Usurpation is the misappropriation of power

What is usurpation? "This is when someone appropriates something that does not belong to him," legal and political science dictionaries tell us in one voice. The concept is derived from the word "grab", "take away". Most often, when using this term, we mean the usurpation of power. But during the aggravation of various political conflicts this word is often used incorrectly, with both sides of the confrontation. Let's try to consider what exactly is meant by the word "usurpation". This is very important, after all.

Assignment of power

Most often this is the name of the seizure of domination in the country by the so-called illegitimate path. This can be called a military coup, an illegal appropriation of power by one person or a group of people. It happens that usurpation can mean even democratic, seemingly, processes. For example, when elections are held in the state, but they are unfair, non-transparent, with numerous violations and forgery. Sometimes this is the situation when a person or people who have only powers illegally take on others, big ones, and in fact it turns out that they have seized power that they did not have. Thus, usurpation is a rather complex and ambiguous term. However, like everything in politics.

What usurpers we know

This term came to us from the Latin language, because this kind of coming to power was characteristic of the Roman and Byzantine emperors. Local historians tried to divide the rulers into those who became the leader of the state legally, and usurpers. But in fact, we often find people who have become emperors after all sorts of coups, in the list of absolutely legitimate. The same is observed in the case of the Roman popes. In theory, the one who killed his predecessor should be considered a usurper. But this is not always the case. And in the case of candidates for the throne who fought each other, the usurper was called not the one to whom power was granted, but the loser. It turns out that usurpation is a phenomenon that is difficult to define on one concrete example. Among the monarchs who acquired the throne in this way, historians call Catherine the Great, the Russian Empress, and the famous commander of Napoleon the First. Of the recent politicians, one can recall General Pinochet.

Usurpation of power in Ukraine

Now it is very fashionable to talk about illegitimacy and seizure of power during the "Maidan revolution". But this question is very controversial, if you look into it carefully. So, usurpation of power in this country is observed if we approach the issue legally. Let's start with 2010, when the then President Viktor Yanukovich, thanks to the decisions of the Constitutional Court, contradicting all previous provisions, was able to get much more powers than any other leader in Ukraine before him. In addition, his party, thanks to judicial processes, was able to reduce the role of parliament, that is, the Verkhovna Rada. This legislative body gradually began to turn into a formal structure, and the ministers and the President no longer came to report there, as is legally required. Therefore, those who talk about the February events in the Nezalezhnaya: "Usurpation is a grip on power!" Do not notice that the country's parliament simply regained the powers that were taken from it. Although he does not use them very skillfully.

Usurpation of power in Russia

The legislation of the country equates the illegal seizure of the government to a serious criminal offense. In Russia elections are held regularly, and there have been no overturns in recent decades. However, some opposition politicians, for example, the late Boris Berezovsky, argued that usurpation in the country still takes place, but it is simply hidden. As an example, the nomination and election of President Vladimir Putin for the third time is usually given. Opponents of politics consider this to be a violation of the Basic Law of the Russian Federation. Many also point to the numerous falsifications and systemic violations that took place in the country during the past elections. Nevertheless, the power in Russia is recognized by the legitimate majority of the countries of the world.

And yet, what kind of phenomenon is this?

When we consider the phenomenon of usurpation in a historical context, we inevitably understand that everything depends on the political situation at the moment. Quite often it happens that the seizure of power takes place illegitimate, violent way. But then the usurper changes the Constitution or other laws, bringing legal grounds under his rule. And after a while he is actually considered an ordinary lawful monarch, the founder of the dynasty, the President or other head of state. As the ironic poem says, "a rebellion can not end in luck, otherwise it is called differently." What is the criterion of legitimacy of such a power? Usurpation is not always coming to power through a coup. The same can be observed after the elections. But if the popular opinion agrees with such leader or group of people who seized power, then sooner or later it legitimizes them. If not, on one bayonet, as they say, for a long time you will not sit.