PDA

View Full Version : Duma passes new Law on Police despite protests


MeMyselfAndI
Jan 28th 2011, 01:23 PM
Russia’s lower house, the State Duma, has passed the new Law on Police in the third reading. All three opposition parties voted against, but the ruling United Russia’s 315 voices were enough to adopt the legislation.

The law, which got quite a controversial reaction from the public, introduces a number of significant changes to the work of Russia’s law enforcement agency. The document clearly defines police officers’ rights and duties, and sets some new limits to their authority. At the same time, though, the agency gets more rights when it comes to providing security in places that could potentially be targets of terrorist attacks. In addition, it gives it a new name – “politsiya” – as opposed to “militsiya”, which it inherited from the Soviet Era.

In addition, the staff of the Russian police will be reduced by 20 per cent by January 1 next year. According to the Internior Minister Rashid Nurgaliyev “only the best of the best” will stay.

The opposition is not extremely happy with the law and therefore voted against it on Friday.

According to the leader of the “Fair Russia” party in the Duma, Nikolay Levichev, the law leaves space for different interpretations which could be used to violate citizens’ rights. The party demanded that the “backlash” should be removed and hoped for “a constructive dialogue”. However, he said as cited by Interfax, those hopes were not realized.

MP Vladimir Kashin expressed the opinion of the Communist Party by saying that in the final version of the draft, “bureaucratic interests” were put above the idea of a true reform. “Instead of bringing things to order, it was decided to simply change the name [of the police]”. He concluded that today’s Duma decision was a “big mistake.”


Andrey Lugovoy of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDPR) agreed with other opposition parties.He said that his party approved the general idea of the draft when it was considered in the first reading. But the party changed its opinion when it was discovered that only “technical” amendments had been made.


The law is a key element of a major reform of the Internal Affairs Ministry launched by Dmitry Medvedev in 2009. As the president stressed repeatedly, its main purpose is to make the Russian police work more efficiently and transparently.


Before being finally passed, the law went through several stages, both on the level of legislators’ debates and on the internet – by ordinary citizens. For the first ever time, on Medvedev’s initiative, the draft was published online for the public (http://rt.com/politics/law-police-discuss-internet/) to express their opinion. Some of the proposals Russians made during the nationwide discussion (http://rt.com/politics/police-law-discussion-results/)were later added as amendments to the bill.


The law has yet to be approved by the upper house, the Federation Council. It must then be signed by the president and, finally, published in the state media. Once these steps have been taken, the law will come into force on March 1.


http://rt.com/politics/police-law-passed-duma/

A. "Andrey Lugovoy of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDPR) agreed with other opposition parties." This is the man who poured polonium tea for Alexander Litvinenko back in 2006. :) They made him member of Duma to give him immunity from prosecution. He is FSB, of course ('former', but Putin said no FSB or KGB agent that is still alive and prepared to serve his country can be considered 'former' lol), and LDPR was formed by KGB agents in the 90s. Half their members are 'former' GB.

B. What many have a problem with is the renaming. Last time Russia had 'police', were the 'polizei', militias of Nazi collaborators in the 40s, during the War. Russians who worked for the Nazis and were often more brutal to their people than nazis themselves. There are enough people alive still to remember those times, and they tell their grandchildren about this. So, word 'police' has very negative associations for many.

MeMyselfAndI
Jan 29th 2011, 12:20 AM
I just realised, this means they might have to repaint all their vehicles
http://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2010-06/1276250032_0_1c348_10f0198d_xl.jpg

http://i052.radikal.ru/0904/46/bd2b1b4d5949.jpg

http://www.flamber.ru/files/photos/1211922554/1213727241_o.jpg

Probably uniforms will change too...
http://img.lenta.ru/photo/2010/08/22/flag/pic036.jpg

http://www.echo.msk.ru/att/element-656799-misc-4.jpg

I hope they leave same uniforms for policewomen. We like our policewomen, very much
http://policing.ru/file.php?a=photo&ph=30&key=71096981http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs296.snc3/28464_421780251557_721246557_5746246_6031543_n.jpg

:D

Michael
Jan 29th 2011, 09:08 AM
Btw, I've noticed a pattern in many of your pictures of contemporary Russia.

Seems that Russia may have many fine looking women, but the men tend to be uniformly homely. :lol:

Americano
Jan 29th 2011, 10:18 AM
Sounds like a 20% reduction in force will be required to afford putting the new name in place. Repainting, uniforms, ID, signage and such don't come cheap.

Please keep us updated on the female uniforms. In grossly overweight America I haven't seen a collection of fine legs like that in a long time.

MeMyselfAndI
Jan 29th 2011, 01:45 PM
Michael,

Agreed. We are not worthy of our women... lol

Americano,

They are reducing, and I think it is about time. 3.5 million strengh (nearly twice the size of our military) does seem like a little much. Their Internal Troops alone number, in different estimates, between 1.5 and 2 million.
http://s51.radikal.ru/i134/0909/0d/858f486306c0.jpg
http://deadland.ru/files/u2228/____111pic006.jpg
http://kavkaz.ge/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/k1.jpg

They have their own elite Specnaz teams, such as Vityaz
http://rms3d.com/images/Brother/20/S1053841.jpg
(They are very secretive, particularly about their men's identities, so in most photos online their faces are either covered by masks they wear in action, or blurred this way)

http://vipsecurity.ucoz.ru/_si/0/74983049.jpg

This, by the way, is why many think the government is behind the recent terrorist acts. How can this... army, no other word for it, with tanks
http://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2010-07/1278482527_bmpt_09.jpg
(though I heard that, according to the new reform 'Internal' tank units will be transfered to the Army)

and helicopters
http://www.rg.ru/pril/article/40/93/12/600.jpg

not be able to stop some ragtag, even Pakistani-trained terrorists? Unless, it was ordered not to.

And, Americano, I will keep updating you on the women's uniforms :)

Michael
Jan 29th 2011, 02:13 PM
Btw, just for illustration of my point, I punched "US troops" into google images and took the first photo that I could find that showed a group of faces of random soldiers. This isn't truly random, but reasonably so.

http://www.anewsalerts.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/iraq-us-troops.jpg

There does seem to be more relatively good looking men in that picture than in any of the photos of Russians in uniforms that you've posted in this thread and in others.

I don't have an agenda with this comment, nor am I trying to be offensive, rather I just noticed this trend with all the photos of Russian men in uniforms and it did seem a bit different different. Soliders generally do have a bit a reputation for being 'handsome' (no doubt due to the physical fitness of military training).

It does seem odd given that the Russian women in your pictures certainly seem to be as generally attractive as women generally are. :)

Anyway, I'm not going to dwell on this point or go all :offtopic: either!

* * *

Like Americano, I'm interested in the topic itself (not just ugly soldiers and lovely women's legs). The evolution of the Russian security state is certainly of strong political interest to me. We never hear anything about the numerous state security forces. :)

Michael
Jan 29th 2011, 02:16 PM
... not be able to stop some ragtag, even Pakistani-trained terrorists? Unless, it was ordered not to.

Yes, this stuff always does look a bit suspicious and it is very hard from an outside perspective to make a rational judgement call. The question always boils down to, are the failings of the government due to incompetence or nefarious intent?

That was a popular question about the Bush Administration. The evidence for incompetence at the higher levels of command is always strong though. :shrug: