scholarly journals Constitutional principles of the creation of federal territories in Russia

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 468-476
Author(s):  
Sergey S. Starikov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Public Power ◽  
The Public ◽  
Strict Compliance ◽  
New Type ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Legal Mechanism

Introduction. During the constitutional reform of 2020, part 1 of Article 67 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation was supplemented with a provision on the possibility of creating federal territories. In this regard, questions need to be resolved about how the constitutional novel should relate to the principles of federalism established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and what the principles for the creation of federal territories in Russia are. Theoretical analysis. The creation of federal territories in the Russian Federation should take place subject to strict compliance with the principle of state integrity, the principle of equality and self-determination of the peoples of Russia; the principle of unity of the public power system; the principle of priority of individual rights and freedoms, their recognition, observance and protection by the state; the principle of compliance with the goals of the formation of federal territories with the strategic interests of the Russian Federation. Empirical analysis. It is revealed that the current version of Part 1 of Article 67 of the Constitution, firstly, establishes the possibility of creating federal territories as a new type of public legal territory, secondly, provides for a special organization of public power in these territories, different from the generally accepted organization operating on the territory of the subjects of the Russian Federation, and, thirdly, defines the constitutional and legal mechanism for their creation: the adoption of a federal law. This norm does not specify the types of federal territories and the possible goals of their creation. These issues are fully attributed to the discretionary powers of the Russian Parliament. Results. Based on the analysis of the scientific literature devoted to the problems of federal territories in Russia and abroad, and the legislation of the Russian Federation, the definition can be formulated: federal territory is a public legal entity that has a special constitutional and legal status determined by national strategic significance, created in accordance with a regulatory act providing for direct or indirect management of it by the federal government, defining the specifics of the exercise of public power in accordance with the goals of creation, additional guarantees and restrictions on the rights and freedoms of citizens.

scholarly journals State council in the light of the 2020 constitutional reforms

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 52-55
Author(s):  
P. R. Magomedova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The State ◽  
State Council ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Public Power ◽  
Advisory Body ◽  
Constitutional Reforms ◽  
Presidential Decree ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyzes the prerequisites for changing the legal status of the State Council of the Russian Federation, analyzes the Federal Law "On the State Council of the Russian Federation" dated December 8, 2020 No. 394-FZ and studies the changes that came into force in the light of the constitutional reforms of 2020. According to this Law, the State Council of the Russian Federation should become a real mechanism of public power in Russia, while remaining an advisory body and a platform for coordinating the interests of the regions and the center. The author conducted a comparative analysis of the State Council, which acted in accordance with the Presidential Decree of 2000, and the law adopted in 2020. Based on the conducted research, the author concludes that the amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation adopted in 2020 are timely and necessary in order to restore the existing government.

scholarly journals The System of Public Authorities of the Russian Federation: Concept, Characteristics, Interaction

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-203
Author(s):  
М. N. Kobzar-Frolova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
The State ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Council ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Public Power ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Russian Federation

The entry into force of the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the qualitative changes that were made to the text of the latter led to legislative activity. Laws were adopted, reflecting the changes made to the text of the Constitution, and containing new and / or little-studied terms, concepts, phenomena. Special attention of scientists and researchers was attracted by the Federal Law “On the State Council of the Russian Federation”, which came into force in December 2020, which for the first time legalized such terms as “public power”, “unified system of public power”, etc. The position is also of interest, expressed in the conclusion of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated March 16, 2020 No. 1-З in connection with the request of the President of the Russian Federation. It became necessary to give explanations and Author’s comments on the positive law of the country caused by these novelties. The term “public authority” is not a novelty for Russian legal science, but it has not been widely studied, and in connection with legislative changes it acquires new qualities, characteristics that need explanation and justification. The legislator provides an extensive definition of these terms. This makes it necessary to comprehend their essence, highlight the main elements of the public power system and demonstrate their political and legal ties, as well as the forms of interaction that take place in the public law regulation of relations between the subjects (elements) of a unified system of public power. Purpose: to investigate the essence of the concepts of “public power”, “unified system of public power”, to identify the characteristic features of the concept of “unified system of public power”. Among the main tasks: to show the political and legal ties and forms of interaction that arise between the subjects (elements) of a single system of public authority. Methods: logical, analytical, comparative legal, dialectical methods, allowing to reveal the essence, internal connections and the ratio of concepts enshrined in the federal law “On the State Council of the Russian Federation”, to reveal the features of a unified system of public authority. Results: state authorities are listed that correspond to the characteristics specified by the legislator, political and legal ties and forms of interaction that arise between the subjects (elements) of a unified system of public authority are identified, conclusions corresponding to the study are drawn.

scholarly journals Local Self-Government in the Context of the 2020 Constitutional Reform

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 35-41
Author(s):  
M. M. Stepanov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Reform ◽  
Main Trend ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
State Budget ◽  
Public Power ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Russian Federation

Local self-government in modern Russia was revived in the early 1990s. The legislation then in force was aimed at separating local self-government from the system of state authorities and ensuring its autonomy. The independence of local self-government was also established by the 1993 Constitution of Russia. As a follow-up to the provisions of the Constitution, the Federal Law dated 06 Oct 2003 No. 131-FZ “On General Principles of the Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation” was adopted. The Federal Law initiated the reform of local self-government aimed at improving the efficiency of local self-government bodies as an independent level of the public power most closely associated with the population. However, the municipal power is now radically different from that created in those years. This is primarily preconditioned by the lack of the necessary amount of its own revenue necessary to enable the municipal power to exercise its authority independently. The majority of municipalities need state assistance and interbudgetary transfers. The necessity to exercise control over the state budget spendings has led to the fact that the main trend in the development of local self-government in Russia was its integration into the vertical of public power. The legal crystallization of this process was carried out by amending the current legislation, especially the Federal Law No. 131-FZ dated 06 Oct 2003. The Constitutional Reform of 2020 has legitimized these changes.

Public hearings as an institution of deliberative democracy in major Russian and American cities

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-83
Author(s):  
Andrey Fursov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Regulations ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Hearings ◽  
The Russian Federation

Currently, public hearings are one of the most widespread forms of deliberative municipal democracy in Russia. This high level of demand, combined with critique of legal regulations and the practices for bringing this system to reality – justified, in the meantime, by its development (for example, by the Agency for Strategic Initiatives and the Public Chambers of the Russian Federation) of proposals for the correction of corresponding elements of the legal code – make both the study of Russian experiences in this sphere and comparative studies of legal regulations and practical usage of public hearings in Russia and abroad extremely relevant. This article is an attempt to make a contribution to this field of scientific study. If the appearance of public hearings in Russia as an institution of Russian municipal law is connected with the passing of the Federal Law of 6 October 2003 No.131-FZ, “On the general organisational principles of local government in the Russian Federation,” then in the United States, this institution has existed since the beginning of the 20th century, with mass adoption beginning in the 1960s. In this time, the United States has accumulated significant practical experience in the use of public hearings and their legal formulation. Both countries are large federal states, with their own regional specifics and diversity, the presence of three levels of public authority and different principles of federalism, which cause differences in the legal regulation of municipal public hearings. For this reason, this article undertakes a comparative legal analysis of Russian and American experiences of legal regulation and practical use of public hearings, on the example of several major municipalities – the cities of Novosibirsk, Nizhny Novgorod, Voronezh and New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. A comparison of laws influencing the public hearing processes in these cities is advisable, given the colossal growth in the role of city centers in the industrial and post-industrial eras. Cities in particular are the primary centers for economic growth, the spread of innovations, progressive public policy and the living environment for the majority of both Russian and American citizens. The cities under research are one of the largest municipalities in the two countries by population, and on such a scale, the problem of involving residents in solving local issues is especially acute. In this context, improving traditional institutions of public participation is a timely challenge for the legislator, and the experiences of these cities are worth describing. The unique Russian context for legal regulations of public hearings involves the combination of overarching federal law and specific municipal decrees that regulate the hearing process. There are usually two municipal acts regulating public hearings on general issues of the city district (charter, budget, etc.) and separately on urban planning. In the United States, the primary regulation of public hearings is assigned to the state and municipality level, with a whole series of corresponding laws and statutes; meanwhile, methodological recommendations play a specific role in the organisation of hearings, which are issued by the state department of a given state. It is proposed that regulating the corresponding relationships at the federal subject level will permit a combination of the best practices of legal administration with local nuances, thereby reinforcing the guarantee of the realization of civil rights to self-government. There are other features in the process of organizing and conducting public hearings in the United States, which, as shown in the article, can be perceived by Russian lawmakers as well in order to create an updated construct of public discussions at the local level.

scholarly journals The structure and features of the civil status of an individual entrepreneur in modern Russia

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3C) ◽  
pp. 424-442
Author(s):  
Dina Viktorovna Alontseva ◽  
Sergey Vladimirovich Vorobyev ◽  
Olga Anatolyevna Lavrishcheva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Civil Status ◽  
General Scientific ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Made In

Based on the analysis of the modern legislation of the Russian Federation and taking into account the existing scientific concepts, the authors studied in detail the legal nature and identified the features of certain types of legal statuses of an individual entrepreneur, as well as revealed the structure and analyzed in detail the specifics of the civil status of an entrepreneur in modern Russia. As a result of the conducted research, the author's concept of the "civil status of an individual entrepreneur" was formulated and the need for the adoption of the Federal Law "On the legal status of an individual entrepreneur in the Russian Federation" was justified. The practical significance of the work is determined by the fact that the conclusions made in the course of the study can contribute to improving the legal status of entrepreneurs in modern society at the legislative level. The methodological basis of this study was made up of general scientific, private and special methods of cognition.

scholarly journals On the Issue of a Public Corporation as a Form of a Non-Profit Organization

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 3-5
Author(s):  
Natalia G. Kanunnikova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Public Corporation ◽  
State Corporation ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article offers the author’s vision of such a form of non-profit organization as a state corporation with a special legal status. As a result of the analysis, the author comes to the conclusion that it is permissible to recognize a state corporation as an independent subject of civil law relations, since state corporations combine the characteristics of both a legal entity, in particular, the autonomy of property, independent liability for obligations, etc., and the institution of the state, endowed with authority. The analysis of the federal legislation allowed the author to say that a special legal regime applies to modern Russian state-owned corporations, which provides for their exemption from certain duties and granting certain rights and powers. In this regard, the question is raised about the development of recommendations for improving legislation in the field under study by excluding Article 7.1 from the Federal Law, January, 12 № 7-FZ “On Non-Profit Organizations”, and introducing its content into the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, adding it to Article 124.1 “State Corporation”.

scholarly journals A Prohibition to Receive Remuneration (Gifts) in Connection with the Performance of Official Duties as a Measure of Anti-Corruption Criminological Security

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 660-675
Author(s):  
Irina Damm ◽  
Aleksey Tarbagaev ◽  
Evgenii Akunchenko
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Service ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
To Receive

A prohibition for persons holding government (municipal) positions, for government (municipal) employees, and some other employees of the public sphere who are public officials to receive remuneration (gifts) is aimed at preventing bribery (Art. 290, 291, 291.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), and could be viewed as a measure of anti-corruption criminological security. However, the existing collisions of civil, administrative and criminal law norms that regulate this prohibition lead to an ongoing discussion in research publications and complexities in practice. The goal of this research is to study the conditions and identify the problems of the legal regulation of receiving remuneration (gifts) in connection with the performance of official duties that prevent the implementation of anti-corruption criminological security. The authors use the legal theory of security measures to analyze the provisions of Clause 3, Part 1, Art. 575 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and Clause 6, Part 1, Art. 17 of the Federal Law «About the Public Civil Service in the Russian Federation», examine the doctrinal approaches to defining the priority of enforcing the above-mentioned norms, study the significant features of the category «ordinary gift» and conduct its evaluation from the standpoint of differentiating between gifts and bribes, also in connection with the criteria of the insignificance of the corruption deed. The empirical basis of the study is the decisions of courts of general jurisdiction. The authors also used their experience of working in Commissions on the observance of professional behavior and the resolution of conflicts of interests at different levels. The conducted research allowed the authors to come to the following fundamental conclusions: 1) the special security rule under Clause 6, Part 1, Art. 17 of the Federal Law «About the Public Civil Service in the Russian Federation», which sets a full prohibition for government employees to receive remuneration (gifts) in connection with the performance of official duties, contradicts Clause 3, Part 1, Art. 575 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (the existing legal-linguistic vagueness of categories in Art. 575 of the CC of the RF leads to problems in law enforcement and makes a negative impact on the anti-corruption mentality of people); 2) as the concepts «gift» and «bribe» do not logically intersect, the development of additional normative legal criteria for their delineation seems to be unpromising and will lead to a new wave of scholastic and practical disagreements; 3) the introduction of a uniform and blanket ban on receiving remuneration (gifts) in the public sphere by eliminating Clause 3, Part 1, Art. 575 of the CC of the RF seems to be an effective measure of preventing bribery, and its application is justified until Russian society develops sustainable anti-corruption mentality.

scholarly journals Local Self-Government in the Public Government System: A New Constitutional Dimension

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 23-26
Author(s):  
Oleg A. Kozhevnikov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Public Power ◽  
The Public ◽  
System A ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The article analyzes certain provisions of the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of March 14, 2020 No. 1-FKZ “On improving the regulation of certain issues of the organization and functioning of public power” in terms of regulatory regulation of local self-government. According to the analysis the author comes to the conclusion that with the entry into effect of the mentioned legal act the content of individual elements of the constitutional-legal bases of local self-government will change, but the nature and scope of modifications in many respects will depend on the provisions of the rules of sectoral legislation aimed at implementing the relevant provisions of the Constitution. In this regard, the Federal legislator has a huge responsibility to create an “updated” legal framework for the implementation of the constitutional foundations of local self-government, taking into account the already established law enforcement practice, the positions of the constitutional court of the Russian Federation, as well as the state's international obligations under the European Charter on local self-government.

Legal Status of a School Principal in the Context of the Federal Law “On Education in the Russian Federation” Enactment

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-47
Author(s):  
Фёклин ◽  
Sergey Feklin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Educational Institution ◽  
School Principal ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Organization Management ◽  
The Core ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Job Duties

The Federal Law of December 29, 2012 № 273-FL “On Education in the Russian Federation” has introduced further clarity in the legal status of a leader (director) of a general educational institution, which came into eff ect as per September 1, 2013. The school principal is given the exceptional legal standing (status), which is conditioned by the specifi cs of his job duties, position and role in the mechanism of the educational institution management. The author thoroughly summarizes, reports in depth and gives comments on the questions concerning the core aspects of a school principal job, which are the most frequently asked by the learners of qualifi cation upgrading courses, and participants of roundtables and seminars. The author also highlights the school principal’s qualifi cation standards and administrational powers in terms of organization management, considering these issues De lege lata. The material is presented in the form of detailed answers to the frequently asked questions on the issues concerned.

scholarly journals Unrestricted (absolute) rights and freedoms of man and citizen in the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 and international acts

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (4) ◽  
pp. 69-75
Author(s):  
Aleksandr Podmarev
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Religious Affiliation ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Individual

The 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation as one of the principles of the legal status of an individual establishes the possibility of restricting human and civil rights and freedoms, while also providing for the necessary conditions for imposing such restrictions (the existence of a constitutional goal of restriction; setting restrictions only by federal law; proportionality; compliance with international standards of restrictions; prohibition restrictions on rights based on social, racial, national, linguistic or religious affiliation). The need for the existence of restrictions on the rights and freedoms of the individual is due to various reasons: the protection of the foundations of the constitutional order, the rights and freedoms of other persons, and the interests of the state. However, certain human rights and freedoms cannot be restricted under any circumstances; this so-called absolute rights and freedoms. But neither national legislation nor international law contain a precisely defined list of absolute rights and freedoms. The aim of the article is to identify in the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 and in international acts unrestricted (absolute) rights and freedoms of a person and citizen. The relevance of the research topic for the Russian constitutional legal science is due to the fact that certainty in the understanding of the list of unrestricted rights and freedoms is necessary for the improvement of lawmaking and law enforcement activities. The article examines the provisions of the Constitution of Russia, the main international legal acts on human rights, the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document