scholarly journals The Right Of Ownership Of The Ukrainian People And The Right Of State Ownership Of Natural Objects And Their Resources

2019 ◽  
pp. 164-174
Author(s):  
V.A. Martyniuk
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Private Property ◽  
State Ownership ◽  
The State ◽  
Special Importance ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
The Public ◽  
Natural Objects ◽  
The Right

The article presents the analysis of the ownership of natural objects and their resources through understanding and correlation of the property rights of the Ukrainian people and the state property rights. Different scientific approaches to understanding the property rights of the Ukrainian people are analyzed. Emphasizes on the public aspect of the legal regime of property of the Ukrainian people. It is substantiated that the recognition by the legislator of natural objects and natural resources as objects of property of the Ukrainian people confirms and points to the special importance of such objects for the life of the whole society. At the same time, the property of the Ukrainian people was not declared as exclusive. Natural objects and their resources may be public, communal and private property. In our opinion, the thesis about the equivalence of the property rights of the Ukrainian people and the state property rights, which is grounded in separate scientific researches, is not correct. The property rights of the Ukrainian people and the right of state ownership differ in their nature and mechanisms of legislative regulation. The state, as a subject of state ownership of natural objects and their resources, is on an equal footing with other entities. In the article, on the basis of legislative prescriptions, the subjects of exercising the property rights of the Ukrainian people and state property rights are identified. The differences in the system of such entities are indicated.  

THE MYSTERY OF TERRITORY

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernando R. Tesón
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
State Ownership ◽  
The State ◽  
Natural Rights ◽  
Actual State ◽  
First Order ◽  
The Social ◽  
Territorial Rights ◽  
The Right

Abstract:This essay argues that the territorial rights of states derive from the property rights of the individuals that make up those states. The argument draws from the Lockean tradition of justification of political powers. Persons in the state of nature have natural rights. Those rights are first-order substantive rights (the right to property), and second-order executive rights (the right to enforce the right to property.) In the social contract, individuals transfer to the state their executive rights, not their substantive rights. The state can thus define the boundaries of property rights and adjudicate property disputes, but does not legitimately own land itself. The article discusses and rejects, for deontic and consequentialist reasons, positions that justify collective and state ownership of territory. Some important consequences follow from the argument: First, no actual state has territorial rights, since no actual state wields delegated powers in land. Second, notwithstanding the preceding conclusion, actual states have an obligation to exercise their (putative) territorial powers consistently with the respect for private property.

scholarly journals TOWARDS A TAXONOMY FOR PUBLIC AND COMMON PROPERTY

2019 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Rodgers
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Common Property ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Effective Protection ◽  
The Public ◽  
Property Interest ◽  
Public Property ◽  
New Strategies

AbstractThis article argues that public property rights should be recognised as a separate category of property interest, different and distinct from private and common property interests and conferring distinctive rights and obligations on both “owners” and members of the public. It develops a taxonomy to differentiate private, public and common property rights. The article concludes that it is a mistake to think in terms of “private property”, “common property” or “public property”. The division and allocation of resource entitlements in land can result in private, common and public property rights subsisting over the same land simultaneously, in different combinations and at different times. The categorisation of property interests in land (as private, common or public) may also shift and change from time to time. The article considers the importance of distinguishing between private, common and public property interests for developing new strategies for environmental governance, and for implementing the effective protection of natural resources.

Constitutional basis for public property in the context of the creation of a legal entity of public law

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 134-149
Author(s):  
Vladimir Nizov
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The State ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Property ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Right

The article discusses problems of the constitutional regulation of property rights and property itself. The research has been narrowed down to the features of public property regulation in the Russian Federation. The relevance of the research is explained by the process of the reform in the public property administration in Russian Federation, which has transferring of the state property to some legal entities of public law as distinguished feature. The author proposes the historical analysis of the property regulation’s development and the role of the Constitution in this process. The comparative instruments are used to show the main preconditions and trends of public property regulation in Russia and other countries. The author argues the Russian Federation is going on the process of the property regulation construction and the modern stage sees the Constitution as a main axiological filter for that. Meanwhile, the Russian legal system has several obstacles in this way: the limitation of the direct force of the Constitution, the spoiled separation of power, etc. The importance of the system of the check and balances in the property administration is noted. Thus, the research explains the differences between the system of the separation of power in the United Kingdom, Ukraine, and Russia. The author discloses the distinguishing features of the public property the state needs to account in the process of the property transition to public law entities. The critic overview of detailed property regulation in the Constitution’s text is expressed. The author notes constitutional provisions that regulate property issues are features of the post-socialist states. The difference between property rights and sovereign rights is also enclosed in the article. The justification of the right to administrate public property is provided, the research explains the importance of the justification in public property administration and its role in democratic societies, especially in the Russian Federation. The privatization and decentralization of the public property administration are needed to be explained the effectiveness and stability of these decisions. Additionally, the author argues that public property must have more concrete regulation because it needs more complex rules for just and effective administration. The conclusion of the article explains the linkage between the constitutional ideal and the development of public property regulation.

scholarly journals China’s Challenge: Expanding the Market, Limiting the State

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
James A. Dorn
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Chinese Communist Party ◽  
Private Property ◽  
State Ownership ◽  
The State ◽  
Economic Life ◽  
Free Markets ◽  
State Sector ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
General Secretary

AbstractChina has made significant progress since 1978 in expanding the market, but that progress is threatened by the failure to limit the state. The critical challenge facing the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its leadership is to widen the range of choices open to individuals by promoting what Milton Friedman, in his 1988 memorandum to General Secretary Zhao Ziyang, called “free private markets.” Free markets require well-defined private property rights protected by a just rule of law. China has a robust private sector and private property rights are now recognized by law, but the state sector and state ownership continue to play a strong role in directing economic life.

scholarly journals Theoretical and legal bases of protection of business entities from raiders in Ukraine

2020 ◽  
pp. 51-56
Author(s):  
N.S. Horobets ◽  
Ye.S. Pylypenko
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
The State ◽  
Small Enterprises ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Business Entities ◽  
State Registration ◽  
The Right ◽  
Common Understanding

The article is devoted to the study of theoretical and legal principles of protection of business entities from raids in Ukraine due to the low level of quality of the system of protection of private property rights in the state. It is stated that for small enterprises the lack of financial resources and the risk of illegal seizure or takeover, ie "raiding", is a more common problem, but large enterprises are also subject to raids. It was found that raiding is a real threat to the integrity of enterprises, stable economic development and information security of the state, its danger is confirmed by data on the number of raider seizures of property in Ukraine. It is noted that one of the areas of counteraction to raiding is the consolidation at the legislative level of a common understanding of this concept, but the Civil Code of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine "On Joint Stock Companies" deals only with certain aspects of raiding. Features of "white", "gray", "black" raiding are revealed. There are two ways to warn and protect businesses from raiding: the use of government tools and self-preventive protection of the enterprise. The state instruments of warning and protection of enterprises from raids include: legislative guarantees of inviolability of property and protection of property rights of enterprises in case of violation, criminal liability for misappropriation of property, the procedure of state registration of property rights, the right to apply for protection of rights and interests to the court and the Office for Combating Raiding at the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine. It is emphasized that only 20% of enterprises independently protect themselves from raider encroachment, which explains the large number of raider seizures in Ukraine. Among the methods of such protection, emphasis is placed on creating a reliable system of protection of information about the company, ensuring timely and full payment of dividends to shareholders, preventing the mass purchase of shares and monitoring the current situation. It is concluded that it is expedient to develop and consolidate at the legislative level a common understanding of the concept of "raiding", guarantees of warning and protection of business entities from raiding in Ukraine, improving the powers of courts and the Office for Combating Raiding in Ukraine to consider issues of registration of property rights of enterprises.

scholarly journals Legal Confıscatıon as a Property Rıght Issue in Turkey

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-448
Author(s):  
Yavuz Guloglu
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Public Service ◽  
Public Services ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Property Right ◽  
The Public ◽  
Service Areas ◽  
The Right

Zoning plans are drawn and written texts prepared as a result of planning activities according to the characteristics of the region in order to meet the social, cultural, human and economic needs of a settlement and to show a safer and more regular development of the place. The property rights of individuals can be restricted by means of the plans prepared by the administration to create livable, orderly and modern living spaces. While the zoning plans are being prepared, the immovables allocated for public services should first be selected from public lands and if these immovables are not sufficient for the places to be allocated to the public service areas, the immovables subject to private property should be allocated to the public service and these areas should be expropriated by the administrations to be allocated on their behalf. The Zoning Law No. 3194 in Turkey is the basic regulation of the zoning law. In the Zoning Law, there is a regulation that the parcels allocated to public services in the zoning plans will be expropriated within five years. However, if the expropriation of the immovables is not completed within the time specified in the legal regulation, the owner who is deprived of his right to dispose of the immovable, is unfairly burdened with a heavy burden. The concept of "legal confiscation" emerges when the property right of the owner of the immovable is restricted for many years only by allocating privately owned immovables to public space in the zoning plans without any actual intervention by the administration. Since the administrations responsible for expropriation mostly avoid this obligation, the procedures established by the administration for planning constitute a disproportionate and unfair intervention in the property rights of the immovable owners. In this study, the definition of the concept of legal confiscation in Turkey, its elements, the remedies for ending the interference with the right to property will be explained, the procedures and principles to be considered during the judgement will be explained by giving examples from the judicial case-law and the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, and solution proposals will be presented.Keywords: Legal Confiscation; Construction Plan; Property; Contravention Tuntutan Hukum sebagai Permasalah Hak Properti di Turki Abstrak.Undang-undang Zonasi No. 3194 di Turki adalah peraturan dasar dari undang-undang zonasi. Dalam UU Zonasi, ada aturan bahwa persil yang dialokasikan untuk layanan publik dalam rencana zonasi akan diambil alih dalam waktu lima tahun. Akan tetapi, jika pengambilalihan barang-barang tidak bergerak itu tidak selesai dalam waktu yang ditentukan dalam peraturan perundang-undangan, maka pemilik yang dirampas haknya untuk membuang barang-barang tidak bergerak itu, dibebani secara tidak adil dengan beban yang berat. Konsep "sita hukum" muncul ketika hak milik pemilik barang tidak bergerak dibatasi selama bertahun-tahun hanya dengan mengalokasikan barang-barang milik pribadi ke ruang publik dalam rencana zonasi tanpa intervensi nyata dari pemerintah. Karena sebagian besar administrasi yang bertanggung jawab atas pengambilalihan menghindari kewajiban ini, prosedur yang ditetapkan oleh administrasi untuk perencanaan merupakan intervensi yang tidak proporsional dan tidak adil dalam hak milik pemilik tak bergerak. Dalam penelitian ini akan dijelaskan pengertian dari konsep sita hukum di Turki, unsur-unsurnya, upaya penyelesaian untuk mengakhiri campur tangan terhadap hak milik akan dijelaskan, prosedur dan prinsip-prinsip yang harus dipertimbangkan selama penilaian akan dijelaskan dengan memberikan contoh-contoh dari kasus hukum peradilan dan keputusan Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia Eropa, dan proposal solusi akan disajikan.Kata Kunci: Penyitaan Hukum; Rencana Pembangunan; Properti; Kontravensi Юридическая конфискация как проблема права собственности в Турции Абстрактный.Закон о зонировании № 3194 в Турции является основным постановлением закона о зонировании. В Законе о зонировании есть положение, согласно которому участки, выделенные для общественных услуг в планах зонирования, будут экспроприированы в течение пяти лет. Однако, если отчуждение недвижимой вещи не завершено в сроки, указанные в правовом регулировании, на собственника, лишенного права распоряжаться недвижимой вещью, несправедливо возлагается тяжелое бремя. Понятие «юридическая конфискация» возникает, когда право собственности владельца недвижимой вещи ограничивается в течение многих лет только путем отнесения частной недвижимой собственности к общественным местам в планах зонирования без какого-либо фактического вмешательства со стороны администрации. Поскольку администрации, ответственные за экспроприацию, в большинстве случаев избегают этого обязательства, процедуры, установленные администрацией для планирования, представляют собой несоразмерное и несправедливое вмешательство в имущественные права владельцев недвижимого имущества. В этом исследовании будет объяснено определение концепции правовой конфискации в Турции, ее элементы, средства правовой защиты для прекращения вмешательства в право собственности, а также будут объяснены процедуры и принципы, которые должны быть рассмотрены в ходе судебного решения, с помощью примеров из будет представлена судебная практика и решения Европейского суда по правам человека, а также предложения по их решениям.Ключевые слова: Конфискация; План Строительства; Собственность; Правонарушение

Distributive Justice and the Tensions of Lockeanism

1983 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 132-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Mack
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Distributive Justice ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Individual Property ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Personal Nature ◽  
The Right ◽  
Time And Energy

An ongoing tension exists within the Lockean tradition in political philosophy between the claim that each individual is the “Proprietor of his own Person” and the claim that nature is “that which God gave to Mankind in common.” The former claim points to a realm of discrete individual entitlements only formally equal in the sense of each individual having jurisdiction over his own person and not over any other person, while the latter points either to a collective entitlement to nature or to individual entitlements to substantively equal shares of nature. Were the two realms, that of persons and that of extra-personal nature, separate and independent, no tension would arise from the union of these two claims. But the realms are manifestly interconnected. Individuals acquire, use, labor upon, invest their time and energy on, and transform, more or less in accordance with their purposes, elements of extra-personal nature. And Locke and his followers believe that at least certain of these interactions with segments of nature give rise to individual property rights to the segments thereby appropriated, labored upon, transformed, or whatever. The traditional bridging notion is each person's right to his own labor which is seen as part of each person's proprietorship over himself. According to this tradition, if the right of each individual over his own person is to be respected, individual titles to appropriated, labored upon, or transformed nature must also be respected.The task for anyone seeking to embrace all the strands within this Lockean heritage is to reconcile, a) this right to one's own labor and the (or some) system of private property rights tied to it (which system will include historical entitlement principles for legitimating later property configurations) plus the right of self-ownership (or some equivalent) which lies behind the right to one's own labor, with b) some distributionist ideal, at least with regard to natural resources.

A Fundamentação Kantiana do Estado de Direito

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (24) ◽  
pp. 5-20
Author(s):  
Aylton Barbieri Durão ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Private Property ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Political ◽  
Evolutionary Anthropology ◽  
Civil State ◽  
The Public ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Original Contract ◽  
The Right

Kant intends to present a Foundation of the state of right based on the reconstruction of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s thought. Like the Genevanese philosopher who presents an empirical explanation based on the evolutionary anthropology, and a rational Foundation, based on the political and juridical philosophy, Kant also imagines two ways to fundament the state of right. In his empirical explanation, along with the anthropology, he introduces the history philosophy, which considers that the unsociable sociability makes the humankind leave its state of nature and establish, by means of an usurper, the civil state, in which it gradually approaches the republican constitution and, later, the States Federation and the cosmopolitan right; the rational Foundation, on the other hand, shows how the original contract indirectly determines the Foundation of the civil state, to the extent that only through it is it possible to establish the presumption of the right to the private property that will just turn effective in the civil state itself, although the public right directly postulates the state fundament, which is obtained analytically from the principle of the right in opposition to the concept of violence.

scholarly journals THE INFLUENCE OF PROPERTY ON A RUSSIAN PERSON IN DIFFERENT ECONOMIC SYSTEMS

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-26
Author(s):  
E.I. Titova
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Work Motivation ◽  
The State ◽  
Positive Development ◽  
Economic Management ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Market Interaction ◽  
Role Of The State ◽  
The Right

The article deals with the interpretation of labor and the relations of property rights used in different socio-economic ideologies of management. In all existing ideologies of economic management under capitalism people are free in their economic choices and only under socialism, under public ownership, the manufacturer can not freely dispose of either any property or manufactured product, so his work motivation is weakening, there is no sense of ownership and caring attitude to property and means of production. Only private property protected by the laws of the State provides its owner with the right to dispose of it and the produced product at his own discretion on a legal basis. At the same time, private property creates a personal interest in the owner in improving the quality, range, productivity, as well as reducing the cost of production of manufactured products. Since the basis of private property is labor, and it is connected with human nature, so the private property obtained by labor and personal skill is always protected by each person and is dear to him. Therefore, owners are always interested in the implementation of state laws that protect property rights. Only when a person has private property, in the form of a small plot of land, a house built on it and his own business, only then he feels like an independent owner and he has the desire to work hard and the desire to master new things. For the owner, property is his possession, his pride and he puts his strength, will, knowledge and soul into it. The Russian man did not own private property for a long period, so he lost interest in it. Only the acquisition of private property rights can restore his economic initiative and diligence, ingenuity and inventiveness, deftness and assiduity. The role of the State should be limited to the framework of the law and the creation of conditions in which market interaction between people will have economic freedom of choice and positive development.

POLITICS AND PROPERTY IN NATURAL RESOURCES

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 53-94
Author(s):  
Andrew P. Morriss
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Environmental Problems ◽  
Economic Problem ◽  
Extractive Industries ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
The Public ◽  
Natural Resource Extraction

Modern discussions of natural resources focus on increasing public control over extractive industries proposing measures that range from increasing the public's share of the gain via royalties and taxes to regulating extractive activities to prevent environmental problems to outright expropriation of private investments. This article argues that such efforts are counterproductive because the fundamental economic problem of natural resources is producing the knowledge necessary to locate and extract resource deposits. The public benefit comes from enabling the use of the resources and the increased economic activity their discovery produces rather than from royalties or expropriation. The key question in designing natural resource laws is thus their effects on the incentive to discover and manage resources. Private property rights in natural resources are the best way to provide such incentives. Fortunately, the combination of property rights and tort law principles (trespass and nuisance) enables property rights to solve environmental problems related to natural resource extraction as well.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document