Stability of the Constitutions of the Republics within the Russian Federation: theoretical and practical aspects

Safina Svetlana Borisovna Doctor of Law Head of the Department; Department of Constitutional and Administrative Law; Bashkir Academy of Public Service and Management under the Head of the Republic of Bashkortostan Secretary of the Constitutional Council of the Republic of Bashkortostan; Constitutional Council of the Republic of Bashkortostan 450008, Russia, Republic of Bashkortostan, Ufa, Zaki Validi str., 46 svetlanasafina@mail.ru

Each State, when adopting its constitution, enshrines in it those basic ideas and priorities that enjoy the obvious support of the majority of citizens. These provisions, common to many, serve as the foundation for the formation of a socio-political community of the population and the consistency of its ideological position. In this regard, it is extremely important to provide guarantees for the preservation and preservation of the values enshrined in the constitution, in other words, to make it impossible to violate the consent and stability of the state and its basic law. In this regard, A.V. Bezrukov noted that "violation of constitutional stability hinders the provision and maintenance of established law and order and is a constitutional risk" ^{[7, 107]}. The stability of the constitution, as a document containing the main principles of the development of the state and society, allows us to formulate an idea of the future of the country and move towards it.

In legal science, there is no single approach to determining the essence of stability and its characteristic features. The encyclopedic dictionary, for example, reveals the stability of the constitution as "the immutability of the basic provisions of the constitution under the unchanging socio-political conditions of a given society" ^[3]. V. O. Luchin believed that the stability of the constitution presupposes "the effect of its basic provisions during a long historical period of development of the state and society" ^{[4, 22]}. A. A. Manasyan She noted that stability is a property of the constitution, suggesting its "viability in conditions of transforming social relations" ^[5,29]. The same side of the stability of the constitution was highlighted by other authors. S.M.Shakhray, speaking about the effective model of constitutions, wrote: efficiency means "the ability of a constitutional act to maintain its stability for a long time, changing reality in a given direction and" ^{[8, 45]}. N.S.Bondar pointed out that "the stability of the constitution is expressed in its socio-cultural dynamism" ^{[9, 25]}, and V.D. Zorkin - that "the deep meaning of the text of the constitution makes it possible to adapt its text to changing socio-legal realities" ^[10]. Thus, almost all the authors, speaking about stability, rightly did not reduce the stability of the constitution simply to its immutability.

Nevertheless, speaking about the stability of the content of the constitution as the main characteristic of its stability, one cannot but say that one of the legal guarantees of the stability of the constitution is a rigid mechanism for its changes. Many scientists note a more complex procedure for changing constitutional norms compared to ordinary laws ^[2,16]. Of course, the introduction of such a complicated procedure is not a panacea for political and legal chaos and it would be wrong to reduce ensuring the stability of the constitution only to a "rigid" procedure for its changes. Revealing this aspect and pointing to the stability of the constitution as "its long-term effect without making significant changes" ^[1,164], S. A. Avakian noted that they often try to ensure stability by a complicated procedure for making changes, but this option gives almost nothing ^[1,165]. In support of his position, he quoted the words of the Russian statesman N. M. Korkunov: "New, strong demands of a developing society will always overcome the letter of the law that opposes them, and complex, slow forms of constitutional change in practical result will only multiply cases of violent coups d'etat" ^[1,165]. We fully share this position.

Undoubtedly, the stability of the constitution is largely determined by the political environment, the ratio of political forces, and the level of constitutional culture in society. Nevertheless, while ensuring the stability and legal protection of the constitution, the governments of the states introduce a special ("rigid") procedure for its changes as a tool to protect against possible market changes. In the process of constitutional changes, the elements of "rigidity" enshrined in legislation as special legal mechanisms play an important protective role.

To be fair, we note that the stability of the federal Constitution is still being analyzed by Russian scientists, while there is practically no research on the stability of constitutions and charters of the subjects of the Russian Federation. Some scientists question the very formulation of this question. In our opinion, the topic of the stability of the constitutions of the republics within the Russian Federation (in particular) has not only the right to exist, but also needs appropriate theoretical elaboration.

Considering the constitutions of the subjects of the federation for their stability, it should be noted that in conditions of priority of federal law and the federal constitution, regional basic laws cannot have their own autonomous stability. The Federation, consolidating the fundamental principles and priorities in its constitution, is united with its subjects by a single legal field. Consequently, constitutional changes at the federal level cannot but affect the state of regional constitutional texts and in these conditions it is necessary to determine the elements of "rigidity" for the basic laws of the subjects of the federation very adequately.

Constitutional and legal practice knows several mechanisms by which it is possible to ensure the introduction of amendments to the constitution in a complicated manner: somewhere there is a requirement for a qualified majority in parliament to adopt constitutional amendments, somewhere there is a requirement to re-adopt constitutional amendments by the parliament of the next convocation or to adopt a constitutional amendment twice with a certain period of time, and somewhere there is a requirement to adopt constitutional amendments in a referendum, etc. The elements of "rigidity" include the establishment of so-called "immutable norms", i.e. giving some norms of the constitution "immutable" force, i.e. the impossibility of changing them within the framework of this constitution under any circumstances. Recall that the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as a "rigid" constitution, provides for several complications, if necessary, constitutional adjustments: a narrowed circle of subjects initiating constitutional changes; the use of a qualified majority in voting in parliament; the requirement to approve an amendment by a qualified majority (at least two thirds) of the subjects of the Russian Federation; the presence of chapters that cannot be They have been changed within the framework of the current constitution, and if they are adjusted, they lead to the adoption of another, updated constitution.

The constitutions of the republics within the Russian Federation can only show relative stability, derived from the stability of the federal constitution. Being in a unified federal system of legislation, linked by a hierarchy of subordination to the Constitutions of the Russian Federation and federal laws, republican constitutions obviously become "reflectors" of changes in federal legislation. At the same time, the procedure for making amendments to the republican constitutions should be different, and differs from the usual legislative procedure. This procedure proves the special status of the Constitution and serves as a certain guarantee of its stability. This is evidenced by many republican norms. For example, article 73 of the Constitution of Karelia states that the stability of the Constitution of the Republic of Karelia is ensured by a special procedure for its amendment and the procedure for reviewing certain constitutional provisions. Article 140 of the Tuva Constitution stipulates that the stability of the Constitution of the Republic of Tuva is ensured by a special procedure for its adoption and revision of certain constitutional provisions. Article 146 of the Altai Constitution states that the stability of the Constitution of the Altai Republic is ensured by a special procedure for its adoption, amendment and a special procedure for reviewing certain constitutional provisions.

An analysis of the texts of the republican constitutions shows that the procedure for changing them in all republics is complicated in comparison with the procedure for changing the ordinary law, i.e., guided by the goals of maintaining stability, the republican legislator provided for some elements of "rigidity" in the constitutional procedures.

Firstly, in order to emphasize the peculiarity of constitutional changes in some constitutions, the previously used terms "amendments and additions" have been replaced by "constitutional amendments" (Dagestan, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachay-Cherkessia, Mari El, Udmurtia, Tyva) or simply "amendments" (Altai and Buryatia). This is due to the fact that it is appropriate to make "changes and additions" to ordinary normative legal acts, and in relation to the constitution, use the more appropriate term "amendments". At the level of republics, the use of special terminology is not specified anywhere, so the republics determine this independently. It should be noted here that Federal Law No. 414-FZ of December 21, 2021 "On General Principles of the Organization of Public Power in the Subjects of the Russian Federation" in Article 8 refers to the powers of the legislative body of the subject of the Russian Federation to adopt the constitution of the subject of the Russian Federation and "amendments" to it. Therefore, for the purposes of uniform application of terminology, the use of the term "amendments" should still be considered preferable.

Regarding the use of the term "revision" in the Republican constitutions, the following can be said. This term itself, in fact, means a new review, revision of something. With regard to the Constitution, revision may be associated with a change in such constitutional relations that lead to the development of a new draft constitution. As a rule, these are fundamental, basic relations, fixed in the chapter on the foundations of the constitutional system or the chapter on the legal status of a person and a citizen. At the republican level, the contents of such chapters are mostly reproduced from the federal Constitution and cannot be revised by republican forces. This is probably why a significant part of the constitutions of the republics does not talk about revision.

It is impossible not to say here that in a number of republics, amendments to the constitution are introduced by the republican constitutional law providing for special adoption procedures ^{[6, 196-201]}.

Secondly, in all republics, as a rule, the circle of subjects with the right to initiate constitutional amendments is narrower than the circle of subjects of legislative initiative, but necessarily covers the highest official of the republic, the government and deputies in the amount of at least one third of their total number. The federal legislator does not regulate this area, and all republics resolve this issue at their discretion, although the minimum list of subjects of legislative initiative for the level of subjects is established by Federal Law No. 414-FZ of December 21, 2021 "On General Principles of the Organization of Public Power in the Subjects of the Russian Federation". Reducing the number of subjects initiating constitutional amendments seems logical, taking into account the special status of the republican constitution in the legislative system of the republic and the need to provide it with increased protection.

Thirdly, in all republics, amendments to constitutional texts are carried out, unlike changes to ordinary law, by a qualified majority (at least 2/3 of the votes of deputies), which is prescribed by article 12 of the above-mentioned Federal Law. Some republics strengthen the federal requirement of a qualified majority when adopting constitutional amendments with the help of other "rigid" elements. Thus, according to article 108 of the Constitution of the Republic of Mari El, amendments to the Constitution are adopted "by a majority of at least two thirds of the votes of the established number of deputies of the State Assembly of the Republic of Mari El, while in two readings with a break between them of at least three months."

Another element of "rigidity" in making constitutional changes may be the holding of a referendum. For example, in accordance with the constitutional norms of a number of republics, it is allowed to hold a referendum to revise the provisions of the constitution in the Republic of Mari El, to amend the constitution in the Republic of Mordovia, to amend the constitution in the Republic of Udmurtia. In the Republic of Tatarstan, a referendum should be held in case of amendments to Articles 1 and 123 of the Constitution of Tatarstan.

Fourth, some republican constitutions contain specially protected structural parts, the modification of which requires a special procedure. Thus, in the Constitution of the Republic of Tyva, changes to the chapter on the foundations of the constitutional system and the chapter on constitutional amendments and revision of the Constitution require preliminary consideration by the Constitutional Commission of the Republic of Tyva; in the Constitution of Dagestan, changes to the chapter on the foundations of the constitutional system, the chapter on human and civil rights and freedoms, the chapter on constitutional amendments and revision of the Constitution require the participation of the Constitutional Assembly.

The same special conditions are contained in the Constitution of Bashkortostan, in accordance with Article 124 of which proposals for amendments and additions to the provisions of Chapter 1 "Fundamentals of the Constitutional system of the Republic of Bashkortostan" and Chapter 11 "Procedure for amendments and additions to the Constitution of the Republic of Bashkortostan" are considered by the State Assembly of the Republic only after their support by fifty thousand voters.

With regard to those provisions of the Republican constitutions that enjoy increased legal protection and require serious democratic procedures in the event of their change, the following should be taken into account. A certain layer of republican norms in the text of the constitution reproduces the provisions of the federal constitution or federal legislation. So, firstly, such provisions follow the fate of federal norms and cannot be changed by the republic at its own discretion, even under a complicated procedure. Secondly, in case of changes in federal norms, the reproduced federal norms of the republican constitution must be changed unconditionally. This was clearly demonstrated by the large-scale changes in the republican constitutions after the All-Russian constitutional reform in 2020.

It is also necessary to take into account that the republican constitutions are subject to verification by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and at some point their norms may be recognized as inconsistent with the federal Constitution. In this case, inappropriate norms should also be excluded from the constitutional text unconditionally, and therefore the fulfillment of special conditions (collecting signatures of voters, convening a special board, holding a referendum) for changing the constitution in this case seems superfluous. In addition, holding such events, the outcome of which is predictable, is not only difficult, but also very costly from a material point of view. Here it would be appropriate to give an example from the Constitution of Dagestan, article 105 of which states that "in case of changes in accordance with federal law and the law of the Republic of Dagestan, the names of state authorities, positions, as well as in case of recognition by a competent court in accordance with the established procedure, certain provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Dagestan do not comply with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, invalid and not subject to The relevant amendments to the text of the Constitution of the Republic of Dagestan are made by decree of the Head of the Republic of Dagestan. And by such Decree of the President of the Republic of Dagestan dated December 13, 2013 No. 333 "On Amendments to the text of the Constitution of the Republic of Dagestan", for example, in the text of the Constitution of Dagestan, the name "President of the Republic of Dagestan" was replaced by "Head of the Republic of Dagestan".

At the same time, of course, one should not forget about the use of democratic procedures (referendum, people's initiative, etc.) when it comes to constitutional regulation issues of great public importance for the republic and belonging to the exclusive jurisdiction of the republic itself. After all, stability does not mean immutability, and therefore they can be adjusted periodically to take into account new conditions of social reality.

Thus, based on the results of the study, the following conclusions can be drawn.

Firstly, it is obvious that the stability property of the republican constitution is largely derived, depending on the state of the federal Constitution and federal legislation. Therefore, its own "rigid" order of constitutional changes does not have a decisive effect on the immutability of the constitution.

Secondly, the complication of constitutional procedures at the republican level is necessary in those vital issues that the republic has the right to resolve independently.

Thirdly, among the well-known elements of "rigidity" for republican constitutions, the use of a qualified majority of deputies' votes remains justified; narrowing the range of subjects of the initiative of constitutional changes in comparison with subjects of legislative initiative; the use of special terminology ("amendments" instead of "changes").

Fourth, it should be recognized that the introduction of specially protected structural parts (sections, chapters) of republican constitutions requires careful consideration. We believe that it makes sense to differentiate the procedure for changing the constitutional text depending on which norms are subject to correction: reproduced, specifying or supplementing federal ones. In some cases, it is more logical to introduce a simplified order of changes, in some cases - a complicated one. The main thing is to provide the republican constitution with protection from momentary, opportunistic trends in the face of inevitable changes in the political and socio–economic spheres of the Russian state.