Introduction
The article “Separation of powers in post-communist government: A constitutional case study of the Russian Federation” discusses the concept of separation of powers and its importance in democratic governance. According to Weisman (1995), the division of powers is essential to a democratic government because it inhibits any one arm of the government from amassing excessive power and misusing its authority. He acknowledges how the Soviet system of government differed from the democratic system and the challenges Russia faced in transitioning to a democratic system after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Separation of Powers Doctrine
The article explains how the Russian Constitution, adopted in 1993, provides for a separation of powers and highlights the provisions that establish the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government and their respective powers and responsibilities. According to Weisman (1995), the Constitution vests the legislative power in the Federal Assembly, which comprises two houses: the State Duma and the Federation Council. The executive power is vested in the president, the head of state and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The judicial power is vested in the independent courts, which are subject only to the law.
Pre-Soviet and Soviet History
The article provides a historical overview of Russia’s political and cultural history, which is essential to understanding the country’s current political and constitutional problems. The first Slavic principality, Kyivan Rus, emerged in 862 in what is now Ukraine and began expanding to other areas (Weisman, 1995). The Tartars dominated these early states for over two hundred years until Muscovy overthrew the Tartars in 1480, positioning itself as a European power and expanding its territories. In 1721, Tsar Peter the Great proclaimed Russia an empire after a campaign of “Westernization” (Weisman, 1995, p. 1368). The nineteenth century in Russia was marked by a clash between “Westernizers” and “Slavophiles.”
Despite Russia’s strong leaders and military, its economy remained weak, leading to revolutionary movements in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In 1917, the Bolsheviks, led by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, seized power and established a communist economy and form of government (Weisman, 1995). Popular unrest among the nation-states and residents of the USSR soared by the late 1980s, following many years of Gorbachev’s reform effort of perestroika and glasnost. After a failed coup on August 19, 1991, the fifteen Soviet Republics, including Russia, formally proclaimed their sovereignty.
Post-Communist Constitutional Government
Presidency/Executive Branch
The article explains how the Russian president has accumulated more power over time and highlights how constitutional amendments, such as those that allow the president to dissolve the Parliament and appoint judges, have strengthened the president’s power. Weisman (1995) argues that recent history has shown that a powerful executive, such as the president, can threaten democracy. A constitutional structure that allows for cooperation between the branches of government is needed.
The Russian Constitution goes against the principle of separation of powers by giving excessive authority and scope to the office of the president. The document’s drafters intended to create a separation of powers system, but they created a conflicting one. The presidential system that the Constitution formed has been dubbed “superpresidentialism,” which provides the executive branch the ability to intervene in other administrative duties.
Judicial Powers of the President
The President of Russia is seen as the sole representative of the Russian people, responsible for guaranteeing the Constitution and coordinating the entire government. The president is granted the power to use “reconciliatory procedures” to resolve intra-governmental conflicts and can refer such disputes to the courts, but is not required to do so (Weisman, 1995). This grants the president significant power over dispute resolution, usurping the judiciary’s traditional role.
Presidential Lawmaking Powers
The Russian Constitution grants the President significant lawmaking power through decrees, with virtually no checks on this authority. The sole restriction is that decrees cannot run counter to the Constitution or any laws passed at the federal level (Weisman, 1995). This grants the president the right to administer the country by decree until the Federal Assembly acts, which may inhibit the formation of new legislation and hearken back to Russia’s less democratic past.
Presidential Power over Parliament
The Russian president has significant power over the Parliament, particularly the State Duma. It can be dissolved if it rejects the president’s candidate for Prime Minister three times or issues a vote of no-confidence in the government. There are no constitutional restrictions on who the president may propose for the position of Prime Minister, even though he has virtual authority over the Duma. The result could culminate in the president knowingly nominating individuals who are not acceptable and unqualified (Weisman, 1995). Due to the restrictions, it is possible that authentic democratic discussion would be stifled, which will ultimately lead to the presidency dominating the Duma.
Appointment, Veto, and Emergency Powers. The provisions for presidential appointment follow the standard separation of powers doctrine. Still, recent events have cast doubt on President Boris Yeltsin’s commitment to them. The president may veto legislation presented by the Federal Assembly within 14 days. Still, the Assembly can override the veto with a two-thirds majority vote of both chambers (Weisman, 1995).
Any law, however, weakens the president’s ability to make future decisions on this topic without Congress. The phrase “aggression” is not defined. Still, the president has the authority to declare martial rule “in the event of aggression.” If he does so, he is required to promptly inform the Federal Assembly (Weisman, 1995). Without the Federation Council’s authorization, the President of Russia is not allowed to deploy military forces outside Russian territory.
Impeachment of the President
The president’s impeachment process in Russia is more complicated than in the US, but the grounds for charges are similar. The Duma needs the support of one-third of its members to consider charges and can be indicted with a two-thirds majority vote.  Suppose the Federation Council decides to remove the president. In that case, it will have up to three months to do so. During that time, the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court must validate the ruling’s reliability (Weisman, 1995). However, the system may allow the removal of the president on charges for which they could ultimately be found innocent in a court of law
Government
The agencies and ministries created by the legislature have emerged as a fourth branch of government in Russia, alongside the dual executive branch of the Government and the Presidency. The government, headed by the Chairman, has executive authority and can initiate legislation. Suppose there is a dispute between the three branches of government. In that case, the president has the right to dissolve either the government or the Duma and can also preside over proceedings of the Executive branch (Weisman, 1995). Even the government’s resignation requires the president’s consent, thus demonstrating the preeminence of the president’s office.
Legislature/Parliament
The article explains how the Russian Parliament has become less effective in holding the executive branch accountable. It highlights how the Parliament has been weakened by constitutional amendments that limit its powers, such as those that allow the president to dissolve the Parliament. As such, the president’s party dominates the Parliament because the opposition parties are marginalized.
Judiciary
The article discusses how the independence of the judiciary has been undermined in Russia. Weisman (1995) notes that the judiciary is not truly independent because the president appoints judges and the president has the power to remove judges from office.
The article also highlights how the judiciary is often reluctant to rule against the executive branch and how the executive branch has ignored judicial rulings. Weisman (1995) argues that the judiciary’s lack of independence has weakened the separation of powers. Due to the judiciary’s lack of independence, democracy in Russia has become increasingly challenging to flourish.
Conclusion
The article concludes that Russia’s separation of powers has been weakened over time. It argues that the Russian Constitution provides for this separation, but it has not been fully realized in practice. The article suggests that a more robust separation of powers is necessary for democracy to thrive in Russia. The article proposes several ways to strengthen the separation of powers, such as ensuring the independence of the judiciary, creating a more effective parliament, and limiting the power of the president. It argues that a more robust separation of powers would help prevent the abuse of power and ensure that democracy can thrive in Russia.
Reference
Weisman, A. J. (1995). Separation of powers in post-communist government: A constitutional case study of the Russian Federation. American University International Law Review, 10(4), 1365-1398. Web.