According to Ekho Moskvy radio, May Day events in Moscow that had been sanctioned by the city government included five demonstrations, three processions, and eleven rallies. One of the processions was organized by the opposition movement Solidarity, which counted members from a variety of other opposition groups and public organizations among its 500 participants. Prominent figures in the procession included United Civil front leader Garry Kasparov, former Deputy Prime Minister and Solidarity cofounder Boris Nemtsov, and former police Major Aleksei Dymovsky. Participants carried posters, political insignia, and a gigantic Russian flag spanning several meters in length while chanting “Russia without Putin,” “Moscow without Luzhkov,” “Putin is Brezhnev, Putin is Stalin,” “We need the Other Russia,” and “Putin must go,” among other slogans.

Although a smoke bomb was set off at one point during the procession, the police did not move to detain anyone. Protesters believe that a provocateur set off the bomb. Despite that, the procession successfully made its way to Moscow’s riverside Bolotnaya Square, where the event ended with a cultural festival. Police detained several people on the square without explanation, including Andrei Moiseyev, co-leader of Solidarity’s Moscow branch and one of the event’s organizers. Moiseyev was escorted away by police together with a reproduction of a painting by artist Dmitri Vrubel, entitled “The Kiss of Putin and Brezhnev” that he was holding. Also detained were artist activist Pyotr Verzilov, his wife, several musicians, and event co-organizer Sergei Davidis. Police gave no explanations for any of the detentions.

Elsewhere in Moscow, at least five thousand people turned out for a demonstration held by the Communist party. In addition to the Communists themselves, members of the Left Front, the National Bolsheviks, the anti-fascist group Antifa, and anarchist organizations also joined the protest.

The liberal opposition group Yabloko also held a demonstration in Moscow, with approximately 1200 participants. Chief among speakers at the event was Yabloko leader Sergei Mitrokhin, who warned against allowing Prime Minister Putin to return to the presidency in 2012. “We need a new president who won’t rob the people of their rights and freedoms – who will fight not against the opposition, but against corruption,” he said to the crowd.

Another protest dubbed the Day of Anger was held in Moscow by the opposition group Left Front. A wide variety of oppositions, human rights advocates, environmental activists and social justice advocates came together to express their collective grief with Moscow’s ruling elite – in particular, Mayor Yury Luzhkov and Governor Boris Gromov.

Controversy had surrounded plans for the Day of Anger all last week. Left Front leader and event organizer Sergei Udaltsov had said on Wednesday that the city had sanctioned the event, but the mayor’s office denied this the next day. It remained unclear up to the end whether the rally had really been officially sanctioned or not – a vital factor, since participating in an unsanctioned rally in Russia is punishable by law, and many unsanctioned rallies end with participants being beaten and/or arrested by the police. In any case, the rally went on, but Udaltsov was detained at the end. The official reason cited by police was that more people had taken part than Udaltsov had indicated on the application for sanction. According to Left Front press secretary Anastasia Udaltsova, the unofficial version for Udaltsov’s detention, as told by several police officers, was that “representatives of the Moscow government would like to have a chat with him.”

In the city of Kaliningrad, approximately three thousand demonstrators took part in a rally of various opposition groups. According to Kasparov.ru, what began as a traditional May Day demonstration evolved into an anti-government rally. Participants brought signs to the event reading “Peace, work, May – no work, no housing,” and held up tangerines, which have become a symbol of public protest in the city in recent months. Following that, however, protesters began chants demanding for the federal government to resign.

In St. Petersburg, a procession planned by democratic opposition groups was banned by city authorities. Olga Kurnosova, executive director of the pro-democracy group United Civil Front, said that the reason involved the slogan that the protesters had planning to use, which called for St. Petersburg Governor and Putin favorite Valentina Matviyenko to resign. Supposedly, the slogan did not correspond with the slogan written on the application to hold the rally that was filed with the city. Therefore, the procession was banned altogether. Despite that, about seven hundred oppositionists held a stationary demonstration where the procession was supposed to take off from.

A photo gallery of the various events in Moscow is available here at Grani.ru.

Rally organizer and coalition co-founder Konstantin Doroshok said that a founding assembly was held on Wednesday, but leaders have yet to settle on a name for the new union.

The January 30 protest in Kaliningrad, in which between 7 and 12 thousand people participated, was notable both for its massive size and for the diversity of political forces represented. The new coalition features similar diversity, including the Kaliningrad branches of the parties Solidarity, Justice, A Just Russia, Patriots of Russia, Yabloko, and the Communist Party.

According to the Nezavisimaya Gazeta newspaper, coalition leaders invited the local branch of the Right Cause party to join the union, but leader Mikhail Tsikel declined the proposal. The ultranationalist Liberal Democratic Party is also not included in the coalition.

Doroshok said that the union’s main goal is “to break the political monopoly of United Russia,” Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s ruling party, which has dominated the country’s elections at every level since its inception in 2001.

Ekho Moskvy reported that Kaliningrad residents have been threatened with losing their jobs or having their wages slashed if they take part in the coalition’s upcoming rally on March 20. Likewise, students have been promised that they will be expelled.

Meanwhile, the Kaliningrad Public Chamber was set to meet on Thursday with the Public Chamber of Russia to discuss the situation in the region, which has been a media spotlight since January’s massive rally. A relatively new institution, the Public Chamber is an oversight body intended to monitor government activities.

Protesters in the January 30 rally gathered in Kaliningrad to collectively demand that high vehicle tariffs be annulled and that Kaliningrad Governor Georgy Boos and Prime Minister Putin both resign. Boos immediately cancelled his vacation plans and promised to meet with opposition leaders, although he cancelled multiple times before finally meeting with Doroshok on February 26.

Another rally of more than a thousand Kaliningrad residents was held in the city of Yernyakhovsk on February 28, and a demonstration of comparable size to the one on January 30 is scheduled for March 20.

The governor had initially called the meeting after one of Russia’s largest protests in recent history was held in Kaliningrad on January 30. By various estimates, between 7 and 12 thousand residents came together to protest tariffs and call for the governor’s resignation.

The protest gained widespread media attention domestically and abroad, provoking Boos to cut his vacation short and the Kremlin to scapegoat Oleg Matveychev, a political adviser responsible for the region who has now resigned under pressure. The governor then scheduled a meeting with rally organizers for February 2.

However, Boos phoned opposition leaders on Wednesday evening to tell them that the meeting would have to be postponed – already for the second time in less than two weeks.

According to Konstantin Doroshok of the Solidarity opposition movement, the governor said that the meeting would have to be put off because they have not yet been able to ensure participation from all local opposition representatives. He did not specify to Doroshok when exactly the meeting would be rescheduled.

The Gazeta.ru online newspaper cited sources in the Kaliningrad government as saying that the governor wanted to see Mikhail Tsikel, the local representative of the Right Cause movement, at the meeting with opposition leaders. However, in addition to being out of town, Tsikel did not participate in the January 30 rally.

Kaliningrad Regional Duma Deputy Mikhail Chesalin of the Patriots of Russia party was also notified of the meeting postponement by the governor on Wednesday. He added that during their conversation, the governor had mentioned the Communist Party. Local Communist Party representative Igor Revin told Gazeta.ru, however, that their party has not been invited to the meeting at all, leading to speculation as to why the governor would mention it.

The rally was organized by the opposition movement Solidarity, which has gained significant prominence in Russian politics since its inception little more than a year ago. Movement leaders Boris Nemtsov, Vladimir Milov and Ilya Yashin traveled from Moscow to take part in the event.

With the exception of the Kremlin-backed United Russia, representatives of every political party in Kaliningrad were present at the rally: Solidarity, Yabloko, Patriots of Russia, the Communist Party, the Liberal Democratic Party, and A Just Russia, as well as various regional social organizations.

The basis for the rally was the sharp increase of state duties on vehicle registration, as well as high customs duties on imported cars and increased housing and utilities taxes. Protesters demanded the resignation of Kaliningrad Governor and United Russia member Georgy Boos, as well as Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and his administration.

An analogous rally was held on the same day in St. Petersburg.

This is not the first time Russian car owners have come together in a large act of protest. Last December, five thousand people took part in a similar rally in Kaliningrad, demanding the annulment of high duties and taxes. The Federation of Automobile Owners of Russia initiated a process to form an official political movement last November, which they say would work to solve “the economic problems of the middle class and small businesses,” suffering from unfair vehicle legislation.

In response to a question concerning disputed regional elections that took place throughout Russia in October, the president stated that the elections were indeed “not sterile.” Medvedev had previously admitted that the elections were flawed, with numerous cases of blatant fraud having been documented after Putin’s leading United Russia party was given overwhelming wins.

At the same time, Medvedev said that he was hindered from admitting that the problems were of any real seriousness by the low number of court complaints contesting the results. “Altogether throughout Russia on the whole there are 450 to 460. In Moscow, where there were also many claims, there are altogether a few more than twenty demands in the courts,” he said.

Communist Party (KPRF) deputy Vadim Solovyov refuted Medvedev’s information. “I don’t know where the president got these figures. I believe he has been misinformed. The KPRF itself filed 47 suits in the courts, and that’s only the beginning,” he told Gazeta.ru. Those who wish to contest the elections have a year to file suit.

Konstantin Ernst, manager of Russia’s Channel One, asked the president if he was acquainted with the phrase “basmanny justice,” a term used mostly by the political opposition to describe a corrupt judicial system. “Yes, I’ve heard this term,” said the president. “I’m not sure that it’s exact and correct.”

He added, however, that if a judicial system exists in Russia that allows “unjust decisions,” then “it is evil, and we must fight it.”

“Such decisions or sentences should be annulled, and if they are taken under the influence of this or that circumstance – whether it’s money, political pressure, or other factures – those who make such sentences and decisions should be subjected to responsibility,” Medvedev asserted.

Ernst later posed a question about political opposition groups that have repeatedly tried and failed to gain official recognition by the Kremlin, referred to here as the “extrasystemic” opposition. “What place in the political life of Russia do you see for representatives of the extrasystemic opposition, for such people as [former Prime Minister Mikhail] Kasyanov and [oppositionist leader Garry] Kasparov?” Ernst asked.

“You know, the so-called extrasystemic opposition, it is extrasystemic because it does not see itself inside the political system. They chose such a place for themselves. It’s their right,” the president responded. “I treat them with respect, if by doing so our legislature is not violated – electoral [legislation], legislation about social unions, about rallies and so on.”

“They too, probably, reflect somebody’s preferences; it’s true that I sometimes have a hard time saying whose. But that’s already a question of inner value; I wouldn’t want to offend anybody,” Medvedev added.

Kasyanov was scathing in his response. Speaking to Gazeta.ru, he asserted that “Medvedev and Putin are to blame for the fact that today in Russia no electoral institution exists from which they and all the rest of the citizens could learn what number of people share the value of a democratic state and wish to live in a free, civilized country.”

Concerning Medvedev’s thesis that he and Kasparov “chose themselves” to exist outside of the political system, Kasyanov stressed that “there is no place for free people in the political system intentionally created by Putin and Medvedev.” Likewise, Solovyov added that the radicalization of the opposition in Russia is a consequence of the actions of authorities.

The concluding questions addressed various aspects of Medvedev’s personal life, including his late bedtime (2:00 am) and his son’s taste in music.

“You know, like many young people – he is now 14 – he’s a fan of so-called alternative rock,” Medvedev said. “I know little about it, but I know some of the groups and even sometimes listen to them, including this group Linkin Park.”

A source in the Kremlin told Gazeta.ru that while the interviewers had previously discussed with the president what topics would come up during the program, the exact questions had not been specified.

However, political analyst Dmitri Oreshkin asserted that “nothing is accidental in these things.” In his opinion, Medvedev’s responses indicated that he was preparing to run for a second term as president – a competition that Prime Minister Putin has publicly stated that he is considering entering as well. If a direct competition between the acting president and current prime minister comes to be, Oreshkin said, then Medvedev needs to be able to have confidence in the integrity of the electoral, judicial, and law enforcement systems – which is why, said Oreshkin, all of those topics were raised during the interview.

Political analyst Stanislav Belkovsky said that overall, the program is a sign of the Kremlin’s continued policy of spreading bogus signals to the public. By speaking in the spirit of a “conservative modernizer,” Belkovsky said, Medvedev is allowed “to talk plenty, but not do anything.”

He also said, however, that the election results did indeed “reflect citizens’ political party preferences.”

These comments follow Medvedev’s weekend meeting with leaders both from opposition parties and parties normally loyal to the Kremlin. Despite being presented with 120 counts of electoral fraud, he stated that the election results would not be annulled. Vladimir Zhirinovsky, leader of the nationalist Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) and close Putin ally, was a surprising critic of the elections. According to Zhirinovsky, the president stated that election annulments “do not, in principle, happen anywhere in the world, and that the situation has to do with the fact that we must use the judicial process – and we are using it in full force.”

Medvedev did agree that the elections had not been ideal.

Boris Gryzlov, Chairman of the Supreme Council of Putin’s United Russia party, said that by having the meeting, Medvedev had “fulfilled his constitutional role as guarantor of the Constitution.” He proposed that anyone in disagreement over the election results turn to the courts, stressing that there should not be any “political disorder.”

Medvedev requested at the beginning of the meeting that party representatives not turn the discussion into a funeral for democracy. “I intentionally dressed darkly today, thinking that, who knows, you all might be in the mood for a funeral,” said the president.

Deputies from LDPR, A Just Russia, and the Communist party walked out of an October 14 session of the State Duma in a sign of contempt at the election results of October 11. However, after a telephone call with the president the next day, LDPR and A Just Russia agreed to return to their posts; the Communist party returned for the sake of budget discussion.

Elections took place on October 11 in Moscow and 75 other regions of Russia for officials on various levels of government. They delivered sweeping wins for United Russia across the country, continuing the political monopoly it has held since its conception in 2001. Observers noted massive electoral violations, including ballot stuffing and multiple voting with the same absentee ballot.

In Moscow, the majority of opposition candidates had been banned from the ballot. Widespread electoral fraud quickly became clear and has now been statistically documented. Numerous incontrovertible examples highlight the unabashed nature of these violations – opposition party Yabloko, for one, received no votes even at the polling station where its leader, Sergei Mitrokhin, had voted.

According to the party’s data, the pro-Kremlin United Russia party received around 200 thousand votes illegally during the election. Vadim Solovyev, a party legal expert, said this was 10 times the number of votes stolen during the 2003 election, when the Communists also attempted to contest the results.

According to electoral law, the court may annul voting results issued by the Central Electoral Commission if violations are found in certain election procedures. These include problems with forming voter lists, vote counting, and other breaches of the law that contradict the true will of the electorate.

As result, the KPRF is filing a lawsuit consisting of five parts. To start, they charge that media coverage was skewed, as their research found that United Russia received 70% of all television airtime. Further, they add that campaigning laws were broken in favor of United Russia, and that voters were given false information.

Finally, the largest part of the suit deals with discrepancies in voting figures between records given to electoral observers and official vote counts, as well as complaints against electoral officials. The Communists will present evidence of fraud in 26 regions. By their data, votes were added to the tickets of United Russia, as well the other major parties, including Just Russia, LDPR, and even Yabloko in certain regions.

At just one polling station in the Moscow oblast, the KPRF found that 1225 votes were thrown in for United Russia.

Meanwhile, the Central Electoral Commission sees the move by the Communists as an “empty bother.” Gennady Raikov, a member of the Commission told Vedomosti that the agency had already examined all complaints about the election, and has found that they did not significantly effect the results. Still, the KPRF has pledged to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights if their Supreme Court effort is rebuffed.

–

Further reading:

Statistical Evidence of Russian Poll Fraud

Fraud, Interference in Russian Elections

While many spectators came out to watch the military parade and listen to speeches, a large contingent of supporters of the Communist Party (KPRF) marched through central Moscow and expressed outrage at the Kremlin, the Sobkor®ru news agency reports.

An estimated 9 thousand Communist demonstrators took to the streets, chanting “Beat this authority!” “We cannot be broken!” “Down with modern fascism!” “We took the Reichstag, and we’ll take the Kremlin!” “Down with densifying construction!” “Luzhkov, densify yourself!” “The Federation Council will be ours!” “Bears [Medvedi, a play on Medvedev] into the woods!” and “Freedom for political prisoners!”

Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of the Communists, led the procession. Speaking before the crowd at the Teatralnaya ploschad, Zyuganov said that for this holiday, the authorities had only given one present to veterans – higher prices for consumer products and public services. Zyuganov added that all the military gear rolling through Red Square was created during Soviet times, and that no new technology was being created. He went on to say that not one new factory had been opened in recent memory.

The Communist leader then accused Russia’s Finance Minister, Aleksei Kudrin, of letting capital flow out the country at a time when funds should be allocated for the country’s social services. Zyuganov also thanked supporters who voted for him during presidential elections, and who cast ballots to bring the KPRF into the Parliament.

It should be noted that before the event began, 20 members of the Council of Orthodox Banner-bearers who tried to join the Communists, were arrested. The group was charged with breaking the picketing rules.

Arrests also took place at other demonstrations in the city. Four youth activists trying to unfurl a banned reading “No to fascism of all stripes,” were nabbed by OMON riot police, as was a nearby photographer. Another opposition activist, Suren Yedigarov of the United Civil Front, was leading a solitary picket against President Dmitri Medvedev when the militsiya tried to grab his sign, and then detained him when he resisted.

–

A photo-report of the Communist march, courtesy of Kasparov.ru

A report by Al Jazeera covering the military parade:

After the new changes come into effect, a plebiscite cannot be used to resolve questions “directly concerned with the exclusive competence of the State Duma, the Federation Council and other bodies of state authority.” This effectively prevents the use of referendum to resolve issues such as the budget, treaties, or taxation.

A national referendum may currently be started by calling together an “initiative group,” which must have subgroups containing at least 100 people from at half of Russia’s regions. This group must then formulate the questions to be posed, and gather two million signatures. Four have been held since the new Russian Constitution was drafted in 1993.

The new legislation passed with a 363-8 vote, and will now head to the Federation Council, Russia’s upper house. Despite widespread objections, and a walk-out of all 57 members of the Communist Party (KPRF), it will almost certainly pass, and then be signed into law.

The rules on national referendums were first amended at the start of October 2007, after requests from the Constitutional Court. The law was subsequently changed to allow citizens to directly vote on the financial obligations of the government. Lawmakers used the chance, however, to forbid referendums on other questions.

The Secretariat of the Constitutional Court then filed another response to the State Duma, and called into question the new wording of the law. The court pointed out that referendums must not solely be “questions in conflict with the exclusive domain of the Federal Assembly or other federal authorities.”

Vadim Solovyev, a deputy from the KPRF, was troubled that the word “prerogative,” or exclusive right, was changed to “competence,” a much broader term. He explained that member of the pro-Kremlin United Russia party had created a system where “prohibiting a referendum would always be possible.” The deputy added that a legal challenge on the constitutionality of the new law would take at least 3-4 years to even reach the Constitutional Court.

In 2005, the KPRF attempted to initiate a referendum, but was turned back when Russia’s Central Electoral Commission (CEC) determined that 15 of their 17 questions were unlawful. The questions, in part, dealt with federal spending on health-care, education, as well as minimal pensions. The KPRF then took the matter to the Constitutional Court, which determined on March 21st 2007 that questions on the financial responsibilities of the government could in fact be solved by a referendum.

Some critics of the current legislation believe the law is an outrage—the latest sign that Russia’s government has no respect for its citizens, and that it wants no input from the electorate. They cite other steps taken by the legislature, such as removing direct elections of deputies to the Parliament, raising percentage thresholds for political parties, abolishing a minimum voter turnout, and removing “against all” as a ballot option.

The Associated Press quotes Alexander Kulikov, a KPRF deputy:

“Passing this bill will mean that we’re asking people to shut up.”

UPDATE:

On April 16, 2008, the Federation Council, Russia’s upper house, passed the referendum bill.

On April 25th, 2008, President Vladimir Putin signed it into law.

In total, 31 members of parliament have come together on the issue, sending a formal declaration to Russia’s Central Electoral Commission (CEC). Two presidential candidates, Vladimir Zhirinovsky and Gennady Zyuganov, included their signatures on the document, which charges that federally-owned television channels have been dominated by coverage of a third candidate, Dmitri Medvedev. Medvedev, widely favored to win in March, carries the endorsement of President Vladimir Putin.

According to the statement, a single January 29th meeting of Dmitri Medvedev with the Association of Russian Jurists received 1038 seconds of television coverage. The same day, all reporting on Gennady Zyuganov totaled at 204 seconds. Zhirinovsky received 197 seconds of airtime, and Andrei Bogdanov, the final registered candidate, had just 95 seconds.

The report also considered the duration of direct quotes from the candidates. Medvedev’s lecture at the Association of Russian Jurists was given 301 seconds, while all of Zyuganov’s speeches for the day had 94 seconds of coverage. Zhirinovsky saw 98 seconds, and Bogdanov had 36 seconds for the day.

Based on these figures and other instances, the authors of the statement reach a conclusion:
“Violations of electoral law [and] disregard for the corresponding legal principles of the Council of Europe, reiterated time and time again by decisions of the European court, [are now] documented by monitoring of the informational-political TV airtime in the electoral campaign for President of the Russian Federation, [and] call into question the legitimacy of the presidential electoral campaign as a whole.”

Vladimir Churov, the head of the CEC, has previously dismissed any such allegations, saying that the electoral campaigns of each of the presidential candidates are equally covered in the mass media. Dmitri Medvedev’s appearance in the news is not connected with the electoral campaign, according to Churov, but with his work in the government and his position as First Deputy Prime-Minister.