Staatsräson oder Verfassung: Andersdenken und Gemeinschaftlichkeit in Verfassung und rechtspolitischem Diskurs des post-sowjetischen Russlands. Inakomyslie and Communality in the Constitution and the Discourse on Legal Policy in Post-Soviet Russia

Inakomyslie faces an ambivalent setting in today’s Russia. While the Russian constitution embraces inakomyslie as one of its characteristic features (pluralism), the state creates a legal reality that villainizes minority discourses. This article examines legal aspects of such tension and focuses on constitutional minority rights. The article shows that current legal discourse and legislation are following legal concepts that do not conform to constitutional needs. Especially concerning the so called foreign agent law, two opponent concepts of communality - Fraternite and Sobornost - in freedom of association, vividly appear. While the Russian constitution determines the concept of Fraternite, parliamentary laws and much of the legal discourse seem to favour a concept of Sobornost’. To justify this turn, Russian legal discourse moves outside its subject area and argues historically and culturally. The author questions the idea of legally granted freedom in Russia. He closes with an assessment on the current relation between state, constitution and society, which shows that freedom in today’s Russia does not mark the beginning of political association but is understood as resulting from the state.