had an intimate relationship. Monica herself, as well as Clinton, denied this. At trial, both admitted under oath that they had not had a sexual relationship with each other. This was confirmed by the deputies of the President.
However, after some time, Monica unexpectedly retracted her testimony and admitted that she had a close relationship with the president. As confirmation, she showed a dress with Bill's biological traces. Many skeptics did not believe it, because two years have passed since these events. However, DNA showed that the seminal fluid really belonged to Clinton.
As a result, the Senate considered the case ofimpeachment on charges of perjury of the president, since the first time he said that he had not had sexual intercourse with Monica. However, Clinton skillfully "got out" in court. Apparently, the profession of a lawyer was not in vain. He stated that oral sex is not considered sexual intercourse. Oddly enough, the court accepted and acquitted his arguments, and the Senate did not receive the necessary majority.
