The Constitution of the Russian Federation: Drafting and Implementation

This article concerns the original text of the Constitution of the Russian Federation adopted in 1993 and its early implementation. Preparations began around the dissolution of the Soviet Union; it was not written in a single effort by one author. The Congress of People's Deputies' Constitutional Commission continued to work on drafts, with Oleg Rumyantsev as its executive secretary and head of the drafting working group. Sergei Shakhrai, Anatoly Sobchak and others also put forward different proposals.

The debate concerned the distribution of power among president, parliament and government. Atsushi Ogushi's comparison of drafts from 1990 to 1993 shows that most major proposals retained both a president and a head of government, differing over who would exercise greater control of the executive. In 1993 the presidential side promoted a Constitutional Conference, while the parliamentary commission continued along another drafting path. The two should not be treated as the same institution.

References: [4] [5]

The conflict between President Boris Yeltsin and parliament escalated in autumn 1993, and Moscow's parliament building came under shellfire during armed confrontation in October. After the president gained the political initiative, the new constitution was placed before a popular vote. These circumstances made both the adoption procedure and the balance of powers subjects of lasting controversy; later participants' recollections cannot simply be treated as conclusions shared by all sides.

On 15 October, Yeltsin signed Decree No. 1633, scheduling the vote for 12 December and providing for the president to submit a draft endorsed by the Constitutional Conference. An annex set out secret voting, counting and appeal procedures. The Central Election Commission was to determine the validity of the vote and confirm adoption if more than half of those voting supported it. The vote would be invalid if participation fell below half of registered voters. This was a special procedure established by presidential decree.

References: [2] [5]

The popular vote took place on 12 December. In Resolution No. 142 of 20 December, the Central Election Commission reported turnout at 54.8 percent of registered voters and support for the constitution at 58.4 percent under its stated voting measure. It confirmed the validity of the vote and the constitution's adoption. These were the election authority's official statistics at the time; they should not be restated as meaning that 58.4 percent of all registered voters supported it.

Rossiyskaya Gazeta published the constitution and the resolution on 25 December. Part Two expressly distinguished the dates: 12 December was the adoption date, while the constitution entered into force upon official publication following the voting results. Thus 25 December 1993 marked publication and entry into force, at which point the previously applicable and repeatedly amended 1978 constitution ceased to have effect. Drafting, confirmation of results and implementation were separated by an actual procedural interval.

References: [1] [3]

Part One of the original constitution comprised nine chapters and 137 articles, while Part Two addressed concluding and transitional provisions. Article 2 placed the individual and individual rights and freedoms at the centre; Article 13 recognized political diversity and a multiparty system; and Article 15 gave the constitution supreme legal force and direct effect. Chapter Two further specified rights including expression, belief, property and judicial remedies.

The federal arrangements recognized different categories of constituent entity, including republics, territories and regions, and distinguished exclusive federal powers, shared powers and powers retained by constituent entities. Transitional provisions stipulated that where the Federal Treaty or other agreements between central and regional authorities conflicted with the constitution, the constitution would apply. National unity and regional differences were thus placed within one set of fundamental rules rather than sustained solely through agreements among the parties.

References: [1]

The president was head of state and determined the basic direction of domestic and foreign policy, while appointment of the head of government required the State Duma's consent. The original Article 81 prescribed a four-year presidential term and prohibited one person from serving more than two consecutive terms. These were the 1993 provisions; term lengths amended many years later must not be projected back onto them.

The Federal Assembly comprised the Federation Council and the State Duma. The Duma had 450 seats and an ordinary term of four years. If it rejected the president's nominee for head of government three times, the president would appoint the head of government under the constitution, dissolve the Duma and call new elections. The president also possessed decree-making and legislative veto powers, although decrees could not conflict with the constitution or federal law. This design connected executive and legislature while substantially strengthening the presidency.

References: [1] [4]

Transitional provisions allowed the incumbent president to continue performing his duties until the end of the term for which he had been elected, assigned the existing government its new constitutional responsibilities, and preserved judges' powers for their existing terms. The first Federation Council and State Duma were given special two-year terms, distinct from the ordinary arrangements. Existing laws continued to apply insofar as they did not conflict with the new constitution, preventing the entire legal system from suddenly losing its basis.

Chapter Nine also distinguished amendment procedures. Chapters One, Two and Nine could not be directly revised by the Federal Assembly; fundamental revision required special procedures involving a Constitutional Assembly and related steps. Amendments to Chapters Three through Eight required special majorities and regional approval. The 1993 version established a framework capable of continuity and change; subsequent alterations must be identified individually rather than blended into the original system.

References: [1]

The constitution's entry into force did not resolve disputes over implementation. On 31 October 1995, the Supreme Court held a plenary meeting on courts' application of the constitution. The meeting record shows that the head of the Krasnoyarsk Territory Court cited cases in which local courts had relied on Article 59 to support applicants whose requests for alternative civilian service on grounds of belief or conscience had been refused by conscription authorities.

At the same meeting, Constitutional Court deputy chair Tamara Morshchakova objected to ordinary courts independently declaring laws unconstitutional, emphasizing that they should request review by the Constitutional Court. Concrete remedies had appeared, but the boundaries of review powers still required clarification. The history of the 1993 constitution therefore includes both the establishment of a strong presidency and the process by which rights provisions became practical protections through courts, procedures and subsequent legislation.

References: [1] [6]