---

Скачать книгу

---

a majority of votes of the total number of members of parliament. The candidate for the post of the Chairman of the Bank of Russia is presented by the President of the Russian Federation. The State Duma is entitled to dismiss the Chairman of the Bank of Russia upon the recommendation of the President of the Russian Federation'.

      Is that clear? The Russian President introduces and the State Duma appoints. The Duma as well dismisses the Chairman from the post. But this is just the beginning. The law is written in such a cunning manner that the possibility to dismiss the Chairman of the Bank of Russia from their position for the President and the State Duma is purely theoretical. In order to make sure in this, let us just read article 12 to the end.

      'The Chairman of the Bank of Russia can only be dismissed from the position in the following cases: 1) expiry of term in office; 2) disability which makes performance of duty impossible and which is confirmed by a state in the US government stocks and other abstract entities. You can see that for medical commission; 3) there is a personal resignation letter; 4) the person in question committed a penal offence and was found guilty and sentenced; 5) if federal acts regulating issues related to the activities of the Bank of Russia have been violated'.

      So, apparently, if the Chairman of the Central Bank: 1) is fit as a fiddle, 2) the term in office has not expired 3) is not willing to leave the job, 4) does not pinch wallets off old ladies, 5) observes the federal legislation (that is, does not credit his own country) – dismissing the man is impossible.

      He can even pinch wallets off old ladies but until there is a sentence from court, the State Duma cannot dismiss him. The Russian president cannot do anything either. It is interesting, is it not? Cannot the head of an organisation appointing a financial director dismiss him with a decree and appoint a new one? Or does he have to wait for four years? Or a sentence from court? Or summon a medical commission? No, in reality, the head of an organisation is free both to appoint and dismiss his subordinates. The head of state in Russia is the President. All other governmental officials are his subordinates whom he controls, not directly, but through ministers, governors, mayors, generals and admirals. And only the Chairman of the Central Bank is beyond time and space. The President cannot dismiss him or give him the sack. And if he does, the banker can appeal an international court. And the position of the head of the Central Bank is indeed a key position!

      Article 23. The federal budget funds and state non-budget funds are stored in the Bank of Russia unless otherwise specified by federal laws'.

      So, apart from the gold and foreign currency reserves… it also stores the whole Russian budget. Accounts of the Central Bank hold what used to be the unified Stabilisation fund. 'The Reserve fund and the National Welfare Fund are stored on accounts of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation to account these funds in foreign currency in Moscow'.[38] You would not be wrong if you said that the Central Bank is our everything, meaning that all funds of our country are concentrated there. And this key department is not controlled by the state?! Do you understand what that means?

      If you look closer at it, you will see traces of the compromise achieved by the Russian authorities and almighty bankers in the scheme of control over Russian finances. I would like to remind you that the Stabilisation fund that we have just spoken about was divided in two parts: they were called Reserve Fund and National Welfare Fund. So, the funds in the first one are controlled by the Central Bank, that is not the state, and the funds in the second one – the Ministry of Finance, that is the Government, that is the state…[39]

      Article 5. The Bank of Russia is accountable to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. The accountability of the Bank of Russia to the State Duma means that the Chairman of the Bank of Russia is appointed and dismissed from the post by the State Duma on the recommendation from the President of the Russian Federation'.

      And this is all the accountability there is? But we have just found out that it is only an illusion because the head of the Central Bank cannot be dismissed without his consent and will. Incidentally, it is practically impossible to dismiss other bankers from the Central Bank.

      Article 13. The members of the Board of Directors are appointed for a term of four years by the State Duma on the recommendation of the Chairman of the Bank of Russia, agreed upon with the President of the Russian Federation. The members of the Board of Directors can be dismissed: at the end of their term specified in this article – by the Chairman of the Bank of Russia; before the end of the term specified in this article – by the State Duma on the recommendation of the Chairman of the Bank of Russia'.

      So it is only the Chairman of the Central Bank who can give the sack to stubborn colleague – as to dismiss a banker who is also a member of the Board of Directors of the Central Bank a recommendation of the Chairman is needed. The State Duma itself cannot dismiss bankers unless the Chairman of the Central Bank wants it. How can they say that the Central Bank is accountable to the Parliament then?

      What was it like before? In the USSR the financial system was based on the principles of common sense. The Council of ministers of the USSR, that is the Government, was in charge of the financial sphere. The State bank authorised to perform emission operations was the body that followed all instructions from the USSR Government regarding the monetary system. This was an antipode of today's Central Bank. It followed the orders of the Government, no consent from the State Bank was needed, and its head was appointed by the Council of Ministers and was dismissed in the same manner. The State Bank had no right to appeal to a foreign court. The amount of money required for the country's economy was defined by the Council of ministers and the State Bank only issued it.

      The money issued in the USSR was of three types: notes of the State Bank of the USSR, treasury notes and metal coins. The differences between the bank and the treasury notes were purely juridical. Only bank notes were backed with gold, precious metals and other assets of the State Bank, which as stated on the bills from ten roubles. One-rouble, three-rouble and five-rouble notes (treasury notes) had a different inscription on them and were backed with the whole 'property of the state', so they did not have any gold content. In everyday life ordinary citizens had no idea about these details and that there was a difference between the two types of Soviet money. All types of money were issued into circulation by the State Bank of the USSR.

      Did Yeltsin understand what he was doing in 1990? I am sure, he did not. Illiteracy of the USSR population in financial issues was amazing. But it was not too bad back then – the Soviet people did not have to deal with anything more complicated than public bonds and deposits in a savings bank. The problem was that the elite were just as illiterate. And that ended with a catastrophe. An idea of a bank independent from the state was brought into the Soviet Union as a Trojan horse – through 'advisors'. through those who had practical trainings at Columbia University, those who were recruited or simply betrayed their country. Just as in the Hollywood film Alien' – an extra-terrestrial creature was implanted into a living body. I am exaggerating – a private Central bank was indeed like an alien for the USSR.

      Now, are the following events surprising at all? I do not think so. If anything, they are logical. I would just like to address Gorbachev with one question: Mikhail Sergeevich, how did you let this happen being the president of the USSR? What were these banks, independent from the people's authorities, which appeared in our still multinational state still governed by the people? He will not reply though. Or he will start his old song about humanity, the new way of thinking and a chance to get everyone disarmed. I put all my hopes on hell and cauldrons with boiling oil…

      Do the Russian authorities know about this 'strange' situation with the Central Bank?

      What should one do if there is understanding of the importance of the task and yet there is no power to solve the problem? One should start a systematic siege. The task should be broken into several smaller ones. To change the legislation regarding the Central Bank, a vote in the State Duma is needed. The founders of the Bank of Russia saw perfectly well what a key role it would play. And therefore they did their best to create several security levels. The first level is the law on the Central Bank. Among other things, it contains such amusing details as article 7: 'Drafts of federal law and regulatory documents of the federal bodies of executive power concerning duties of the Bank of Russia and it performance

---

Скачать книгу