Development of the Approval Procedure for the Head of Russian Government in the 1990s

A. A. Berlov
{"title":"Development of the Approval Procedure for the Head of Russian Government in the 1990s","authors":"A. A. Berlov","doi":"10.30570/2078-5089-2023-111-4-163-177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the analysis of conflicts surrounding the approval procedure for the head of the Russian government in 1996—1999. The procedure was formed under the conditions of the acute confrontation between the President and the State Duma, with both aiming to fill the procedure with their own different content. While the presidential branch of power assumed that the appointment of the head of government was its prerogative, and the functions of parliament were purely advisory in nature, the deputies insisted on expanding their own participation in the process, demanding, in particular, that the State Duma should take part in determining a range of candidates proposed for its consideration. The author documents the gaps in the mechanism for approving the head of government described in the 1993 Constitution and examines in detail the positions of the State Duma and the President on the procedure provided for by this mechanism. After that the author turns his attention to the conflict that occurred in August-September, 1998. According to his assessment, the legislative branch’s victory in this conflict was largely explained by the fact that, given the confrontation experience they already had with the president, the deputies began in advance to work out possible strategies for pressuring him. The launch of impeachment procedure and consultations with voters, the Federation Council, and extra-parliamentary political associations, appeared to be the most efficient strategies. However, the State Duma’s victory was not consolidated at the institutional level. As a result, the legislative branch, out of all its gains, retained only ceremonial and consultative components of the approval procedure for prime minister. The presidential branch of power has returned all the positions it lost in 1998, regaining its decisive role in appointing the government.","PeriodicalId":508002,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Political Theory, Political Philosophy and Sociology of Politics Politeia","volume":"25 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Political Theory, Political Philosophy and Sociology of Politics Politeia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2023-111-4-163-177","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article is devoted to the analysis of conflicts surrounding the approval procedure for the head of the Russian government in 1996—1999. The procedure was formed under the conditions of the acute confrontation between the President and the State Duma, with both aiming to fill the procedure with their own different content. While the presidential branch of power assumed that the appointment of the head of government was its prerogative, and the functions of parliament were purely advisory in nature, the deputies insisted on expanding their own participation in the process, demanding, in particular, that the State Duma should take part in determining a range of candidates proposed for its consideration. The author documents the gaps in the mechanism for approving the head of government described in the 1993 Constitution and examines in detail the positions of the State Duma and the President on the procedure provided for by this mechanism. After that the author turns his attention to the conflict that occurred in August-September, 1998. According to his assessment, the legislative branch’s victory in this conflict was largely explained by the fact that, given the confrontation experience they already had with the president, the deputies began in advance to work out possible strategies for pressuring him. The launch of impeachment procedure and consultations with voters, the Federation Council, and extra-parliamentary political associations, appeared to be the most efficient strategies. However, the State Duma’s victory was not consolidated at the institutional level. As a result, the legislative branch, out of all its gains, retained only ceremonial and consultative components of the approval procedure for prime minister. The presidential branch of power has returned all the positions it lost in 1998, regaining its decisive role in appointing the government.
20 世纪 90 年代俄罗斯政府首脑审批程序的发展
文章专门分析了 1996-1999 年期间围绕俄罗斯政府首脑审批程序的冲突。该程序是在总统与国家杜马之间激烈对抗的情况下形成的,双方都希望在程序中加入各自不同的内容。总统权力部门认为任命政府首脑是其特权,议会的职能纯属咨询性质,而议员们则坚持扩大自己在这一过程中的参与度,尤其要求国家杜马参与确定一系列供其考虑的候选人。作者记录了 1993 年《宪法》中规定的政府首脑审批机制中存在的漏洞,并详细分析了国家杜马和总统对这一机制所规定程序的立场。随后,作者将目光转向 1998 年 8 月至 9 月发生的冲突。根据他的评估,立法部门在这场冲突中获胜的主要原因是,鉴于他们已经有了与总统对抗的经验,议员们提前开始制定向总统施压的可能策略。弹劾程序的启动以及与选民、联邦委员会和议会外政治团体的磋商似乎是最有效的策略。然而,国家杜马的胜利并没有在制度层面上得到巩固。因此,立法部门在取得所有成果后,只保留了总理审批程序中的礼仪和协商部分。总统权力部门夺回了 1998 年失去的所有职位,重新在任命政府方面发挥了决定性作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信