Residence Registration in Moscow: New Rules, Old Practices

Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
From: MINELRES moderator <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 07:45:18 +0300 (EET DST)
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Subject: Residence Registration in Moscow: New Rules, Old Practices

From: MINELRES moderator <[email protected]>

Original sender: Susan Brazier <[email protected]>

Residence Registration in Moscow: New Rules, Old Practices


Residence Registration in Moscow: New Rules, Old Practices
 
Susan Brazier
for
Memorial Human Rights Centre, Moscow
August 1999
 
Russia's residence registration system, commonly referred to as the
'propiska' system, has not yet escaped its Soviet - and tsarist -
legacy as an instrument of control over citizens' freedom of movement.
Despite repeated efforts by the country's Constitutional Court to
declare the practice unconstitutional and assertions by politicians
that it should be abolished, residence registration in many parts of
Russia remains a restrictive and arbitrary system of population
control that is both illegal under Russia law and potentially
devastating for internal migrants and newcomers to the country.
 
1998 CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING
Russia's Constitutional Court has ruled several times on a number of
issues related to the country's registration system. Most recently, in
a comprehensive 2 February 1998 decision, the Court declared many of
the system's fundamental characteristics to be unconstitutional. These
included one of its most restrictive features, the linkage between
size of living space and residence registration. Regulations often
cite provisions in the Housing, Civil or Family Codes to restrict
registration to those able to access housing of a certain size - 12 or
6 square metres depending on length of stay, type of accommodation and
relationship to any persons with whom one is living. However, the
Court found conclusively that any federal laws that regulate
accommodation, such as the above Codes, cannot be used as a reason for
rejecting residence registration.
 
In addition, the 2 February 1998 decision also declared
unconstitutional the six-month limit for temporary residents and the
grounds for refusal of registration in the 1995 Rules on Registration.
 
MOSCOW
The Moscow city administration has often been singled out as a
particularly zealous proponent of the registration or 'propiska'
system. Two new Moscow government initiatives indicate that the city
government is still intent on paying only lip service to the country's
laws and on restricting movement into the capital.
 
The Moscow government's enthusiasm for a restrictive residence
registration system stems from the clear and oft-repeated view of
Mayor Yury Luzhkov and his supporters that Moscow is a city under
siege from "outsiders" (including Russian citizens from the Caucasus)
who bring nothing but crime and disorder to the capital. Newcomers are
blamed for a disproportionate number of Moscow's crimes, for being
little better than vagrants when they are not actually active
criminals, and, finally, for being a drain on the city's food
provisions and educational and health resources.
 
Two new initiatives indicate that the government's efforts to restrict
movement into the capital continue unabated.
 
Moscow as a 'Walled' City State
On June 1 of this year, an effort to literally place Moscow outside
the bounds of the country's freedom of movement law was shut down by
the Moscow Duma. At that time, the Moscow government rejected by 11 to
4 an amendment to the Federal Law on the "Right of Citizens of the
Russian Federation to Freedom of Movement, Choice of Place of
Residence in the Boundary of the Russian Federation" entitled "Right
of Citizens of the Russian Federation to Freedom of Movement, Choice
of Place of Residence in the Capital of the Russian Federation, the
City of Moscow, to be Realised in Line with the Laws and Other
Normative Legal Acts of Subjects of the City", which had been
introduced into the Duma in July 1998 - after the Constitutional Court
decision.
 
This amendment could have provided the Moscow government with a tool
to introduce measures restricting movement into and within the capital
without regard for the country's freedom of movement legislation. In
other words, the Moscow government was looking for virtual free reign
to "deal with" a group of people it has branded social parasites, many
of whom are in fact among the most vulnerable people in the capital -
individuals who have been driven from their homes by war, ethnic
unrest, environmental disaster or economic dislocation.
 
While the fact that the initiative failed is clearly positive, the
fact that it was introduced indicates that the motives and strategies
of the Moscow leadership, ie. Mayor Luzhkov, toward newcomers to the
capital remain unchanged. Luzhkov and his supporters are clearly
willing to go to great lengths, including taking on the federal
government and the country's powerful regional leaders, to keep people
out of Moscow.
 
As Luzhkov prepares for the Moscow Mayoralty elections in December
1999, it is distinctly possible that in the months ahead we will be
hearing more the need to control migration into the capital due to
rising crime rates and increasing strains on social funding. Sadly,
with popular attitudes to Caucasians and other minorities in Moscow as
negative as they currently are, such a strategy would likely be a
'vote-winner' for Mayor Luzhkov.
 
New Registration Regulations
On 21 May 1999, new registration regulations (No. 241-28) that had
been introduced on 30 March came into effect in the capital.
Supporters, including some of the backers of the initiative above, say
these new regulations are now fully in line with the Constitution and
only of an advisory/informational nature. This, however, is untrue and
residence registration remains a restrictive and needless system that
harasses everyone and does far greater harm to society's most
vulnerable.
 
As demanded by the Constitutional Court in its 2 February 1998
decision, the regulations no longer provide grounds for refusing
registration. There are also provisions in certain cases for stays in
the capital of up to five years - this is a definite improvement over
the previous upper limit of six months (which was often arbitrarily
and illegally not extended upon application), and again appears to
address the Constitutional Court's ruling.
 
However, one of the fundamental underlying principles of the
registration requirements - the connection between registration and
the ability to obtain a place of residence deemed acceptable to the
authorities - is still firmly in place, although in certain
circumstances it has been eased. However, as noted above, *any*
linkage between registration laws and laws related to living space
were clearly declared unconstitutional in February 1998, and space
requirement for applications should legally not be eased, but
abolished. While a list of reasons to refuse registration no longer
exists, registration can still be arbitrarily withheld due to the
space requirements.
 
It should also be noted that while the very linkage between
registration and the Housing, Civil and Family Codes is
unconstitutional, the Moscow government compounded its misapplication
of the law by often citing these codes in its new regulations
incompletely or out of context.
 
Because of their restrictive nature, the new regulations remain in
violation of "The Law on the Right of Citizens of the Russian
Federation to Freedom of Movement and Choice of Place of Residence,"
as well as the following Articles in the Constitution: Article 27 (1),
which provides people the right of freedom of travel and place to
live; and Articles 76 (5) and 115 (2), which state that regional laws,
and decrees and resolutions must not conflict with federal law.
 
The rights of some of the most vulnerable groups in Moscow - or any
community, for that matter - are also specifically curtailed in the
new regulations; refugees and forced migrants are not included in the
list of those people eligible for permanent registration in the
capital, although they are specifically enumerated on the list of
those eligible for temporary registration.
 
The regulations' treatment of refugees and forced migrants is in
violation of the Law on Refugees (1997), Decree No. 135 on Providing
Assistance to Refugees and Forced Migrants (1992) and Article 115 of
the Constitution.
 
REGISTRATION IN PRACTICE
Any new regulations are only one part of the picture of the Moscow
government's efforts to deal with newcomers - a picture that includes
the above-mentioned attempt to create internal borders around the
capital; the ongoing propaganda and security campaign against migrants
and refugees in Moscow; and the actual implementation of a
registration system that is arbitrary, poorly administered and
humiliating.
 
Registration systems in and of themselves can be neutral instruments
of government administration, for tax or census purposes, for example,
and such systems are in place in some Western European countries.
However, there are several reasons that the Russian registration
system is not an acceptable administrative tool.
 
The system itself is long and involved and requires literally days of
individuals' time and effort to complete, even assuming that the
process is properly followed from start to finish. The following is a
brief outline of the registration system that every newcomer to Moscow
is supposed to undergo within three days of arriving in Moscow.
 
A person must first arrange their accommodation and obtain the
documentation necessary to register. This is the biggest official
obstacle to registering in Moscow. For permanent registration, a
document showing a person has accommodation is required. They can
include: an order with the reason for the move; a court decision; an
inheritance certificate; a lease or rental agreement; or an individual
statement of a person providing the space.
 
In the case of temporary registration, depending on the length of stay
and type of residence involved the following documents may be
requested: proof of residence, such as a rental agreement or lease;
written permission of all the persons in the accommodation; written
permission of the local housing officials, landlord or other person
who has made the space available.
 
Applicants must also produce a document certifying their identity,
generally a passport. (Again, this is another obstacle for many
refugees and migrants, who may have lost their documentation in
transit.) Finally, for permanent registration, (male) applicants must
also produce their war ticket. A fee of 1% of the minimum wage is
paid. These documents and a completed application form are to be taken
to the internal affairs office, where, upon production of the
documentation, registration is theoretically automatic.
 
In reality, many newcomers cannot even begin the process because they
cannot obtain housing as described above that is acceptable to the
authorities. Many certainly cannot do it within three days, meaning
that they are beginning their lives in the capital by breaking an
unreasonable law. The fine for not being registered in Moscow is, for
Russian citizens, 10% of the minimum wage. CIS citizens are supposed
to receive an initial warning, and are then subject to a fine of five
times the minimum wage. The Moscow government in its ongoing
propaganda campaign against newcomers constantly reminds the
population that over 1 million people in Moscow are unregistered - yet
this in many cases is not a personal choice. Registration means living
within the law and obtaining access to services and legal employment.
If people are not registering, it is because the system is rising
barriers to registration, not because people do not wish to.
 
In some cases, people who are desperate to register have paid people
to register them in their homes, even though they are not living there
- often these are pensioners who are themselves living in wretched
circumstances and feel obliged to break the law to earn a subsistence.
This "solution" is hardly an ideal one as it means that even more
people feel compelled to live extra-judiciously; furthermore, the
process has led to the rise of "propiska businessmen" who act as
middle men and profit off the miseries of both the provider and user
of the service.
 
Even in a best case scenario - an ethnic Russian, say, with ready
access to the necessary documents and acceptable accommodation - the
process is considered intrusive and humiliating by many people who do
not believe that a country's citizens should have to ask permission
about where to live. People are required to travel back and forth
between local housing officials, landlords, police authorities and
banks, where they are often treated poorly, made to wait needlessly
and have items checked and rejected arbitrarily. The process can take
up days of one's time and requires taking time off work to meet with
officials.
 
However, it is the best case scenario when an individual simply spends
hours or days being inconvenienced and humiliated. In many, many
cases, rules and regulations are not clearly understood by officials,
never mind the population in general. Rules are complicated and change
often so that administrative confusion is the norm. Furthermore,
amendments and implementing regulations are in many cases simply not
made available to local authorities.

It is not implausible that the system is purposely so designed as a
legacy of the Soviet administrative tactic of keeping individuals off
guard and unsure of their relationship with the state. It is also
possible that the state and its organs has simply not developed
sufficiently to either effectively design a more reasonable system or
to implement it in a humane and consistent fashion. In any event,
administrative confusion certainly complements any ulterior motives
that might exist. Even those police officers who are not out to harass
or otherwise purposely cause problems for individuals are at the mercy
of a dilapidated and virtually non-functioning administrative system.

As a result, individuals and officials alike often do not know the
proper procedures to be followed. People are asked to produce
unnecessary documentation or advised incorrectly that their housing is
unacceptable. This leads to confusion, confrontation and ultimately
frustration for everyone involved.
 
Even when the proper regulations are available they are often not
followed. There is simply no control over local authorities'
implementation of the regulations. The reasons for blatant disregard
of regulations can range from inertia through malice and racism to
corruption at a personal or institutional level.
 
This can take the form of petty annoyances, such as the delay of an
application because of minor administrative points or the demand of a
bribe to see through an application. Sometimes, individuals'
legitimate papers can simply be arbitrarily rejected or worst of all,
seized and destroyed.
 
SUMMARY OF OBJECTIONS TO THE SYSTEM
 
1. Access to registration is restricted. That is, the standards to be
met to qualify for registration are so high that they cannot be met by
many people. This requirement is often impossible for newcomers to
overcome due to the need for space requirements, be they 12 or 6
metres, or the need in some cases to move in with "close family
members."
 
2. Lack of registration places unacceptable burdens on Russian
citizens and citizens of those countries, ie the CIS and Baltic
States, to whom the government has a responsibility within its own
legislation to protect and support. Without registration, citizens
cannot obtain access to services that are their fundamental right,
such as health care, education and access to employment. (It is not
within the bounds of this piece to look at this in detail, but lack of
registration also puts people at the mercy of the city's police force,
who stop people in the streets and metros arbitrarily and often doing
identity checks and, as often as not reports suggest, demanding bribes
- or worse if money is not forthcoming. As Human Rights Watch pointed
out in its report on this phenomenon, by far the people most
vulnerable to these abuses are people who are clearly not ethnic
Russian, ie. refugees and migrants).
 
For most of those who can access it, the registration system is an
aggravation that is costly in terms of time and personal dignity; for
others, it is the difference between sustaining oneself and one's
family  - and trying to establish a semblance of a normal life that
has been shattered once already - and living outside the law, unable
to access work or services and living in constant fear of exposure.
 
3. In part because of the complicated and arbitrary nature of the
system and the attitude of local authorities, but arguably by the very
nature of is existence, Russia's registration system is an
institutionalised humiliation by the state of its citizens. It is,
possibly purposely, designed so that many people are forced to break
the rules, hence breeding disrespect for the law and helping to foster
a breeding ground for criminality that the system is theoretically
designed to protect the city against. Many individuals implementing
the system have a fundamental lack of respect for it as well as for
the people attempting to access it.
 
A corrosive cycle of cynicism and contempt for Russia's
administration, government and its citizenry begins at the point of
registration.
 
For further information on the legal basis of Russia's registration
system, see the following:

Gannushkina, Svetlana, 1998, "On the Situation Relating to the Status
of Refugees and Forced Migrants and Registration at the Place of
Residence and Place of Sojourn in the Moscow Region."
 
Noah Rubins, Spring 1998, "The Demise and Resurrection of the
Propiska: Freedom of Movement in the Russian Federation," 39 Harvard
International Law Journal, 545.
 

Susan Brazier is a Human Rights Researcher. She provided this piece to
Memorial Human Rights Centre, Moscow.
 
Memorial's web site is http"//www.memo.ru
 
-- 
==============================================================
MINELRES - a forum for discussion on minorities in Central&Eastern
Europe

Submissions: [email protected]  
Subscription/inquiries: [email protected] 
List archive: http://www.riga.lv/minelres/archive.htm
==============================================================