Principles of the state political system

It must be understood that any public subsystem: public health care, public health services, building, trade and all other subsystems in general do not function independently, being guided solely by their own rules: they function under state Laws. In their turn, these Laws are written by one group of people, while another group of people supervises over correctness of their execution.

To understand when, how and on what basis the Laws will be published and realized in the society, one should understand first, who and by what right is be engaged in the subject.

This matter refers to the ‘state political system’ – the system, which describes, who, on what basis and which body of power may enter, how long would be the office term, the level of authority of each concrete official, the degree of control over the work of official and the possibility of his dismissal from the office.

The political system is the basic system of the state. It makes a part of the state model, because its modification would lead to changes of the state model.

Today the procedure of people coming to power bases on a person: everyone has the right to be elected and, consequently, a great variety of persons run in elections: coffin makers, jobless, actors, military men, housewives, etc.

When someone goes to the polls, we know about him only the facts he tells us about himself and, certainly, what his competitors will say about him. As a matter of fact, here we see PR and a ‘black PR’ only. No one will ever show us real results of the candidate’s work (and it some cases there might be no such results at all). No one will tell us, what will be the candidate’s actions after elections, because many come to power from absolutely different regions, and frequently they have no idea, what and how they are going to do.

As a result, while running elections they promise us whole mountains of gold, and there’s no need to remind what we really get after elections – it’s well known.

In order to avoid further destabilizing of political system and possible collapse of the state let's formulate


  1. A procedure of people coming to the power should be the main, so that only the most experienced, fair, reasonable, decent people certainly possessing the art of government could be promoted step by step to every higher level. In this system it will not be of much importance who personally will reach the top, because in any case there will be the most worthy ones.
  2. Every slightest possibility of ‘imperial’ state ruling style shall be eliminated, because sooner or later such possibility always leads to usurpation of power.

Now we will consider the way it can be realized.

First, we will define, how many power branches should there be. 2 branches will not be enough, because there will be a rivalry ‘who’s more powerful’, meanwhile to have 4 or more will be unpractical.

So, there should be 3 power branches: executive, legislative and judicial (since mankind has already come to this optimal scheme), provided

All branches of power should be really independent from each other.

It is reached by three rules:

1. Each branch of power should be elected at all levels.

Heads of executive and judicial authority, as well as the legislative branch of all levels should be approved through a direct general voting. All branches of power should undergo the election procedure, only this will provide their genuine equality.

Nomination of persons ‘from above’ to the main offices of region / city / district – is a direct way to corruption. People should have the right to elect the one, who will lead them, and have the right to refuse independently from services of dishonest officials not waiting for the money and posts are distributed ‘above’.

Moreover, all branches of power undergoing through procedure of elections every 4 years will be forced to report the results of their work. This is one of the best methods of control by society of the power bodies functioning.

2. Two branches of power are more powerful than the third one.

That is, for example, if the governor of region has begun activities obviously damaging the regional economy, a joint solution of the judicial panel and the legislative assembly of the region can point out to inadmissibility of such activities, up to decision-making on removal of the governor from his office. The same refers to other branches of power. It will strengthen the equality of branches of power, eliminates the uncontrollability of activity of any branch of power during the elective period and allows us to have one more degree of civil control over the activity of power and its separate representatives.

This actually eliminates any possibility of ‘imperial’, i.e. individual, ruling schemes. That is why even the official of the highest state position, for example, the President of the country, can be warned of inadmissibility of some solutions, and relieved from the office.

3. Transfer from one branch of power to another one without level lowering shall be prohibited.

When working in the State Duma, it will not be possible to leave for the work in the Government of Russia, but only for the work in the Government of a Federal subject. Actually, it is a direct prohibition for merging of powers, and namely this guarantees independence of branches of power from each other.


Among them:

1. Voting in any branch of power should be held only under personal lists, i.e. only for concrete persons.

In no case it will mean the end of parties existence. On the contrary, any parties and movements have the right for activities. The fact that a person is a member of a certain party should serve him as plus or minus in elections, but in no way this will be a dominating parameter. People should clearly understand, who they vote for, and precisely know who’ll be accountable to them after elections.

It may appear so that the program of party ‘A’ is very good, but Mr. Ivanov - but the party candidate - is a person with a shady past. Meanwhile the program of party ‘B’ is not so strong, but Mr. Petrov - this party candidate – is a fair and all around decent professional. It is obvious that in this case it would be much better to elect the candidate of the party ‘B’.

Elections differ by much, at times we need to elect many people by one voting, for example in the State Duma elections. Finally, it is not party worms going to work in the Duma, but concrete persons, therefore I should have the right to vote for the party ‘A’ program, and to elect Mr. Petrov to a concrete position.

2. Elections can take place, provided there run no less than 2 candidates.

3. Elective period for all branches and power levels shall make 4 years.

Elective period should be very well substantiated: if you are a good leader, citizens may entrust you the right to hold the office again. However, if you fail to fulfill the duties, citizens should have the right to refuse from services of such a candidate within a reasonable period before he’d done errors. 4 years – is a reasonable elective period applicable in the World. Frequently, longer periods lead to usurpation of power.

4. The election system (2х4) + (2х4) should be applied.

Every citizen should have the right to be elected twice to the same position. It happens, the person is very good in the office and people with pleasure would give him a chance to continue holding a responsible post. Such persons should be given the right to stay in the office once again. For this purpose in the end of the 8-year period a referendum should be held with a question, whether citizens grant him the right to stand for 2 periods once again.

In case if at this referendum not less than 51 % of voters from the total number of citizens (irrespective of the number of referendum participants) say ‘AYE’, this elected candidate acquires the right to stand for 2 periods more.

If more than 40 % of citizens say ‘NEY’, it means he is not trusted and should be deprived the right to stand for any elected positions within the next 10-year period.

In any case, it would be inexpedient to give a chance to hold one position for more than 16 years. After such period the head of office even physically would not be able to introduce something new, let him make way for the young.

5. Only professionals may work in each branch of power.

No one would dispute the fact that the hospital should be run by a medical man, and the school by a teacher. However, for some reason any Tom, Dick or Harry may be elected to the power. The principle: ‘every kitchen maid can rule the state’ shall have to become a thing of the past! Mayors, governors, let alone the President, should have an administrative background, deputies and judges – legal education, as a minimum.

5.1. Every citizen with no experience of service in the executive branch of power can be elected to an executive office of the lowest level only. For all other levels of executive branch the experience of service in the executive branch shall be mandatory.

For example, if town N of the M-sk region is the lower layer of power, both a medical man or an architect can become the mayor of town N, provided they have a professional diploma in state government. However, only the one, with a record of work in the executive branch of power for no less than a certain period, eg. 2 years, can be elected the governor.

Any work, including the administrative one, has certain specifics. The higher is the level of power, the greater is the scope of work and responsibility before the people. It is an awful situation, when a newly-elected non-professional in the office learns to rule at the expense of the territory and its population. The person going to upper power level should already possess good administrative skills and operational experience, in order to apply them straight away and in larger volumes.

6.1. Climbing a career ladder in the executive and judicial branches of power should be similar to the army system, a higher post can be held only after all the lower positions have been passed.

For every position a list of subordinate posts should be defined, no running in the election would be possible, if such positions have not been passed. People should have a chance to see the results of the person’s work in the previous offices for they could reasonably judge, whether this person could be deputed to a higher office.

6.2. Every citizen shall have the right to stand for any post in the legislative branch of power.

Legislators are engaged in making laws. The main thing in this process is an idea, which little depends on the experience of legislative work. A person may have an idea of correct organization of a certain sphere of human activity, or may not. Among other things, deputies may seek an advice of assistants and lawyers, who will always help to dress a wise thought in a competent statement of the Law.

7. In any branch of power, only a person who had resided in the related territory for no less than 10 years, can become a candidate. In case if elections cannot be held in the territory, elections have not taken place or a person cannot hold his elective office any longer, an external manager can be approved for the elected post, however the period of his powers should not exceed the time before holding the regular elections.

It means that only a townsman living in the town for no less than 10 years can become a mayor of the town, the president of the court or a member of the town council. Same refers to the level of region and higher.

Currently, it’s cool to appoint creatures ‘from above’, bringing, especially to the territorial bodies of executive power, the persons who have nothing in common with this territory. First, the new chief for no less than a year gets to know the specifics and peculiarities of the supervised territory. Second and main, such a chief has nothing that would relate him to this territory, he cannot love and care it as the native resident would do.

Every person going to run for the power should know the territory. This requirement provides no guarantee, but it gives a hope that the candidate would treat the territory with care and reason.


All in all it means the following:

1. Definite parameters should be specified for each level of every branch of power, which would clearly demonstrate the quality of this structure operation.

The parameters should not be abstract, but rather be of an accurate statistical character.

The executive branch of power will be characterized by financial and economic indices of the supervised territory. If within the elective period there were no unforeseen situations, or the more so catastrophes or cataclysms, it is obvious that financial and economic indices should demonstrate a growing trend. There should be a certain boundary, below which the work of executive office shall be considered unsatisfactory automatically.

The legislative branch of power will be characterized by the quality of adopted laws. Most laws can be assessed from the point of view of their usefulness. It is obvious, the adopted laws should not be cancelled judicially after a short period.

The judicial authority will be characterized by the quality of court decisions. If the judgement is contested in the higher level instances or by call in public and/or inspecting bodies, it means, there is a doubt in the justice of awarded judgement. The maximum percent of contested, and the more so cancelled judgements should be established, beyond which the work of judicial body could be considered unsatisfactory.

2. Every candidate for any branch of power should have a clear program stating, what he’s going to do in the office. This program should serve as a quality criterion for the official’s work.

The election program should cover the whole elective period. Separately, it could be discussed, if there would be a need for an annual revision of the candidate’s activities in relation to his promises. However, by the end of elective period his activity shall be estimated obligatory, all the more so, if this person wishes to run in elections once again.

3. If the citizen runs in elections not for the first time, regardless of the position, level of power or the branch of power he’ running for, he shall submit both: a new elective program, and the previous elective programs attached, this in very important, with assessment of their fulfillment.

This will allow the voters to select the best candidate among the offered ones.

4. The candidates, whose work in the previous office has got negative assessment, shall not be deprived of the right to participate in elections.

Let’s imagine a situation: a little town needed development and solution has been made on complete town re-planning, a number of houses have been demolished or relocated, streets have been made wide and big park and recreation areas have been planned. It is clear, financial and economic indices of the territory have sharply gone downward - much has been destroyed, residents are moving to new houses and are busy rebuilding their living accomodations. However it is obvious that a large scale and very useful project is being realized with a key for the future. Only citizens are to decide, this or that candidate is worth running in election. Certainly, statistics provide one of the most precise assessment tools, still it is capable to describe not every bit of the situation.

5. Heads of all branches of power of all levels of power shall bear personal responsibility before all related residents for the solutions made and their consequences.

Law makers shall bear personal responsibility for the quality of laws they have adopted, judges - for the quality of court decisions, heads of executive branches of power - for administrative solutions. If the published law, or the management of territory, or a concrete court decision was wrong and has led to severe consequences, for example, unfair placement in custody, misuse of funds, or, which is even worse, to armed conflicts, the managers in charge for this solution shall be held responsible to the fullest extent of the law for their consequence, including the financial and criminal ones.


The form of bulletin should be changed: two graphs AYE and NAY should be placed against each candidate’s name. Every voter shall have the right to vote pro only one candidate and an unlimited number of times against any number of candidates.

In case if by result of voting some candidate has got over 40 % of negative votes from the total voters, he shall lose the right to run in election for any position for the next 10 years.

It may happen that power attracts odd people (for example, an actor may run for the governor’s office), or persons with a shadowy past, and such facts arouse mistrust in voters. Citizens should have the right to deprive a person of possibility to be elected if they see it necessary. Therefore, they should have the right both to support a candidate they like, and to express incredulity to the one who does not suit them. Very often in elections one candidate wins against another with the minimum advantage literally in some percent of votes. However, if we recollect the presidential elections in Russia 1996, when Yeltsin and Zyuganov competed hard, we will recollect that almost half of the society was against Yeltsin and the other half was against Zyuganov.

One may wonder, whether a candidate has the right to hold a high supervising position, when a big percent of population discredit him categorically? I'm afraid not.

Such voting technique would help to eliminate any possible social strain after elections, and would solve the matter of graph «Against all candidates» automatically - it will be just not needed, the citizen has the right to tick the box in the graph NAY against each candidate.


1. Every legislative body should be elected by two equal-quantitative directions: 1) representatives from the territories falling under the precinct area, 2) representatives of various trades and/or fields of activity of the person under the lists provided by political parties. The list of trades and/or fields of activity of the person, from which candidates will be elected, shall be approved before the elections by a higher-level legislative assembly. The list of trades of the state supreme legislative body shall be approved by the very supreme legislative body of the state. A direct personal voting by show of hands in the related territory shall be held under both lists. One and the same citizen cannot run elections under two lists.

The person coming to power solves the matters of a group of people, which has put him to power. Accordingly, being run by some party - he will not be solving matters of specific residents or professional issues, but he’ll be acting in the party’s interests. The party – is an absolutely faceless organization, and a person, being put forward from its rows, first, has no personal accountability to those, who has elected him. Second, the party is a public organization of the national scale, and as every big structure, when lowering the level of power, it becomes less manoeuverable at the local level. What is good in the national scale, can be hardly acceptable or even non-realizable in a concrete town. That is why there should be no elections on the party lists - they do not meet to the interests of voters.

The main task of a law-making body - writing of competent laws, which regulate the live of society. Two components are needed for giving light for these laws: 1) good and smart legislators only are capable of writing good laws; 2) additionally to law-makers the laws required for the society, good laws may be drafted and put forward by legal experts, lawyers and even individual citizens, therefore a certain system capable to pass quickly the expectations of society over to legislators is needed.

The laws accepted by legislative assembly of any level of power are intended to define most expertly the frames, within which the residents of the governed territory are supposed to live. Only a person put forward by his neighbors will be able to protect them at maximum. Besides, when needed, the resident should know exactly whom to address, if he considers necessary to put question to the power or to make a proposal. For this reason, there shall be elections of representatives from the territories.

Now, let's recollect how the work of legislative body is organized. Laws are adopted at the moment of voting by all legislators simultaneously, but framing of laws is made in the committees and commissions, which are arranged by a professional principle, for example, the commission on building, committee for property issues. It is obvious that legislators should represent as much as possible wide spectrum of trades. What makes us to have in the State Duma 20 bankers, 15 sportsmen and 10 singers? It would be quite enough to have one of every trade.

It is not a matter of dispute that problems of teachers are better solved by teachers, and problems of doctors – by doctors. Legislative assembly of any level is intended through its work to define at most balance the frames of operation of various fields of people’s activity. The more informed approach there is applied, the more competent laws will be adopted. For this reason, representatives from the maximum number of trades and directions of personal activity should enter the state legislative assembly. At the local level, the complete list should be limited to the positions most important for the territory.

That is why the optimal election run for a legislative branch body should be organized in two ways: 1) in single-mandate districts, where every person would know his deputy and could contact him 2) by a professional principle, i.e. deputies from various directions of human activities.

Example: local council elections soon should be run in town M of region N. Town M has 5 microdistricts, accordingly there will be elected 5х2=10 members of local council. 5 from them are representatives of microdistricts, and 5 - representatives of trades (for example, the legislative assembly of the N region has approved the list consisting of a teacher, a builder, a doctor, a sports representative, and a representative from the local township-forming enterprise). Several candidates (minimum 2) run from each of microdistricts, and trade unions or other bodies run their candidates from each trade.

Accordingly, the bulletin will have two paragraphs: in the first one the citizen should vote for a candidate, he’d like to be elected from his own microdistrict, and in the second one the citizen should elect 5 candidates, he’d like to be elected from each of trades. In this voting bulletin he can put a tick against all candidates, he’d like to be / not to be elected, and to put a tick in the end stating ‘I vote for not voted positions’ in the list of the party he liked.

One should feel no fear that once in 4 years citizens should vote under a list of 250 trades running for the state legislative assembly. The state structures are engaged in their daily activities - law enforcement bodies reveal criminals, medics treat their patients, and the public transport carries passengers. With certain rights and obligations of citizen, one may allow himself within 2-3 weeks of voting campaign to spend few hours studying the offered candidates and to execute an informed voting.

By the way, here the party lists might assist seriously. In a situation where the citizen feels unsure of professional peculiarities, it will be easier for him to cast his vote for this or that candidate, when the latter belongs to this or that party.

2. Only the candidates with less than 10 years working record in trade can be elected to any other legislative body under the lists of trades and/or activity fields. Any citizens can be elected under personal lists.

It seems evident for us: once a person is going to represent his profession in a legislative body, he should possess in-depth knowledge of it. When drawing up this or that law the understanding of the essence of process or nuances of trade will be of primary importance, and any legislative body includes enough of lawyers, who would assist dressing a competent knowledge of the subject into an exact legal statement.

For the one, who is going to represent the interests of residents, his trade is not of much value, the confidence of his voters matters much more.

3. The citizen has the right to work job-off in a legislative body being elected under trade list for 2 terms maximum, i.e. for 8 years only.

It does not matter at what level of power you protect your trade. If you wish to protect the trade legislatively, you should be well aware of all trade-internal problems. For 8 years of work off the main job too much would be forgotten, new nuances along with new problems may appear in trade, and only a person being on point with a perfect understanding of situation should solve them.

Similarly this item refers to deputies staying too long in office: regional and federal legislative assemblies work on a constant basis, which means a full-time occupation. Accordingly, no deputy can take physically more than 8 years in office.