Russian Federal Structure: Federal Subjects, the Treaty of Federation, and Division of Powers

The federal structure of the Russian Federation is defined by the 1993 Constitution, the Treaty of Federation (1992), and subsequent federal legislation. Russia’s federal arrangement reflects the legacy of the Soviet ethno-territorial system and the post-Soviet negotiation between central authority and regional claimants to autonomy. The federal structure has undergone significant transformation from the highly asymmetrical arrangement of the 1990s to the centralised system of the present day.

Federal Subjects: Types and Status

The Russian Federation currently comprises 89 federal subjects (subyekty Rossiyskoy Federatsii) of six distinct types. Republics (22) are national-territorial formations established as homelands for specific ethnic groups. They have the right to adopt their own constitutions, establish official languages alongside Russian, and maintain limited cultural and linguistic autonomy. Among the most significant republics are Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Sakha (Yakutia), and Chechnya. Krais (9) and oblasts (48) are territorial-administrative units that do not have constitutions but operate under charters (ustavy). Cities of federal importance (3) — Moscow, Saint Petersburg, and Sevastopol — have special status as city-regions. The Jewish Autonomous Oblast is a unique territorial unit with ethnic status. Autonomous okrugs (4) — such as Khanty-Mansi and Yamal-Nenets — are national-territorial formations that may be part of another federal subject while maintaining representation in the Federation Council. Each federal subject, regardless of type, has equal representation in the Federation Council (two senators each) and equal rights in inter-budgetary relations, though their actual political and economic weight varies enormously.

The Treaty of Federation (1992)

The Treaty of Federation (Federalny dogovor), signed on 31 March 1992, was a pivotal document in Russia’s post-Soviet constitutional development. The Treaty was concluded between the federal government and the constituent units of the Russian Federation, comprising three separate treaties with republics, krais and oblasts, and autonomous formations. The Treaty divided jurisdiction among the federal government, the federal subjects, and their joint competence. It granted republics broader autonomy than other subjects, including the right to own property on their territory and to participate in international and foreign economic relations. The Treaty was incorporated into the 1993 Constitution through its concluding and transitional provisions, though the Constitution’s supremacy over the Treaty was established in Article 15. The Treaty’s significance diminished after the Constitutional Court’s 2000 Tatarstan ruling, which declared that republics could not claim sovereignty, but it remains a foundational document of Russian federalism.

Asymmetric Federalism

Russian federalism has been described as asymmetric federalism because different types of federal subjects possess different legal statuses and powers. During the 1990s, republics enjoyed substantial privileges, including treaty-based arrangements with the federal government. The asymmetry was most pronounced in the bilateral treaties of delegation (dogovory o razgranichenii polnomochiy), which granted specific republics — particularly Tatarstan and Bashkortostan — additional powers over taxation, natural resources, and foreign economic relations. The Putin administration’s centralisation campaign systematically eliminated these asymmetries. Federal Law No. 119-FZ of 24 June 1999 required all bilateral treaties to conform to federal legislation and limited their duration and scope. By 2003, most treaties had been terminated. The 2020 constitutional amendments further reduced asymmetry by introducing the concept of a unified system of public authority (yedinaya sistema publichnoy vlasti), subordinating all federal subjects to common constitutional standards. The practical effect has been the transformation of Russia from a genuinely federal system into a unitary state operating through regional administrative subdivisions, while maintaining federal constitutional forms.

Division of Powers

The Constitution establishes three categories of jurisdiction. Article 71 enumerates subjects of exclusive federal jurisdiction, including defence, foreign policy, monetary regulation, the federal budget, energy systems, transport, and the judicial system. Article 72 lists subjects of joint jurisdiction, including human rights protection, education, healthcare, environmental protection, and coordination of international relations. Article 73 provides that all residual matters fall within the exclusive competence of federal subjects. The Constitutional Court has generally interpreted federal jurisdiction broadly. In joint jurisdiction matters, federal framework laws set national standards, and federal subjects may adopt detailed legislation within those limits. However, the federal government has increasingly used its powers to preempt regional legislation and impose uniform standards. The division of powers, as applied, favours the federal centre and leaves limited scope for genuine regional autonomy.

Chechnya and the North Caucasus

The Chechen Republic and the broader North Caucasus region have posed the most significant challenges to Russian federalism. Chechnya’s declaration of independence in 1991, the First Chechen War (1994–1996), and the Second Chechen War (1999–2000) tested the constitutional framework for territorial integrity and federal governance. After the wars, Chechnya was reintegrated under a special arrangement that granted considerable internal autonomy while ensuring loyalty to the federal centre. Federal subsidies have supported Chechnya’s reconstruction and budget, creating a relationship of financial dependence. The Chechen model — combining federal financial transfers, local political autonomy, and firm security control — has been applied, with variations, to other North Caucasus republics, including Ingushetia, Dagestan, and Kabardino-Balkaria. The North Caucasus remains the most complex federal challenge, involving issues of ethnic identity, Islamist insurgency, corruption, and the limits of federal authority in regions with strong clan-based governance structures.

Conclusion

The Russian federal structure has evolved from a contractual, asymmetrical arrangement to a centralised hierarchy within a formally federal framework. The Treaty of Federation’s vision of shared governance has given way to the power vertical and the unified system of public authority. The division of powers operates in practice to the benefit of the federal centre. The management of the North Caucasus demonstrates both the resilience and the limits of Russian federalism. As the 2020 amendments continue to be implemented, the federal structure is likely to become even more centralised, further reducing the distinctive features that once characterised Russia’s complex federal system.