The question was raised during a discussion of the legislation when A Just Russia Deputy Dmitri Gudkov asked whether protesters would be allowed to wear medical face masks.

In response, United Russia Deputy Vladimir Pligin of the State Duma Committee on Constitutional Legislation responded that nothing that covered a protester’s face would be permitted.

Numerous opposition activists have worn masks to protests out of fear of facing political persecution.

As Gudkov pointed out on his blog, the Committee on Constitutional Legislation has rejected the majority of amendments proposed by oppositionists.

“The law is a hellish hell. Welcome to North Korea. What falls under its scope?” Gennady wrote. “Here is a quote from bill author A. Sidyakin (United Russia): ‘Weddings fall under the law if they turn into political performances that result in a violation of public order.'”

In an attempt to point out the absurdity of the new legislation, Gudkov asked his fellow deputies whether he would be required to submit notification to the Moscow mayor’s office about his own upcoming wedding. This was brushed off by the majority of deputies, who said that wedding organizers wouldn’t face any possible fines under the new legislation even if the wedding was politicized. How they reconciled this with Sidyakin’s previous assertion was unclear.

In addition to banning masks, the legislation, proposed by United Russia deputies, would raise the fine for violating the procedures for holding a protest to 1 million rubles (about $34,000). It passed the first of three required readings in the State Duma on May 22, largely thanks to United Russia’s 238-seat majority in the 450-seat body. The vote was 236 to 207, with one abstention.

According to the article, Vladimir Pligin, chairman of the Duma Constitutional Legislation Committee and a member of the Kremlin-backed United Russia party, stated that it would be more advisable to create such a committee under the president.

A presidential electoral monitoring committee, Pligin says, would deal with the implementation of electoral legislation. It would include representatives of the presidential administration, members of the Central Elections Commission (TsIK), and representatives from various parliamentary parties.

An anonymous source in the Kremlin confirmed to Vedomosti that the presidential committee would mainly work to implement reforms proposed by President Dmitri Medvedev in his state of the union address on November 12, in hopes of meeting his deadline of April 2010. According to TsIK member Gennady Raykov, the TsIK itself has yet to receive any instructions concerning the reforms.

In response to complaints by the Communist Party over fraudulent elections in October, State Duma representative and United Russia member Boris Gryzlov had earlier proposed that an electoral monitoring committee be created in the State Duma. After two months of negotiations, no committee was created.

A presidential committee similar to the one described by Pligin was implemented in 2000, which, according to Communist party lawyer and Duma representative Vadim Solovyov, worked effectively. However, in his opinion, a State Duma committee would serve a different purpose: not only would it be able to implement amended legislation, but it could also refer alleged violations to the TsIK and the appropriate law enforcement agencies. “Gryzlov, in his innocence,” says Solovyov, “made the proposal; but United Russia simply got scared.”