scholarly journals Constitutional acts of Kyrgyzstan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-45
Author(s):  
A. A. Arabaev

The article is devoted to the research of forming constitutional legislation of Republic of Kyrgyzstan, that originates from the moment of acceptance of the first constitutional acts as a Autonomous Republic in the composition of Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic. The author of the article researches law and political specifications of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, that has been accepted in 1929 by the all-Kyrgyz congress of Soviets. One of the features of that Constitution was a determination of the status of Kyrgyzstan as a part of Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic. The author comes to the conclusion that as a fact Soviet Kyrgyzstan as a part of Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic in spite of having a constitution and the higher authority and other state elements as a territory, nationality, language, symbols most likely represented not an autonomous state, but the administrative unit with some state elements, forming a part of Russian State. In the article the author concludes that in spite of the fact, that the Kyrgyz Constitution of 1929 wasnt adopted by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and All-Russian congress of Soviets as it was determined, that Constitution was valid and formed the national statement of Kyrgyzstan in such a period of time.

Kavkaz-forum ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Е.И. КОБАХИДЗЕ

В статье предлагается анализ Конституции Северо-Осетинской АССР 1978 г., отразившей этап развития ее государственности в советский период. Научное осмысление правовых аспектов истории Северной Осетии в статусе автономной республики, анализ ее места и роли в системе советской государственности во многом объясняет противоречия в реализации органами государственной власти республики функций политического самоуправления в эпоху «застоя» и «кризиса социализма». Анализ показывает, что декретированный ранней советской властью национальный суверенитет народов, населяющих советскую Россию, не нашел правового подтверждения в Конституции СССР 1977 г., на основе и в соответствии с которой были разработаны и приняты Конституции РСФСР и входящих в нее автономных республик, в том числе и СОАССР. Фиксация статуса автономной республики в качестве государственного образования без признания ее государственного суверенитета ограничивало пределы компетенции республиканских органов власти и управления и ставило их в фактическую зависимость от вышестоящих властно-управленческих структур даже в решении вопросов, отнесенных к ведению автономной республики. Все это вместе взятое превращало автономную республику в «квазигосударственное образование», высшие государственные органы которой действовали в режиме «местной власти». Противоречивые конституционные положения 1977-1978 гг., закрепленные в Основных законах СССР, РСФСР и СОАССР, стали одним из факторов деструкции советской власти и социалистической системы и последующего затем «парада суверенитетов» бывших автономных образований в пределах РСФСР. The article analyzes the 1978 Constitution of the North Ossetian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, which reflected the stage of development of its statehood relevant to the Soviet period. Scientific comprehension of the legal aspects of the history of North Ossetia in the status of an autonomous republic, an analysis of its place and role within the system of the Soviet statehood largely accounts for the contradictions in the implementation by the republican state institutions of the functions of political self-government in the era of "stagnation" and "crisis of socialism". Analysis shows that the national sovereignty of the peoples inhabiting Soviet Russia, that was decreed by the early Soviet government, did not find legal confirmation in the USSR Constitution of 1977, on the basis and in accordance with which the Constitution of the RSFSR and its autonomous republics, including NOASSR, were elaborated and adopted. Fixing the status of the autonomous republic as a state entity without recognizing its state sovereignty limited the competence of the republican authorities and made them in fact dependent on the higher power structures even in resolving issues attributed to the jurisdiction of the autonomous republic. All this taken together turned the autonomous republic into a "quasi-state entity", the highest state bodies of which operated in the regime of "local power". Contradictory constitutional provisions of 1977-1978, enshrined in the Fundamental Laws of the USSR, RSFSR and NOASSR, became one of the factors of the destruction of the Soviet power and the socialist system and the subsequent “parade of sovereignties” of the former autonomous entities within the RSFSR.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (3/2) ◽  
pp. 125-135
Author(s):  
D. Sh. RAMAZANOVA

Being the part of Russia throughout different periods Daghestan had  various administrative and political status (as an oblast being the  part of the empire) an autonomous Republic of the RSFSR (USSR),  as a Republic of the Russian Federation. Upon that, the borders of  Russia as a state were set without regard for the interests of the  nationalities, populating it, but taking into account the interests of  the state exclusively. In the XIX century this policy gave birth to the problem of separation among daghestani nationalities (the  Lezgins, the Tsakhurs, the Avars, the Kumyks) and the Nogais as  well as in 1922-1923 their territory was included on the list of  nationalities – the members of the Daghestan Autonomous Soviet  Socialist Republic, but later it was the issue of exchanges between  the RSFSR subjects. If the problem under discussion was topical  within administrative and territorial borders of the Russian State,  then, by the end of the 20th century it had the status of interstate  problem – the first 3 of the enumerated nationalities were separated  by state borders with the neighboring states of Azerbaijan and the  Republic of Georgia. With the reference to the literary sources and  the results of the demographic census, the author of the article  shows the population changes and the settlement of the Lezgins, the Tsakhurs and the Avars in the Caucasian region in the end of the  20th the beginning of the 21st centuries, continuing the article  serves on the problem of separation among Daghestan nationalities.  In 2011 the problems of the Avars from the Kvarelski region in  Georgia were discussed in the article published in “Izvestya Daghestanskogo Pedagogicheskogo universiteta”, where as  in 2018 the problems of the Nogais, separated by administrative  borders of the Russian Federation subjects on the North Caucasus  were discussed on the pages of the magazine “Society: philosophy,  history, culture”. All the above mentioned ethnic communities are  officially labeled as “title (subject-forming) nationalities” in the  contemporary Republic of Daghestan.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-71
Author(s):  
Melissa Chakars

This article examines the All-Buryat Congress for the Spiritual Rebirth and Consolidation of the Nation that was held in the Buryat Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic in February 1991. The congress met to discuss the future of the Buryats, a Mongolian people who live in southeastern Siberia, and to decide on what actions should be taken for the revival, development, and maintenance of their culture. Widespread elections were carried out in the Buryat lands in advance of the congress and voters selected 592 delegates. Delegates also came from other parts of the Soviet Union, as well as from Mongolia and China. Government administrators, Communist Party officials, members of new political parties like the Buryat-Mongolian People’s Party, and non-affiliated individuals shared their ideas and political agendas. Although the congress came to some agreement on the general goals of promoting Buryat traditions, language, religions, and culture, there were disagreements about several of the political and territorial questions. For example, although some delegates hoped for the creation of a larger Buryat territory that would encompass all of Siberia’s Buryats within a future Russian state, others disagreed revealing the tension between the desire to promote ethnic identity and the practical need to consider economic and political issues.


Author(s):  
D. V. Repnikov

The article is devoted to such an important aspect of the activities of the plenipotentiaries of the State Defensive Committee during the Great Patriotic War, as conflicts of authority. Contradictions between the plenipotentiaries of the State Defensive Committee and the leaders of party, state, economic bodies at various levels, as well as between the plenipotentiaries themselves, that were expressed in the emergence of various disputes and often resulted in conflicts of authority, became commonplace in the functioning of the state power system of the USSR in the war period. Based on documents from federal (State Archive of the Russian Federation, Russian State Archive of Socio-Political History, Russian State Archive of Economics) and regional (Central State Archive of the Udmurt Republic, Center for Documentation of the Recent History of the Udmurt Republic) archives, the author considers a conflict of authority situation that developed during the Great Patriotic War in the Udmurt Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, which shows that historical reality is more complicated than the stereotypical manifestations of it.


Author(s):  
V. V. Kharabuga ◽  
V. A. Afanasyev

For a long time, Crimea has been the place of a permanent ethnopolitical political conflict controlled from the outside, one of the components of which is the confrontation between the Russians, as an ethnic group and the other Slavic population of Crimea, on the one hand, and the Tatars of Crimea, on behalf of whom the extremist banned in Russia is trying to speak structure «kurultai-mejlis». The argumentation of the hypothesis designed to confirm the myth about the national (Tatar) character of the Crimean ASSR is presented. The analysis of argumentation suggests that the hypothesis is not supported by convincing evidence. More weighty should be considered the point of view that the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic in 1921–1945. was multinational-territorial autonomy. The discussion in Ukraine of the topic of changing the status of Crimea, turning it into national Tatar autonomy is carried out by the leaders and functionaries of the extremist organization «kurultai-mejlis» in the framework of the anti-Russian propaganda flow controlled from abroad and exploits the analyzed myth as the historical basis of its claims.


Author(s):  
Mykhailo Bibik ◽  
Hryhorii Moroz ◽  
Vitalii Kyrylenko ◽  
Artem Kuzmenko

According to the results of the study of soils in the Northwest of the Black Sea region, it is determined that here, in the profile of vorony-calcic and calcic Chernozems, both residual and weak alkalinity are manifested. It was found out, nowadays, in the national soil science, there are no clear criteria for the selection of sodic soils and for the determination of their alkalinity degree. Furthermore, there is also the question of the differentiation of the actually sodic and residual-sodic soils. It has been established that on the territory of the Northwest of the Black Sea region polygenetic soils – vorony-calcic and calcic Chernozems weakly and residual-sodic were formed and the diagnostics of their classification and taxonomic position for the moment is rather ambiguous. The diagnostic of the alkalinity degree of vorony-calcic and calcic Chernozems in the Northwest of the Black Sea region was carried out in four methodological approaches. It was established, that it is impossible to carry out precise and unambiguous diagnostics of the alkalinity degree of soils of the territory of the study according to existing methods. Thus, the sodic and residual-sodic soils, according to classification of 1977, are almost entirely positioned as weakly sodic in accordance with the “Field determinant of soils”. In turn, taking into account the Novikova approach, the status of these same soils varies from non-sodic to solonetzes according to the degree of illuviation, the final diagnosis of which, however, contradicts the low content of exchangeable sodium. An integral approach to the determination of the alkalinity degree of soils is proposed, which is based on the chronological features of the course and direction of the sodification process. According to this approach, if the alkalinity of the studied soils is relict, its degree should be diagnosed by the illuviation of silt and by the content of exchange Na+ (Ni> 8 %, Na+<3 % – residual-sodic soils, Ni> 8 %, Na+ ≥ 3 % –sodic soils).In turn, in the case of the modern alkalinity, its degree should be determined by the ratio Ca2+/Mg2+ (<4,8) and by the content of the exchangeable Na+ (<3 % – residual-sodic soils, and ≥3 % – sodic soils). Key words: Chernozems, the alkalinity degree, diagnostic, steppe, the Northwest of the Black Sea region.


2021 ◽  
pp. 156-177
Author(s):  
Е.И. КОБАХИДЗЕ

В статье анализируется Конституция СОАССР 1937 г. как один из важнейших документов по Новейшей истории Северной Осетии, впервые определивший ее самостоятельный государственно-политический статус в качестве советской автономной республики в составе РСФСР. В поиске форм национального самоопределения Северная Осетия несколько раз меняла свой статус: будучи рядовой территориально-административной единицей в административной системе позднеимперской России, Осетия и после утверждения советской власти оказалась включена в окружную модель территориального устройства Горской АССР. Лишь после упразднения Горской республики Северной Осетии был придан статус автономной области в составе России с несколько расширенной административной самостоятельностью, хотя и довольно ограниченным объемом полномочий, распространявшихся преимущественно на хозяйственно-культурную сферу. Однако именно тогда Северная Осетия впервые сформировала собственные устойчивые и жизнеспособные органы власти и управления, деятельность которых регулировалась союзным и республиканским (РСФСР) законодательством. Новый этап развития североосетинской государственности пришелся на вторую половину 1930-х гг., когда новая Конституция СССР объявила ряд бывших национальных автономных областей, в том числе и Северо-Осетинскую АО, автономными республиками и предоставила им правовые основания для принятия собственных конституций, наделив их таким образом государственно-политическим статусом. Сравнительный анализ конституций СССР, РСФСР и СОАССР показывает, что организационно-правовые основы национальной государственности, закрепленные в конституции СОАССР, формулировались исходя из приоритета общесоюзной и российской конституций, хотя и с учетом местных особенностей. В то же время первая советская конституция Северной Осетии, принятая ее собственным законодательным органом и определяющая правовые основы политической автономии, ознаменовала завершение процесса становления национальной государственности Северной Осетии и открыла новую страницу ее социально-политической истории. The article analyzes the Constitution of the North Ossetian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic of 1937 as one of the most important documents on the recent history of North Ossetia, which firstly defined its independent state-political status as a Soviet autonomous republic within the RSFSR. In the search for forms of national self-determination, North Ossetia changed its status several times: being an ordinary territorial-administrative unit in the administrative system of late imperial Russia, Ossetia, even after the approval of Soviet power, was included in the district model of the territorial structure of the Mountain ASSR. Only after the abolition of the Mountain Republic, North Ossetia has got the status of an autonomous region within Russia with somewhat expanded administrative self-dependence, albeit with a rather limited scope of powers that extended mainly to the economic and cultural sphere. However, just then North Ossetia for the first time formed its stable and viable power and administrative institutions, the activities of which were regulated by union and republican (RSFSR) legislation. A new stage in the development of North Ossetian statehood fell on the second half of the 1930s, when the new Constitution of the USSR declared the granting of the status of autonomous republics to the former national autonomous regions, including the North Ossetian Autonomous Region, and provided them with legal grounds for adopting their own constitutions, and so endowed them of state and political status. A comparative analysis of the constitutions of the USSR, RSFSR and NOASSR shows that the organizational and legal foundations of national statehood, enshrined in the Constitution of the NOASSR, were formulated based on the priority of the all-Union and Russian constitutions, albeit taking into account local specifics. At the same time, the first Soviet constitution of North Ossetia, adopted by its legislative institution and defining the legal foundations of political autonomy, marked the end of the process of formation of the national statehood of North Ossetia and opened a new page in its socio-political history.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleg Galuscenco ◽  

The article presents the biography of the folklorist Pavel Chior, the chief architect of the new Soviet Moldovan culture in the interwar years. He was one of the party and state leaders in of the Moldovan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic: secretary of the Komsomol of the Autonomous Republic, editor of the republican newspaper “Plugarul Rosu” (“The red ploughman”), People’s Commissar of Education of the MASSR, head of the Moldovan Scientific Committee, precursor of the Moldovan Academy of Sciences, one of the founders of the Writers’ Union of the Moldovan ASSR. Pavel Chior devoted great attention to folk art. He published a number of scientific works that have maintained their significance to this day: Zicători moldoveneşti, (Moldovan proverbs), Cîntece moldoveneşti norodnice (Moldovan folk songs), etc. This article is written on the basis of previously published scientific papers. New archival materials are also used.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 63-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leyla G. Kaymarazova ◽  
Gany Sh. Kaymarazov

The relevance of the questions raised in the article is due to the 100th anniversary of the events of the Russian Revolution, as well as interest in the problems of national-state construction in Soviet Russia against the background of political transformations that have occurred in the Russian state since the late 1980s. The article with the involvement of reliable source material, analytical use of accumulated historiographic experience, materials of documentary publications for different years, sources of personal origin, mainly of reminiscences, highlights the complex process of revolutionary events in Dagestan after October 1917. It is shown how the formation of associations of various political and ideological orientations occurred, the first Soviet authorities were created, and radical changes were carried out in the conditions of the opposition of its supporters and opponents, who organized or tried to organize their authorities on the ground. These issues are considered in the context of events related to the Civil War and foreign intervention, the struggle against the Denikin’s Volunteer Army and the victory of the Soviet government in a multinational area.Particular attention is paid to the creation in Dagestan of temporary emergency authorities - revolutionary committees (revcoms), transfer from them to elected authorities - the Soviets, the Emergency Congress of the Peoples of Dagestan and the proclamation of the Soviet autonomy of Dagestan in Soviet Russia, the formation of the Soviet government and the adoption of the decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee on the formation of the Dagestan Soviet Socialist Republic of the RSFSR. The article shows that the Soviet autonomy of Dagestan is one of the forms of national statehood, and state-building in a multinational region, despite regional peculiarities, is part of the all-Russian political, economic and social process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document