scholarly journals Review of Some Amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 40-44
Author(s):  
Andrey M. Konovalov ◽  

On March 14, 2020 , the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation from 14.03.2020 N 1-FKZ (hereinafter — the law on the amendment), or rather its article 3, which provides for the entry into force of the amendments themselves to the Basic Law of the country, as well as several related issues, was officially published and entered into force. After only two days — March 16, 2020 was the Conclusion of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (hereinafter — CC RF), "On compliance with the provisions of chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation pending its entry into force the provisions of the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment of the Constitution" (hereinafter — the Conclusion). The proposed amendments affect a number of issues that are socially significant and therefore require detailed study, such as: fixing additional social guarantees for the population in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, setting the maximum number of presidential terms that a single person can hold, fixing requirements for persons applying for a number of positions, introducing a rule on the State Council, the possibility of checking the compliance of laws with the Constitution of the Russian Federation before they are signed by the President, etc. Even when the text of the original Bill was published, it caused quite a lively discussion not only in the society of professional lawyers, but also among those who do not have special knowledge in the field of law. Without trying to analyze in detail the entire text of the amendment Law (this would require writing a whole book) and without claiming absolute truth of the statements made, we will still try to consider its most interesting and controversial points, including relying on the Conclusion given by the constitutional court of the Russian Federation.

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 23-26
Author(s):  
Oleg A. Kozhevnikov ◽  

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.


Author(s):  
Sergey P. Kazankov

The article discusses the issue of the procedure for changing the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Examples of norms of foreign constitutions are given, which constitutionalists recognize as rigid constitutions in the order of their amendment. The ways of changing the Constitution of the Russian Federation are considered: revision, adoption of amendments, amendment of Art. 65Identified problems such as the form of the amendment to the Constitution, the moment of entry into force of the amendment, the introduction by the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 2020 a nationwide vote as an additional condition for the entry into force of the amendment, as well as additional powers of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to verify compliance with Chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation of the provisions of the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation that have not entered into force, as well as the procedure for the entry into force of Art. 1 of the Amendment Act. The critical notes are offered. In particular, the author comes to the conclusion that the approval of the constitutional amendment by the parliaments of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation is not a moment, but a condition for its entry into force, therefore, the law on the amendment cannot introduce additional conditions for the entry into force of constitutional amendments, since this leads to a violation requirements of Art. 136 of the Constitution, which cannot be amended by the federal parliament in the manner prescribed by chapter 9 of the Constitution.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 32-41
Author(s):  
N. G. Stenichkin ◽  

The problem. The concept of «issues of reference» is used in the Constitution of the Russian Federation when listing the subjects of the law of legislative initiative in relation to the judiciary. The legislation does not disclose or define this concept, which leads to discussion about its content and, as a result, raises questions about the practical implementation of the separation of powers principle in the legislative process. Aims and objectives of the study: we determined the limitations of the law of legislative initiative of the higher courts of Russia from the point of view the legal grounds for such restrictions, their subjects and legal consequences. Methods: we use both the common scientific methods (e. g. systemic, deductive) as the special-legal methods (formal, dogmatic, state-legal modeling method, comparative legal method etc.). Results: we conclude that «issues of reference» is a special constitutional legal term used in the Constitution of the Russian Federation to describe all functions of the certain branch of power or the public authority. This term in its content is broader than the concepts of «authority», «subjects of jurisdiction» and «jurisdiction». The use of the term «issues of reference» towards the higher courts, as subjects of the right of legislative initiative, does not allow us to assert the constitutional sense of existence various types of legislative initiative right, such as general right and limited (special) right. The practice of exercising the right of legislative initiative by the higher courts, as well as the applying the Procedure Rules of the State Duma of the Russian Federation does not provide for any restrictions on the right of courts to initiate bills. Russian legislation lacks mechanisms for applying the term «issues of reference» as an instrument restricting the constitutional right of the higher courts to participate in the legislative process. Also, such mechanisms are not reflected in the regulatory framework governing the activities of the higher courts. The term «issues of reference», applied to the legislative initiative right of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, does not imply any exemptions from the right to initiate bills given by the Constitution to other entities, but this term is used in the delimitation of legislative functions between the higher courts.


Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 70-82
Author(s):  
A. A. Liverovskiy

25 years of influence of the Constitution of the Russian Federation on public relations in our State has radically changed the idea of the Constitution and Constitutional Law. Admission of the Constitution of the Russian Federation by the society marked the formal recognition of social values spelled out in the Constitution and the nature of the legal principles implementing these values that are generally recognized by international law. The system of constitutional principles of natural origin became the basis for the constitutional regulation of social relations. The natural origin of legal principles means that they emerged in legal reality as a result of rational activity of a man, not only in terms of legitimizing the natural rights inherent in the man from birth, but also within the framework of their corrective impact on state regimes in light of promotion of civil rights and human freedoms. The natural origin of the constitutional principles gives an objective character to the constitutional regulation, and their predetermination and supremacy in relation to the influence of the legislative activity of the State power allows to create a constructive dichotomy of the constitutional and legislative regimes. In the theoretical and legal sense, constitutional principles as regulators of social relations constitute the “law of the Constitution”. Its fundamental part consists of the basic constitutional principles that determine the foundations of the constitutional system. The paper defines the mechanism of influence of constitutional principles on public relations that is different from the normative regulation: constitutional principles, in contrast to the norms acting in full compliance with their content, act in accordance with a a certain detectable extent of its content. Legal development of constitutional regulation arises from the interpretation of constitutional principles by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Resolving cases with regard to the constitutionality of normative legal acts, the body of constitutional justice creates legal stances — new constitutional regulators of social relations that not only correct the constitutional development of the State, but also are the law-making characteristics of the decisions. Using the construction of constitutional regulation, the author proposes an actual understanding of the problem of constitutional identity.


Author(s):  
Ella Z. Dzhamil’

Every decision of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation attracts the closest attention of the legal community, as it affects a wide range of public relations and the development of law in general. There is therefore no surprise about the interest in the Decision of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, on the 6th of December, 2018, No. 44-П adopted on business about check of constitutionality of the Law of the Republic of Ingushetia «On approval of the Agreement on the establishment of the border between the Republic of Ingushetia and the Chechen Republic» and the agreement on the establishment of the border between the Republic of Ingushetia and the Chechen Republic in connection with the request of the Head of Ingushetia, which marks another stage in the development of federalism in Russia. The conclusions formulated in this judgement clarify the competence of the Federation Council in terms of establishing the boundaries of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, which explains the issues related to the referendum and to identifi cation of the views of the population of the respective municipalities when such a demarcation takes place, and defi nition of the limits of the discretionary powers of the constitutional (Charter) courts of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, in terms of blocking laws of the subjects. At the same time, many of the legal positions expressed by the Court appear to be at least controversial and need adequate refl ection.


2019 ◽  
pp. 143-158
Author(s):  
Alexey Semitko

The paper analyzes the principle of sustaining citizen’s trust to the law and actions of the state in the system of individual / authorities relations. This principle is introduced into the Russian legal system by rulings of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation possessing the legal force of the Russian Constitution. However, the Supreme Law itself does not feature this property in the text. It is accordingly required – which is the purpose of this paper – to study this principle’s notion, content, nature, character, scope and place in the system of other legal principles, including those established in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, some of which are referenced by the Court in its rulings to justify the identification of the analyzed principle. To solve the above tasks, methods of interpreting official legal texts were applied (systemic, special legal and logical methods), as well as the anthropological approach. It is established that the researched principle is a general legal (universal) principle that stands on its own in the system of principles and is associated with the need for the whole state’s activity to comply with the established value, moral and ideological beliefs, generally accepted social conventions, etc., i.e. society’s legitimate expectations, which defines its scope and applicability. The recognition and respect of human dignity is central in society’s legitimate expectations from the state as it implements its activities. The latter requirement is fundamental for this principle and the public trust to state’s activities that is shaped during its realization; at the same time, such requirement is a criterion of how aligned state’s actions are with the society’s legitimate expectations. The novelty of this approach rests on identifying closely interconnected grounds, features, content and scope of the researched principle.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. 145-158
Author(s):  
O. Yu. Antonov ◽  
S. V. Shepelev

In the paper, given the recent history of prosecutorial supervision, the opinions of prosecutors and scientists, and the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the authors analyze the legislation and court practice on cases when prosecutors engage experts. The forms of special knowledge application in the course of the prosecutor’s supervision are highlighted and specified. The authors formulate recommendations for their design and use both during the prosecutor’s investigation and for further possible legal proceedings. In case the prosecutor’s decision is taken within the framework of the powers granted by the Law on the Prosecutor’s Office, it must be made based on the results of an audit conducted with the participation of a competent person. In cases when the prosecutor’s investigation findings are subsequently result in response measures made up of legal norms in the framework of legal proceedings, the examination must be carried out in court in order to establish the circumstances requiring the use of special knowledge. Special knowledge application in the course of the prosecutor’s investigation becomes the basis for further measures of the prosecutor’s response. The authors substantiate the opinion that the integration of the institution of forensic examination into the implementation of prosecutorial supervision in its pure form is impossible. At the end of the paper, a conclusion is formulated about the forensic significance of this activity, including for an investigator, an inquiry officer at the stage of initiating a criminal case.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 81-103
Author(s):  
A. Avtonomov ◽  
V. Grib

The article is a comparative study of legal regulation on non-profits in the Russian Federation by federal law, including the Constitution, federal statutes, decrees of the President of the Russian Federation, resolutions of the Government and Constitutional Court rulings in connection with certain international legal acts dealing with the right to association, and by the law of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The main stages of the development of the law on non-profits both at the federal level and at the level of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as the main trends in the development of non-profit law in modern Russia, are explored.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document