Russian constitutional projects and their West European prototypes

Abstract

A.Medushevsky introduces his readers to such vital questions as whether the great revolutionary conflicts and political reforms was the bridge to creation of modern Russian constitutional system. The aim of this paper is to explain the phenomenon of Russian constitutionalism in past and present. The history of Russia includes the great number of constitutional attempts which had failed, but their real impact on creation of liberal tradition and political culture in general has not been properly analyzed. The author traces his origins, critically analyzes its nature and main trends, political structure. He examines the process of transition from pre-revolutionary autocratic rule to constitutional monarchy, democratic social order and after that a direct way to renaissance of authoritarian regime. Modern attempts in this direction also can be characterized as the organic part of original and genuine political tradition, the most important trend of which is the permanent struggle between the idea of representative government and bureaucratic power. The need to introduce some kind of constitutionalism was felt by the Russian ruling elite soon after Peter the Great's death and found its first expression in 1730 with the so called "Konditsn". The next step in this direction was N.L.Panin's reform project of the higher echelons of the state. Other project from this time also aimed at further enlarging the powers and legislative functions of the Senate and other ruling organs. Considerable interest has been shown in comparative analysis of different forms of Russian legal ideology (in different political projects): the oligarchic constitutionalism of the most influential court parties of eighteenth century Russia (Verhovniki, Count Panin's group, projects of political reforms of Count Bezborodko and Vorontsov) with their prototypes from England, Sweden and Poland; the concept of a true or legal monarchy with the existence of fundamental laws, which Montesquieu considered to the most important for enlightened absolutism (it was realized first of all by Catherine the Great in her Instruction for Legislative Commission and later in policy of official constitutionalism at the beginning of the nineteenth century); modernizing bureaucratic absolutism of the XIX century with its policy of semi-constitutional reforms from above (projects of M.M.Speranskiy N.N.Novosiltsev and Manifesto of future Russian constitution drafted by Alexander I). Another part of the Russian constitutional tradition represented by constitutional projects of the most outstanding figures of the decabrist movement (P.I.Pestel and N.Muraviev) that deeply influenced Russian political thought before the reforms of the 1860s. This path was revolutionary in many aspects. It envisaged the abandonment of the old patriarchal system through the abolition of serfdom and the monarchic regime and the introduction of a European model of government and judicial system (in republican or constitutional monarchical form). The author outlines the main features of the Russian bureaucratic constitutionalism after the reforms of the I860's (the projects of P.A.Valuev and M.T.Loris-Melicov). Throughout this period, the author states, the steering wheel of Russian constitutionalism was the enlightened bureaucracy, which through such a reformistic path tried in fact to preserve the monarchical government. It was a form of bureaucratic constitutionalism from above. The educated liberal society and its most important thinkers (B.N.Chicherin, K.D.Kavelin, A.S.Muromtsev) contended that only a strong centralized state could simultaneously keep order and promulgate sweeping civil reforms, for when nations lacking democratic experience embark on extensive reforms, the absence of a powerful state apparatus may lead to uncontrolled revolutionary ferment. The 1905 revolution brought to the light the urgent need for political modernization in Russia. But autarchic regime showed itself unable to promote those political measures through which modernize itself and the Russian society as a whole. The author sketches the true meaning of the term "constitution" as it appears in the judicial literature and political projects in the period after French revolution (1789). Between the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century the constitutional question aroused a great controversy the Russian government. In the eighteenth-century Russia the meaning of the word constitution was different from the one that the reformistic movement would give it in the nineteenth century. The term meant in fact political system, implying the strengthening of the autocratic regime. In the early twentieth century, Russia was ruled by an institutional system commonly defined constitutional monarchy. This term, however, encompasses a variety of forms and expressions. Along some generally shared characteristics, the type of regime shows features that vary from country to country. Within this general framework the author outlines the constitutional systems of three countries (England, France and Germany) that exherted the deepest influence on the European institutional arrangements and Russian legal consciousness. From this point of view he shows the crisis of the absolutist framework as a constitutional model and the way to new principles of modern liberal state. According to that position author distinguishes typological variety, developmental alternatives and different forms of legitimization of such a regimes. He explores the evolution of this phenomenon from French to Russian revolutions, political transformations of our times in Soviet Union and modern Russia. He comments and criticisms are based on theoretical and politological study of great constitutional systems of modern times.