On the historical experience of preserving the territorial integrity of the state by criminal law means
The article examines the historical experience of preserving the territorial integrity of the state through the adoption of criminal laws. This is done using the example of two such attempts in the history of the Russian state (by the Provisional Government after the February Revolution of 1917 and during Gorbachev’s perestroika in connection with the decision of the union republics of the Baltic states to gain state independence). In both cases legislators passed strict criminal laws, which, however, proved unable to prevent violation of the territorial integrity of the state. For example, under the Provisional Government criminal liability was increased for violent encroachments on changing the existing state system in Russia or “to tear away any part of it from Russia” (the perpetrators were even subjected to life or urgent hard labor). The second experience, also unsuccessful, dates back to the spring of 1990, when the Baltic republics (Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia) declared their state independence. The extraordinary Third Congress of People’s Deputies of the USSR immediately reacted to this, recognizing these decisions as invalid as contrary to the Constitution of the USSR. The all-Union power, recorded in the decisions of the congresses of people’s deputies, almost openly announced to the republics that their withdrawal from the USSR was impossible and they had nothing to hope for in this sense. So, in an interview for Soviet and French television in November 1990, the President of the USSR, recognizing that the Constitution of the USSR provides for the right to self-determination up to the secession of a republic and referring to the existence of a special mechanism for this exit, at the same time said that he had come to the conclusion, the country cannot be divided. The outcome of this legislative “fight” is known and dates back to December 1991. What should a legislator learn from these historical lessons? Most importantly: he must firmly grasp that there are certain limits to the possibilities of criminal law to achieve political and socio-economic goals.