ON THE STATUS OF PARTICIPANTS OF COMBAT OPERATIONS
The standing of the participants of combat operations in society and armed forces, the
attitude of the state, its bodies, and officials are of special importance in the system of civilmilitary relations. On the one hand, concern of the state and society for those who defended
their interests and values in the most violent and dangerous manner is a legal and moral duty
and on the one hand, to create conditions providing them with a worthy life, active actions,
honour, and respect in society is an important factor in shaping a reasoned attitude to the
defense of the Fatherland as a constitutional duty in the population, primarily in young
people, a key factor in bolstering the forces and strengthening the defense capacity of the
state.
Therefore, it is difficult to overestimate the value of legislation defining the status of a
participant of combat operations. The bill brought in by a group of deputies of the State
Duma is the first attempt to describe the legal position on the matter. The value of this
document is that it proposes a considered system of tangible measures of financial and
medical support of the participants of combat operations and the members of their families,
as well as privileges in their professional training. Its particularly humanistic orientation is
traced primarily in a wide basket of these measures. It is evidenced by the standard
according to which ‘the measures of social protection, previously established by the
legislation of the USSR and by that of Russian Federation for the participants of combat
operations participants and the members of their families, may not be cancelled without
their equivalents’. At the same time, the law is presumed to apply to the citizens of the
Russian Federation, to the foreign citizens and stateless persons who permanently live on its
territory, and under international treaties of the Russian Federation, to those who
temporarily live or stay on its territory.
It is thought that the measures provided by the bill in its aggregate form the substance of
social protection. By definition, the protection suggests a shield from encroachments,
hostilities, danger, actions against personnel or related persons. In the meanwhile, in this
case we are dealing with the establishment of benefits, compensations, and privileges whose
granting is (should) not be associated with the overcoming of resistance. So it should be
more correct to say it is just about social backing, more accurately, about social care.
However, this somewhat editorial remark does not reduce the value of the document which
details additional rights of the participants of combat operations.
At the same time, there are issues that require further elaboration while discussing the
bill. Firstly, the proposed text clearly writes the sources and procedure of financing of social
protective measures (social provision) of the participants of combat operations. However, it
does not define what bodies and officials are specifically responsible for granting these or
those guarantees. Its formula ‘State policy as to the participants of combat operations shall
be carried out by the federal state authorities, the state authorities of the subjects of the
Russian Federation, and local authorities’ is excessively common. Secondly, the status of a
citizen in general and a participant of combat operations in particular is unjustifiably
narrowed down. ‘Man shall not live on bread alone’. It is apparent that the bill may be
supplemented by provisions on a system of state awards and decorations for participants of
combat operations, on a system of celebration in their honor (from preferential service
promotion to the introduction of state memorable dates and days), that of attraction to
implement federal state programs, where possible, for example in the military and patriotic
educational program.