Adopting of a budget in the second reading was quite predicted and even boring. As a matter of fact what was accepted what was talked over much earlier. I shall not make comments on the second reading as the mass-media will do it without me and more qualitative.
I’ll comment on another bill rather dangerous to citizens owning some land area. In the bill passed in the first reading with rather complex name can be seen desire of the state, to be more exact some bodies of state authority and institutions of local government, to receive legal opportunity of taking away the lands of citizens without serious indemnification.
It could be called as: "reservation of the lands for the state needs" (and for municipal, certainly, also). Under this bill, if it becomes a law, any authority including local can accept the plan of development of the region or area where the lands belonging to summer residents or countrymen will be declared "reserved for corresponding needs". The list of such "needs" can be rather various as it is open.
Actually, after the announcement of such decision, citizens, no matter if they are tenants, land users or land owners, cannot use the sites during the period of three years. During this period the state or local authorities should "redeem" their sites having given indemnification which sizes are not stipulated. It is possible to imagine that in duration of several months after "reservation" the market price for such sites will fall several times and land owners will be compelled to give them to the state for nothing.
Furthermore the lots will be transferred subsequently to rich investors and gradually all citizens of the small and average prosperity, not capable to protect themselves legally or using "power" or administrative way (now adjudgement for withdrawal of a lot is not needed) will be turn out from all prestigious and expensive places where the trading and entertaining centers will be placed as well as cottage settlements for the well-to-do owners.
From my point of view the bill is anticonstitutional as it assumes an opportunity of deprivation of citizens of the land ownership without the decision of a court. This is obvious contradiction to the constitutional guarantees of the property right. The most sad is that the most serious repartition which will touch upon many people will immediately begin.
And "Southern Butovo" probably will then be recollected with nostalgia as an example of the fair attitude to people! At least there were some judicial decisions.
Deputy Chuev asks all readers of FORUM.msk to help to distribute this text so that greater number of people would take steps for counteraction to this obviously prolobbied by financial oligarches bill. If mass letters to Administration of the President and the State Duma addressed to the Chairman of the State Duma Boris Gryzlov will start flowing than there is a chance to change seriously the bill or to suspend its acceptance (meanwhile it is real!)
Meanwhile the bill has passed in the first reading, its name is of a quite neutral type "About Introduction of Modifications and Additions in the Acts of the Russian Federation Directed on Reduction of the State Expenditure at Reservation of the Land for the State Needs". Certainly it’s not the exact name but the meaning is clear.
