The article attempts to demonstrate that, despite the similarity of the institutions of monarchy and presidency, they are fundamentally different from each other. Therefore, a president should be considered not as a “republican monarch”, but as an “ersatz” monarch, and not in its metaphorical but in its literal meaning. This fact has practical consequences, expressed in the conscious or unconscious effort of a president to acquire monarchist features lacking in his office, primarily permanence of tenure and avoidance of responsibility. However, going down this path, a president drifts toward dictatorship. In order to confirm this hypothesis, the author analyzes fundamental differences between the institution of presidency and the institution of monarchy. According to the author, the immanent features of a monarchy determine the immutability of its nature even when its possesses different amounts of power and, on the contrary, the acquisition by a president of some monarchical traits constitutes a modification of the nature of the presidency itself.
About the author: Mikhail Krasnov – Professor, National Research University – Higher School of Economics, Doctor of Law