OREANDA-NEWS. September 23, 2011. “What is the purpose of power? So people in power can live the sweet life? No. It is to resolve the problems of the people who shape this power through the open and honest expression of their will.”

Transcript of the meeting:

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, friends! I hope I am not disturbing you too much. I would like to hear how the discussion is going.

First of all, my congratulations on the start of the conference. I’d like to hear what you are discussing here. I will say a few words if the opportunity arises.

I apologise, however, if I am interrupting your work. Please continue. I’ll get caught up on what you’ve been discussing.

Andrei Makarov: Thank you, Mr Putin. If I may, I will briefly describe what has been going on here.

In fact, these are rather serious discussions because we are talking about civil society. I should mention that the three words we have heard here most often today are justice, partnership and trust.

Dr Roshal, for example, just said that he believes that the Russian Popular Front helped him to stop a law that is being considered by the State Duma.

Vladimir Putin: It would be good if the Popular Front actually helped pass the law.

Andrei Makarov: This is why he left this session, to continue his fight in the session attended by Healthcare Ministry representatives. I would like to quote an important thing he said: “Those in power must hear the people’s heartbeat.”

There is another viewpoint that I would call a real boiling point. As Fyodor Bondarchuk said, “we reached a boiling point, a concentration of numerous explosives where everything is raging.”

So, we have been discussing civil society and what it can do (we also spoke about whether there is a civil society in our country), and many of us said that there is a huge number of laws and resolutions aimed at making people’ life better but they are not even aware of them. People do not know about them, which means they do not understand their purpose. This situation creates distrust, people lose faith in justice, and, conversely, it breeds a strong desire for justice.

You joined us as we began discussing human rights, the situation in business and the legal system, because no rights can be exercised unless they are protected by the law.

Somebody asked why in English, for instance, the word ‘justice’ has both general and legal meanings, while in the Russian language, with its rich vocabulary, these two meanings are expressed with two different words whose meanings rarely overlap. Basically, that is where we were when you came in. Would you like to comment on this or we can give the floor to Mr Krasheninnikov?

Pavel Krasheninnikov: And I will confirm that this problem exists.

Vladimir Putin: I may not have anything particular to stay at the moment. But, firstly, we should not diminish the English language. As far as I understand, linguists say the number of symbols and words in the English language is even larger than in Russian.

But, Mr Makarov, when it comes to the legal system, you and your colleagues know (because many of those present here are experts) there is a difference between civil law and common law. But there are basic ideas in our legal system that can be found in these two major legal systems. I remember very well what we were taught: the law is always ethical, there are absolutely no unethical laws, nor there can be.

Therefore, I would not say that our legal system, civil law – which includes various systems, such as the laws of Germany, France and the entire continental Europe – is in any way worse than common law. Perhaps it is even better in a sense because it is based on codified laws rather than precedents, and it may be risky to proceed with any case without a qualified lawyer. Our citizens, if they are educated enough, of course, can understand the laws and even defend their rights themselves. So, I do not think that we have a disadvantage compared to anyone else.

On the other hand, the court system needs to be constantly improved. This is absolutely clear. Basically, it is one of our key goals in order to make the legal system fair and capable of protecting the interests of all citizens regardless of where they live, their ethnicity, religion, income or position. The system must be impartial and everybody must be equal before the law.

Is this always true in our society? Perhaps not. But I can tell you that it is not perfect anywhere else. But we can try to achieve this.

One possible solution is, of course, civil society and its capabilities. Is there civil society in our country? Of course, there is. As you know, I was among the initiators of the Russian Popular Front that Dr Roshal spoke about. It is gratifying to watch it grow. A large number of public organisations – I forget how many – including youth, women’s, veterans’ and professional groups, have become very actively involved in its work. Before that many of these groups remained on the sidelines of political activity or were viewed as marginal groups. Now they have been given a platform.

But what warmed my heart is that they exist, and they include some very proactive people. They might not have enough experience with this kind of political or public activity, so it is the government’s duty to help these groups and support them, at all levels including municipal, regional and federal governments and legislatures.

I can tell you something many of you might already know: we decided to allocate significant funds to support non-profit social enterprises this year. Unfortunately, the money has not been disbursed yet because it has not been distributed, I mean the relevant tenders have not been held. But anyway, the money has been allocated and it should eventually reach the target recipients. We have discussed this recently: we are talking about a large amount, some 900 million roubles. A very large sum.

Let me repeat, what I find most encouraging is not even the fact that many of them have joined the Popular Front, but the fact that they are there, that they exist and are active and capable of achieving their goals. It is gratifying to hear their hearts beat. It certainly is. It is the ultimate mission of any government in any country. What is the purpose of power? So people in power can live the sweet life? No. It is to resolve the problems of the people who shape this power through the open and honest expression of their will. In fact a responsible government must do more than listen to the heartbeat; it must be able to find remedies if it detects a flaw in the country’s healthy functioning.

Look at some of the so-called developed economies: they have found themselves in straits. I won’t discuss right now what has brought them to this point. But a government must explain that to the people in a clear and understandable way. It should make the people understand using discussion and dialogue, not tear-gas and police batons. At least most of the people must understand that some of the remedies used in the economy or in the social sphere are necessary for recovery, even if unpleasant, because otherwise, things would get much worse. This is also the government’s duty. The government is not just there to give out candy, but to administer bitter medicine as well. But each of the two should be done in an open and honest way, so that most people understand and support its policies.

Andrei Makarov: Mr Putin, first of all I’d like to thank you for your speech.

Vladimir Putin: This isn’t a real speech.

Andrei Makarov: Can I go first? Everyone here seems to want to fire questions at you at once. Someone said here that Russian businesses are behaving like they don’t care if the deluge comes after them, and they are building a model which is based on that assumption. Do you agree with this description? Someone else said the reverse is true, but businesses are hampered by corruption and other obstacles which need to be eliminated. There were two different viewpoints voiced here.

And one more question. When we talk about criminal law, we are talking about court verdicts and sentencing. The Criminal Code says, literally, that the verdict should be lawful, justified and fair. In civil law, however, when we discuss the 10 million civil cases heard every year – and civil cases are essentially about people’s lives, their property, land, and child support – the verdict has to be only lawful and justified. How about being fair? Many people wonder about this.