Comparing constitutional adjudication of self-determination claims

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 452-475
Author(s):  
Xabier Arzoz ◽  
Markku Suksi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
National Courts ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Adjudication ◽  
The Way

The judicial resolution of claims of self-determination by national courts is still exceptional, but rulings seem to be increasing. This paper aims to compare the adjudication of claims of self-determination by constitutional or supreme courts. It will look at three judicial pronouncements from three jurisdictions: the Judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation concerning the sovereignty of Tatarstan (1992), the Opinion of the Canadian Supreme Court concerning the secession of Quebec (1998), and the Judgment of the Spanish Constitutional Court concerning the declaration of sovereignty of the Parliament of Catalonia (2014). The paper will draw parallels in the way constitutional or supreme courts have tackled the tension between democracy and constitutionalism.

Hearing of Cases about Indemnification, Caused to the Environment: Procedural Questions ofJudicial Practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 48-58
Author(s):  
M. A. Fokina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Research Gaps ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

Research objective is the analysis of practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on cases of indemnification caused to the environment. Proceeding their concepts of integrative right understanding the author reveals the importance of legal positions of the supreme judicial authorities for law-enforcement practice of inferior courts by hearing of cases about indemnification, caused to the environment. During the research gaps in the current legislation and ways of their completion in judicial practice are revealed. Methods. As methods of a research the legallistic method, synthesis, the analysis, induction, deduction were used. Results. The research showed certain shortcomings and gaps of legal regulation of an order of the indemnification caused the environment. Legal positions of the supreme courts which allowed to meet lacks and shortcomings of the legislation are revealed and analysed and to provide appropriate protection of the rights of citizens and legal entities.

RESTRICTIONS ON RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF A MAN AND A CITIZEN IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AS A MEANS OF DEFENSE OF CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 169-174
Author(s):  
Болотин ◽  
Vladimir Bolotin ◽  
Паньков ◽  
Sergey Pankov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Legal Instrument ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional System

In the article the need of reasonable restriction of human rights and freedoms in modern conditions of increase of various threats for the constitutional system of Russia is shown; the results of modern research in this area, as well as the position of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court of Russia, Supreme Court of the Russian Federation are revealed. Defined The system of restrictions, acting legal instrument for the protection of the constitutional order, the conditions and criteria for the limitation of rights and freedoms .

Review of the Practice of Consideration of Cases of Administrative Offenses under Article 6.1.1 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 60-75
Author(s):  
T. V. Fedorova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Code

The review examines the procedure for judges of courts of General jurisdiction in resolving cases of administrative offenses under article 6.1.1 of the administrative Code of the Russian Federation, and analyzes the practice of courts in various regions of the Russian Federation. The paper offers solutions to controversial issues of judicial practice, considers the positions of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the circumstances to be clarified in the case of an administrative offense under article 6.1.1 of the administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Sources of Formation of Legal Positions of Russian Highest Judicial Bodies

2021 ◽  
pp. 130-142
Author(s):  
Mariia Viktorovna Globa
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The present study is devoted to determining the place and role of legal positions of higher judicial bodies of Russia (judicial legal positions) in the mechanism of legal regulation. Let us specify in advance that the author means the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation (taking into account the 2014 amendments made to the legislation concerning the liquidation of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation) as the higher judicial bodies of Russia. Establishing the meaning and role of judicial legal positions in the mechanism of legal regulation is carried out by the author of this study through the analysis and demonstration of the main sources of formation of legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation. In this regard, the author of this work identifies as sources of formation of judicial legal positions: legal and non-legal. Non-legal sources of formation of legal positions of the highest courts of Russia differ from the legal ones in the fact that initially they do not have material expression, exist in the abstract, however, have no less importance for the process of formation of judicial legal positions. To the legal sources of creating legal positions of the highest judicial bodies of Russia the author includes: formal sources of law, current legal practice, legal doctrine. As non-legal sources of formation of legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation are: the inner conviction of a judge and professional legal consciousness of a judge. The author of this scientific research consistently reveals the importance and role of each source of formation of judicial legal positions. The conducted study of the most significant sources of formation of judicial legal positions allowed to better understand the place of legal positions of higher courts of Russia in the legal system and their role in legal regulation, which is reduced not just to the interpretation of judicial acts, but also to the formation of new legal provisions, which ultimately form a uniform judicial practice. Methodological basis of the study consisted of: analysis, synthesis, comparative-legal method, deduction, induction and other ways of knowledge used in science. Scientific conclusions and proposals contained in this work may serve as a basis for further theoretical study of the problems of judicial legal positions and used in the activities of legislative and law enforcement bodies.

scholarly journals A Special Legal Approach to Interpretation of Norms of Criminal Procedure Law

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-74
Author(s):  
D. P. Velikiy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Interpretation ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper discusses the issue of a special legal approach to interpretation of norms of criminal procedure law. On the example of criminal procedural law the author substantiates the independent character of the special legal method of interpretation, its difference from the grammatical and systematic (systemic) methods of interpretation of law, as well as the place of this method among other means of interpretation. The subject of special legal interpretation include: special legal terms, concepts, categories, legal structures, types (regularities) of legal regulation, rules of legal technique, theoretical provisions. The vast majority of such interpretations were carried out by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which is predetermined by the need for a common understanding of criminal procedural terminology. Unlike grammatical interpretation, which provides a linguistic analysis of the text of the law, systematic interpretation in which interpretation takes into account the place of the norm in the systemic relationship with other norms, in special legal interpretation the main source of information is legal knowledge, i.e. the knowledge of law and legal theory. If a special legal interpretation is carried out by an official body, it is usually normative. Also, based on the legal stances of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the author gives examples of “evolution” of legal standings from special legal interpretation to adoption and amendment of legal norms. The article investigates the judicial practice containing the results of special legal interpretation of criminal procedural rules, e.g. legal concepts and terms defined by the same words, but having different meaning depending on the branch of law in which they are used. The author also gives examples of determination of the branch of law to which the norm belongs by means of special legal interpretation.

scholarly journals The Theory of Criminal Law Should Not Be Reduced to the Analysis and Criticism of Criminal Legislation

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-140
Author(s):  
Anatoly Naumov
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Principle Of Legality

In both normative and sociological senses criminal law includes three components — criminal legislation, judicial practice, and criminal law doctrine, and the development of this branch of law is possible only in their unity. The criminal law doctrine is to a certain extent superior to the other components of the "triad" and involves the development of the branch’s principles, goals and objectives. At the same time, the improvement of criminal law is not the only goal of the theory of criminal law. It should not be limited only to criticism of the current legislation and proposals for its improvement. However, the vast majority of modern domestic criminal law publications, such as monographs, articles in legal periodicals, dissertations, are devoted to criticism of the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Indeed, the current criminal law is not perfect, but the "imbalance" of research into the "law-making" side significantly reduces the scope of criminal law doctrine. And there will always be demand for theoretical studies on the analysis of the subject and method, system and objectives of criminal law, its sources.Debatable, for example, still is the issue of the legal nature of the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and, in particular, the judgments of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court are a special kind of judicial interpretation and a fairly reliable tool for the courts to understand "the letter of the criminal law" and it’s applicability to the particular case. As for the assessment of the legal nature of the judgments of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the criminal law doctrine often fails to notice that they touch upon the methodological problems of the theory of criminal law. In relation to a number of criminal law prohibitions, judgments of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation are a source of criminal law, along with the Criminal Code. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation specified the most important principle of criminal law — the principle of legality and clarified the characteristics of criminality of socially dangerous acts prohibited by criminal law, which is directly related to the issue of criminal liability. In this sense, the Constitutional Court formulated a new and important addition to the content of the principle of legality — the certainty of criminal law rules, and, first of all, the criminal law prohibitions. Thus, the judicial authority overtook the criminal law doctrine in solving one of the most important issues for criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals Extremism. Juridical Abstraction. Problems of Demarcating the Freedom of Expression

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 629-640
Author(s):  
Vladimir Suchkov ◽  
Vladimir Filonov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
National Courts ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

The authors examine the juridical idea of extremist used in the criminal law of the Russian Federation. This work is an attempt to solve the problem of differentiating between this concept and the freedom of expression. The establishment of boundaries and limits of these phenomena is important for both lawmakers and law enforcers. The authors use the attributes of the phenomenon of «extremism» in an attempt to understand its form and contents. To achieve this, they analyze views on different scholars on extremism, the law and its amendments, clarifications of the highest court authorities of the country regarding the object of this research, and study the doctrinal practice of experts – linguists and psychologists. They synthesize the discovered meanings of extremism and identify its features. The obtained information allowed the authors to conclude that the definition of extremism formulated in the law is not precise, it lacks clear boundaries and, at the categorial level, could be viewed as an abstract concept. This concept, incorporated in the law, has a negative impact on the quality of the law and impedes the right choice of interpretation by national courts. The fuzziness of legal prescriptions has not yet been eliminated by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the law enforcement practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. All this creates endless opportunities for interpreting the law at the local level. The authors present disturbing statistics that show a tremendous growth in the number of offences in this area in recent years. They believe that the cause of the problem is the above-mentioned law that allows excessive interpretation by the law enforcer. The presented research deals with the bottlenecks of constitutional law as it analyzes the freedom of expression with its boundaries and limits. The authors discuss the conflict of constitutional and criminal laws from the viewpoint of enforcing specific law clauses. The research includes constructive criticism of the instruments used by experts (linguists and psychologists) who perform their tasks for criminal cases and materials on speech goals, which belongs to the domain of criminalistics. The authors present their own vision of this problem based on the opinion of scholars, historical experience and court practice.

THE RIGHT OF LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE IN THE SYSTEM OF POWERS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

2021 ◽  
pp. 46-52
Author(s):  
Dmitrii V. Zmievskii
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Special Role ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Initiative ◽  
Control Body ◽  
The Right

The article considers the right of legislative initiative of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the light of amendments made to the Fundamental Law of our state in 2020, as well as subsequent updating of special federal constitutional legislation. It is noted that the problem of practice deficiency in implementing the mentioned power by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is not new for the Russian legal science; in general, it is naturally determined and is due to a number of objective factors. However, the process of updating and developing the constitutional provisions on the supreme judicial control body of Russia and, in particular, creating the system of preliminary judicial constitutional control, bring the problem under consideration to a qualitatively new level. The approach itself in terms of granting the mentioned power to supreme courts in the Russian Federation is characterized as atypical for the countries near and far abroad. At the same time, the current lack of practice in exercising the power in question by the Constitutional Court is due to the special role of the latter in the system of supreme state authorities, in particular, the judiciary. The point of view is expressed that the problem cannot be unambiguously solved at the present stage of the statehood development. The author does not share the increasingly expressed point of view today that the right of legislative initiative should be excluded from the powers of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, since this will lead to a violation of the equality of the constitutional and legal statuses of the two independent supreme judicial authorities. In addition, the shortcomings in the wording of certain constitutional provisions have been identified and possible ways to eliminate them have been proposed.

Courts’ Participation in Lawmaking: Critical Analysis of the Theory and Practice of Legislative Initiative

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (8) ◽  
pp. 55-65
Author(s):  
B. A. Zbaratskiy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Political Life ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
System Method ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Initiative

The paper explores the implementation of the power to initiate legislation by the highest judicial bodies of Russia—the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The author focuses on specific legislative initiatives of the higher judiciary and provides examples of judicial intrusion into the field of activities of other branches of power. The author highlights the need for additional doctrinal elaboration of draft laws initiated on behalf of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The paper analyzes the reasons for the non-application of the power to initiate legislation by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in particular: involvement in political life, the principle “nobody can be a judge in their own case,” authority impairment, judges’ opinion, the use of legal standings, complexity of the mechanisms. The author argues that the RF Constitutional Court participation in political activities is mediated. The conclusion is made about the necessity of using the structural-system method of scientific cognition in the study of the reasons for non-application of the institute of legislative initiative. The author substantiates the necessity for the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to apply the power to initiate legislation in exceptional cases, in cases of impossibility of using other forms of participation in law-making.

The Mechanism of Case Reopening Based on New and Newly Discovered Circumstances: Aims, Meaning, Judicial Interpretation (the final part)

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 27-30
Author(s):  
Elvina I. Fagmanova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Final Part ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Judicial Interpretation ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article is devoted to the research of the mechanism in the reconsidering judicial acts under reopened or new circumstances as providing the necessary deviation from the requirement of stability in judicial practice to correct an erroneous judicial act, an analysis of the grounds for reviewing and the importance of judicial review procedures in the system. The author pays an attention to discussions about the possibility of reconsidering a judicial act, due to the development of the position of the supreme court on legal issues, on its borders. The article also analyzes the most important judicial practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the ECHR, and the Resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme court of the Russian Federation, which substantively reveal the approach of these courts to the mechanism in reconsidering judicial acts under reopened or new circumstances.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document