What is usurpation? “This is when someone arrogates to himself something that does not belong to him,” the legal and political dictionaries tell us with one voice. The concept comes from the word "capture", "select". Most often, when using this term, they mean the usurpation of power. But during an exacerbation of various political conflicts, this word is often used incorrectly, with both sides of the confrontation. Let's try to consider what exactly should be understood by the word "usurpation". This is very important.
Assignment of authority
Most often, this is called the seizure of dominance in the country by the so-called illegitimate path. This may be called a military coup, the misappropriation of power by one person or a group of persons. It happens that usurpation can even mean seemingly democratic processes. For example, when elections are held in the state, but they are unfair, non-transparent, with numerous violations and forgeries. This is sometimes called the situation when a person or people with some powers illegally take others, big ones, and in fact it turns out that they 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 a similar type of coming to power was characteristic of the Roman and Byzantine emperors. The 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 various coups, in the list of absolutely legitimate ones. The same thing is observed in the case of the popes. In theory, the one who killed his predecessor should be considered a usurper. But this does not always happen.
And in the case of candidates for the throne who fought with each other, the usurper was not called the one who got the power, but the loser. It turns out that usurpation is a phenomenon that is difficult to determine using one specific example. Among the monarchs who obtained the throne in this way, historians call Catherine the Great, the Russian Empress, and the
famous commander Napoleon the First. Of recent politicians, we can recall General Pinochet.
Usurpation of power in Ukraine
Now it’s very fashionable to talk about illegitimacy and seizure of power during the “Maidan revolution”. But this question is very controversial, if you look at it carefully. So, usurpation of power in this country is observed, if you approach the issue legally. Let's start in 2010, when the then President Viktor Yanukovych, thanks to decisions of the Constitutional Court, which contradicted all previous provisions, was able to gain much more authority than any other leader in Ukraine before him. In addition, his party, thanks to lawsuits, 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 it should be under the law. Therefore, those who talk about the February events in Nezalezhnaya: “Usurpation is a seizure of power!” Do not notice that the country's parliament simply regained the powers that had been taken away from it. Although he uses them not very skillfully.
Usurpation of power in Russia
The country's legislation equates the unlawful seizure of government with a serious criminal offense. Elections are regularly held in Russia, and there have been no coups in recent decades. However, some opposition politicians, for example, the already deceased Boris Berezovsky, argued that usurpation in the country still has a place to be, just that it is hidden. As an example, the nomination and election of President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin for the third time is usually given. Opponents of the politician consider this a violation of the Basic Law of the Russian Federation. Many also point to the numerous falsifications and systemic violations that occurred in the country during past elections. Nevertheless, power in Russia is recognized as legitimate by most countries of the world.
And yet, what is this phenomenon?
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 in an 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 the usual legal monarch, the founder of the dynasty, the President or other head of state. As the ironic poem says, "the rebellion cannot end in success, otherwise it is called otherwise." What is the criterion for the legitimacy of such power? Usurpation is not always coming to power through a coup. The same can be observed after the election. But if popular opinion agrees with such a leader or a group of people who seized power, then sooner or later it will legitimize them. If not, you can’t sit on bayonets, as they say, for a long time.