The Armed Forces refused to the former deputy-priest Napso to satisfy the claim to the State Duma

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation upheld the Decree of the State Duma on early deprivation of the powers of the deputy from the LDPR Yuri Napso, who had not appeared at work for more than two years. The politician himself with the mouths of his representative claimed that he was absent due to illness, and for this, according to the Labor Code, it is impossible to dismiss. But he was not able to convince the court of this: labor relations are one thing, but the question is related to the implementation by the deputy of public functions, said Judge Oleg Nefedov.

On May 29, the Supreme Court recognized the early termination of deputy powers Yuri Napso, refusing him to satisfy the claim against the State Duma. Ex-deputy He asked cancel the decree of the lower house and restore it as a parliamentarian.

The spokesman for the applicant (Mr. Napso himself has long reported that treatment undergoes in the UAE and doctors prohibit him from moving) presented the court with properly certified and translated medical documents, including sick leave on 81 sheets. In addition, the court was transferred to the court that Yuri Napso notified the State Duma apparatus, the chairman of the faction and even the presidential administration in advance and indicating good reasons. Representatives of the Duma did not come to court and asked to consider the case in their absence.

Recall that the State Duma in April deprived Yuri Napso authority on the grounds that he absent At work for more than two years, while the deputy’s failure to fulfill his duties within 30 or more calendar days is already the basis for depriving his mandate. However, this is an expansion interpretation of the norm, the representative of the applicant Yevgeny Kabashny proved, because for no good reason his principal missed only six days. The rest of the time, the NAPSO deputy was on treatment and at the insistence of doctors could not leave the UAE territory. Since April 2023, it was prepared for surgical intervention, which has not yet been produced.

Judge, who was presiding at the trial, Oleg Nefedov was surprised that the preparation for the operation was delayed for two years.

“The human body is very complex, so here we are not imperious to order it,” the lawyer objected. But even during this period, the deputy continued to participate in the work of the committee and did not lose touch with voters, he noted.

Mr. Kabashny also cited as an example the reviews of judicial practice from the Supreme Court itself, which indicate that if a person is on sick leave, then his dismissal due to a pass is recognized as illegal. “This is in relation to labor relations,” the judge noted. “But we have a question related to the implementation of the public functions of the deputy …”

However, the State Duma’s regulation recognizes the absence of a deputy due to a business trip, labor leave or due to illness, retorted by Evgeny Kabashny. If we proceed from the logic that was guided by the Duma ethics commission, then the reason for the absence is not important: the 30-day period has expired-and you can fire, the lawyer reasoned. He recalled that there were already precedents for the dismissal of deputies for “absenteeism”, but in all cases they disputed the very fact of their absence in the workplace. However, there was no precedent with the dismissal of a deputy who was absent for a good reason, Mr. Kabashny insisted.

Nevertheless, Judge Nefedov did not take much time to make a decision, and it was not in favor of the ex-deputy. So far, only the resolution of the decision has been announced, the court will make the motivating part later. Evgeny Kabashny said “Kommersant” that he could not comment on the court decision before the approval of the principal is coordinated.

Anastasia Root