Why in Russia they don’t want to introduce emergency mode so much


Coronavirus pandemic has already caused great damage to the Russian the economy, sharply reducing business activity and contributing to a drop in hydrocarbon prices. It seems that the regime of so-called "self-isolation" can decently drag on, capturing not only April but also May. Considering that many people in our country are forced to work according to “gray schemes” and therefore cannot rely on compensation, and the older generation will rush to their gardens and beds in a couple of weeks, large-scale discontent cannot be avoided.


Without denying the need to introduce restrictive measures to combat the coronavirus pandemic, one has to ask a question: how legitimate are the measures taken by the authorities and what will be the next inevitable reaction from society?

Let's try again to separate the flies and cutlets. Yes, restrictions are needed, the experience of Wuhan and China as a whole has shown that quarantine helps to overcome the spread of COVID-19. But the fact is that we have no “quarantine” in Russia. Instead, the legally unregulated concept of “self-isolation” was introduced.

President Putin, a lawyer by training himself, who for years created the regime of manual control of the country in the format of the notorious "power vertical", has now "self-isolated", entrusting the governors with a pandemic, and periodically telecoms with frightened Russians from the "bunker". And the independent actions of the governors cause a lot of questions. For example, the head of the Nizhny Novgorod region introduced a regime for controlling the movements of his population through QR codes. An ineffective access control system in Moscow created on the eve of a real collapse in the metro of a multi-million megalopolis. Instead of preventing coronavirus disease due to the actions of the city authorities, conditions were created for the infection of COVID-19 Muscovites and visitors.

According to Art. 27 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, all citizens of Russia have the right to move freely and choose their place of residence. The restriction of these inalienable rights, in accordance with Art. 55 of the Constitution, it is possible only on the basis of federal law. Now, many legally savvy people are asking a fairly fair question why President Putin, the guarantor of this very Constitution, does not introduce an emergency or emergency regime, which is the legal basis for quarantine measures.

On April 1, the head of state signed a law on empowering the Cabinet of Ministers with the authority to introduce a high alert and emergency, including because of epidemics. There was a certain gap in the emergency law: the epidemic was not explicitly stated as the basis for introducing an emergency situation in the country. Now it has been very quickly eliminated, but the law has not been applied, although many, for example, business representatives, insistently demand this. Why?

First of all, we must not confuse emergency situations and emergency situations (state of emergency). The latter is a much tougher regime, which provides for the restriction of the rights and freedoms of citizens, their mobilization, relocation to other regions, etc. Emergency in Russia is a fairly common practice due to regular floods, forest fires, and other natural and man-made disasters. Usually an emergency is declared at the regional level, but recent innovations have given such authority to the federal government.

If you call a spade a spade, the coronavirus pandemic is an emergency of a biological and social nature. For this regime, in contrast to “self-isolation”, there is a developed regulatory framework and a unified state system for preventing and combating emergencies, in which all relevant departments should be involved: the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Emergencies, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Rospotrebnadzor and others, as well as whole civil defense system. In the structure of the Ministry of Emergencies there are rescue centers, aviation rescue centers, there are special reserves of material resources (medicines, transport, communications, food, protective equipment, fuel, etc.). Work plans have been developed, there are trained officials with personal responsibility for the results of their actions.

However, this powerful mechanism remains unused. Instead of the emergency mode, “self-isolation” has been introduced, where professionals should work, parallel civilian structures, such as the operational headquarters and the working group of the State Council, are leading the fight against pandemics. The result is so far appropriate, the normal functioning of the country is paralyzed. Meanwhile, the May holidays, the “garden season” among senior citizens, sessions and vacations among schoolchildren and students are approaching.

So still, why is the emergency mode still not introduced? Now in some media publications have begun to appear justifying this decision. If you believe them, this mode will hit a business related to logistics, food delivery, etc. Some experts point out that unscrupulous entrepreneurs use emergencies as a basis for failure to fulfill their obligations under contracts and employment contracts. The population is frightened by the confiscation of their property, for example, cars for solving mobilization problems.

But there is another look at this problem, which is expressed in social networks. Here is what one such “evil language” writes:

Under quarantine and emergency, the state announces force majeure, and all agreements lose their force, including mortgage agreements. The state becomes the guarantor of fulfillment of obligations, it incurs costs. During isolation, you sit at home without work and money, and you are responsible for your financial risks.

Probably the truth is somewhere in between. It is clear that the real emergency situation is not sugar at all, and a certain financial assistance from the state is promised. It is possible that the emergency mode will still have to be applied, for example, in Moscow, if the situation is not taken under control by the civil authorities.
Photos used: https://pixabay.com/
Ctrl Enter

Noticed oshЫbku Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

19 comments
Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in

  1. Arkharov Online
    Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) April 16 2020 12: 27
    -1
    • 3
    • 4
    Serious article.
    1. Marzhecki Offline
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 16 2020 12: 35
      +3
      • 6
      • 3
      I am a lawyer by first education. I am very interested in such legal nuances.
      1. Arkharov Online
        Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) April 16 2020 13: 14
        -3
        • 1
        • 4
        I also have a relationship.
      2. Don36 Offline
        Don36 (Don36) April 16 2020 19: 37
        +6
        • 6
        • 0
        I agree with you extremely rarely, but here, perhaps, I agree. Things are really rotten. They are already writing that the plateau of the epidemic will be somewhere in July, and as for me, this is still an optimistic statement. As for the fact that many are forced to work without registration and are now left without a penny, I also agree, and this is a sad fact. Official work in the Russian Federation, alas, is not enough for everyone. Although our company has a fairly stable paid, but unhealthy and life-threatening service in the OSI system, the situation does not please me, since an increase in unemployment will worsen the criminal situation in the country ... that’s not honey with sugar at all ... Legal nuances are just not so interesting to me, but the actual situation cannot but strain ...
      3. A.Lex Offline
        A.Lex (Secret information) April 17 2020 12: 23
        +1
        • 1
        • 0
        I agree with you here, Sergey (which is rare). But I have, in my unprofessional opinion, an explanation for such a reluctance to introduce an emergency mode. These are capitalist relations in the country (even though we have "wild"). After all, the owners of capital and production have already lost a significant portion of profits. And they categorically do not want the introduction of a regime. And since in us (and throughout the world) capital has a direct impact on the government (or even is directly connected with it) - it will counteract the emergency introduction regime with all its capabilities. This is not Soviet socialism for us - where the central government commanded, and the leadership on the ground and in the enterprises took "under the peak" and executes.
  2. Oleg Rambover Offline
    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) April 16 2020 13: 48
    +2
    • 3
    • 1
    Under quarantine and emergency, the state announces force majeure, and all agreements lose their force, including mortgage agreements.

    And what, before during fires and floods, when an emergency was introduced, did the state pay the mortgage? And even with an emergency, is it obliged to pay the obligations of citizens?
  3. Tektor Offline
    Tektor (Tektor) April 16 2020 18: 35
    +2
    • 2
    • 0
    The country will enter into emergency mode involuntarily if self-isolation lasts more than a month. This will already be full quarantine, which will cause irreparable damage to many citizens, probably 50% of the total population. And then any court can decide on force majeure in most situations. And this means that many loans will be reset, because borrowers on understandable grounds (loss of earnings, work) can justify the objective default of their obligations. If, during self-isolation, the borrower fell ill with a coronavirus infection or lost his job, then any court can decide on force majeure circumstances.
    1. Marzhecki Offline
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2020 07: 41
      +1
      • 1
      • 0
      Emergencies have been de facto for a long time. This is precisely the legal component, from which certain rights and obligations will follow.
      1. A.Lex Offline
        A.Lex (Secret information) April 17 2020 12: 25
        +1
        • 1
        • 0
        wink Especially obligations. lol
  4. Smirnoff Offline
    Smirnoff (Victor) April 16 2020 20: 58
    0
    • 1
    • 1
    Why in Russia they don’t want to introduce emergency mode so much ???

    Emergency - a backup option and until the time has come.

    In Russia, over the past day on April 15, there were 78 new cases of new coronavirus infection recorded in 3448 regions.
    The total number of infected people in the country has reached almost 28 thousand, the operational headquarters reports.

    In Moscow, the daily growth of new cases of COVID-19 decreased.

    Over the past day in Moscow 1370 new cases of coronavirus were detected - this is the first decrease in the increase in the incidence in the capital since April 11, the operational headquarters for monitoring COVID-19 said on Thursday.

    Thus, the daily increase was 22,8% lower than the day before, when 1774 new cases of COVID-19 were recorded.

    The total number of patients with coronavirus in Moscow reached 16 thousand 146 people.

    The previous decrease in the growth rate of coronavirus cases in Moscow occurred on April 11, when 1030 new confirmed diagnoses were recorded, which is 8,4% lower than April 10.

    In addition, according to the headquarters, this week the city is REDUCING the number of deaths with coronavirus.
    So, according to the evening of April 15, seven people died in Moscow,
    April 14 - 11,
    April 13 - 13.

    If the decline has gone, then the emergency mode will not be required.
    1. bear040 Offline
      bear040 April 16 2020 23: 51
      +2
      • 2
      • 0
      You better pay attention to the number of patients, it increases every day and the number of cases per day is growing all the time, this is printed on Yandex. In my city, 3 have already died and 69 are sick, the number is also only increasing, so things are lousy ... there is no decrease in the Russian Federation.
    2. Marzhecki Offline
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2020 07: 43
      0
      • 0
      • 0
      This is the legal and economic aspect of this “quarantine”, if you do not understand.
    3. savage1976 Offline
      savage1976 April 18 2020 02: 51
      +1
      • 1
      • 0
      Data is presented on an accrual basis, that is, survivors or deceased are not deducted from the number of cases. Thus, even with 1 new diseased, there will be an increase in the disease.
  5. 123 Offline
    123 (123) April 16 2020 21: 01
    +1
    • 3
    • 2
    Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov)
    Serious article.

    Marzhetsky (Sergey)
    I am a lawyer by first education. I am very interested in such legal nuances.

    Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov)
    I also have a relationship.

    Such a mimicry correspondence. yes It's so funny to watch you. laughing

  6. Marzhecki Offline
    Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2020 07: 39
    0
    • 0
    • 0
    Quote: 123
    Such a mimicry correspondence. It's so funny to watch you.

    For your comments too. As a matter of fact, there is nothing to say, so I understand?
  7. 123 Offline
    123 (123) April 17 2020 10: 45
    +4
    • 5
    • 1
    For your comments too. As a matter of fact, there is nothing to say, so I understand?

    Firstly, it is inconvenient to get into a dispute between two "distinguished lawyers".
    Secondly, are you sure that you yourself understand the essence of the issue?
    Liberdyuk moans about the power vertical, manual control, frightened Russians, I don’t even see the point of commenting. For this only in the stuffing, on which the flies flock, it remains to poke an attractive face. But since you prefer to crap exclusively through the Internet, this desire is unrealizable.

    According to Art. 27 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, all citizens of Russia have the right to move freely and choose their place of residence. The restriction of these inalienable rights, in accordance with Art. 55 of the Constitution, it is possible only on the basis of federal law. Now, many legally savvy people are asking a fairly fair question why President Putin, the guarantor of this very Constitution, does not introduce an emergency or emergency regime, which is the legal basis for quarantine measures.

    Perhaps these people only consider themselves legally savvy, since they believe that measures taken are possible only with the introduction of a state of emergency? The Federal Law "On the Protection of the Population and Territories from Emergencies of Natural and Technogenic Character" of 21.12.1994. No. 68-ФЗ they did not try to read? Restrictions on movement were introduced earlier, however, on a smaller scale, for example, in flood zones during floods and floods. And no one shouted about a violation of the Constitution. request
    If my opinion is interesting, I would retain the right to free movement for these "legally savvy" ones, including the permission to switch the carriageway to red light and stand under the arrow of a crane. yes

    There was a certain gap in the emergency law: the epidemic was not explicitly stated as the basis for introducing an emergency situation in the country. Now it has been very quickly eliminated, but the law has not been applied, although many, for example, business representatives, insistently demand this. Why?

    If the law does not apply, then its application is not yet considered necessary. The answer to the question why the "guarantor" does not introduce this very regime is simple - it does not consider it necessary. Or do you think you or "concerned businessmen" know better when to introduce?

    If you call a spade a spade, the coronavirus pandemic is an emergency of a biological and social nature. For this regime, in contrast to “self-isolation”, there is a developed regulatory framework and a unified state system for preventing and combating emergencies, in which all relevant departments should be involved: the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Emergencies, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Rospotrebnadzor and others, as well as whole civil defense system.

    The regulatory framework, and so it allows you to use all of these departments.

    However, this powerful mechanism remains unused. Instead of the emergency mode, “self-isolation” has been introduced, where professionals should work, parallel civilian structures, such as the operational headquarters and the working group of the State Council, are leading the fight against pandemics.

    What substantiates this conclusion is incomprehensible. request Can concrete examples be given where the “mechanisms” remain unused?

    The result is so far appropriate, the normal functioning of the country is paralyzed.

    What do you mean by "normal functioning" is a mystery. There is no reason to say that the country's vital activity is paralyzed. If you mean life before the introduction of restrictions, movement, work of enterprises and so on, then with the introduction of the emergency mode, none of the above will return. Limitations will continue or increase.

    Under quarantine and emergency, the state announces force majeure, and all agreements lose their force, including mortgage agreements. The state becomes the guarantor of fulfillment of obligations, it incurs costs.

    And why do we need a situation where all contracts lose their force? Why should the state take upon itself the fulfillment of all obligations indiscriminately?

    During isolation, you sit at home without work and money, and you are responsible for your financial risks.

    This is not entirely true. Measures in this direction are being taken. For loans, including mortgages, deferrals, salaries must be paid, including those working at private enterprises. Another thing is that nothing works for those working on the “black scheme”. But here excuse me, without paying taxes, it is naive to count on state assistance.
  8. Marzhecki Offline
    Marzhecki (Sergei) April 19 2020 08: 15
    -1
    • 0
    • 1
    Quote: 123
    Firstly, it is inconvenient to get into a dispute between two "distinguished lawyers".
    Secondly, are you sure that you yourself understand the essence of the issue?

    Yes, it would be better if you did not crawl into the dialogue between the two lawyers with your comments. laughing
    You are simply not capable of anything other than demagogy.
    1. RusDon Offline
      RusDon (Igor) April 22 2020 07: 56
      0
      • 1
      • 1
      Two lawyers? Funny .. made laugh ....
  9. Marzhecki Offline
    Marzhecki (Sergei) April 22 2020 09: 07
    0
    • 0
    • 0
    Quote: RusDon
    two lawyers? Funny .. made laugh ....

    Show you a finger, also laugh, apparently, you will. lol