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

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.

2021 ◽  
pp. 55-62
Author(s):  
I. S. Polyakova

The objective of this research is to consider some controversial issues of the development of public-and-private partnership (and concession agreements as its most common form) in Russia. Some complaints made by Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation to some infrastructure projects are reviewed. The author studied dynamics of private investments into infrastructure projects in the conditions of imperfect legal regulation. The assessment of the validity of the position of Federal Antimonopoly Service is given. It is predicted whether the legislative collisions will prevent the growth of private investments into infrastructure. Recommendations on the development of the mechanism of public-and-private partnership with the observance of antimonopoly regulation, as well as recommendation on the improvement of the legislation in this area are developed. The results of the research can be used by both private participants of public-and-private partnership and the federal, regional and municipal authorities, and also by legislators working on the improvement of the legislative regulation in this area.


Author(s):  
Larisa Yur'evna Dobrynina ◽  
Anna Viktorovna Gubareva

The authors examine the economic sanctions introduced nu the U.S., EU and their allies against the Russian Federation, as well as the legal mechanism of retaliatory measures taken by Russia on the nationwide scale. The changes in the international legal regulation derailed the vector of global development, which was bringing real freedom of economic activity. Establishment of the sanction regime by the aforementioned parties signifies a struggle for own influence, weakening of the positive trade and economic ties, as well as an attempt to institute a regime of protectionism within the international trade turnover exclusively for their own benefit. Based on the analysis of the normative-legal documents, an assessment is made on the legal legitimacy of the introduced discriminatory measures of the allies from the perspective of the norms of international law. This article presents the analysis of the positions of federal laws and other legislative bills of the Russian Federation, establishing gradual constraining countermeasures for foreign subjects in various spheres of activity. The authors substantiate the fact that introduction of retaliatory economic sanctions by the Russian Federation with regards to the United States, European Union, and their allies is directly related to the implementation of the principle of reciprocity, currently existing within private international law. It is noted that all these actions on protection from illegitimate sanctions are realized by Russia practically without participation of UN, WTO and other reputable international organizations in regulation of the “sanctions” issue. The extraterritorial measures introduced by the United States and the European Union justifies the movement of Russian into a new stage of evolution of legal regulation of the foreign economic activity, and in foreign trade – establishment of new markets in Asia, Africa and Latin America.


Author(s):  
Irina Damm ◽  
Aleksey Tarbagaev ◽  
Evgenii Akunchenko

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.


Author(s):  
Игорь Ирхин ◽  
Igor Irkhin

This monograph comprehensively examines the constitutional and legal status of territories with a special status within the Federal States in the context of the Institute of territorial autonomy. The study is based on the experience of constitutional and legal regulation of the status of Autonomous districts in the "composite subjects" of the Russian Federation, administrative-territorial units with a special status in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, Autonomous districts in India, Nunavut territory in Canada, unincorporated territories of the United States This monograph is one of the first works in the domestic jurisprudence, in which the study was conducted from the perspective of territorial autonomy. The publication is intended for researchers, postgraduates and students, all readers interested in constitutional (public) law, theory of state and law.


Author(s):  
Ксения Горшкова ◽  
Ksenia Gorshkova ◽  
Сергей Желонкин ◽  
Sergey Zhelonkin

Introduction. In the present work, the authors investigated the main aspects of the reform of procedural legislation initiated by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation concerning changes in the legal regulation of the use of conciliation procedures in resolving legal conflicts. Until recently, Russian legislation did not have a regulated list of conciliation procedures. Purpose. The aim of the work is to identify the features and place of conciliation procedures in the institute of alternative ways to resolve legal conflict. Methodology. The work was performed on the basis of special methods of knowledge, including historical, legal, logical, and formally legal. Results. The paper analyzes the results of consideration of the draft Federal Law No. 421600-7 “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation Due to Improving Conciliation Procedures” in the first reading by the State Duma of the Russian Federation, taking into account the opinion of the relevant committee of the State Duma of the Russian Federation on state construction and legislation which caused a wide resonance in the Russian legal community. It is concluded that the world experience in applying reconciliation procedures, indicating a positive dynamic in the peaceful resolution of legal disputes, is also spreading within the framework of the Russian legal system. In the framework of the Russian judicial procedure, two fundamental conciliation procedures were consolidated – the mediation procedure and the judicial conciliation procedure. The introduction of special subjects (intermediaries) as judicial conciliators for the settlement of disputes in court is aimed at reducing the workload of judges, its concise and effective distribution. Conclusion. The material contained in the work is of interest for further research on the problems of alternative ways of resolving a legal conflict, can be used when giving lectures and conducting practical training in the course of the civil process


Author(s):  
Anna Vladimirovna Savina

The questions of application of measures of the state influence on processes of formation of the income of the budgets connected with need of expansion of legal terms in separate powers of the Russian Federation, subjects of the Russian Federation and municipalities are considered. The concept of budget income is analyzed, attention is paid to the theoretical understanding of regulatory income. Comprehend the process of suspending certain provisions of the budget legislation, given a theoretical evaluation of the legal terms in the aspect of budgetary-legal regulation. Illustrates the direction of income growth associated with changes in budget and tax legislation, as well as not related to its changes. Attention is paid to the principle of balance of budgets of the budget system of the Russian Federation, the observance of which is able to ensure the effectiveness of the formation, distribution and use of budgetary funds. The main aspirations of the state to balance the budgets of all levels of the budget system to create a mechanism to improve the efficiency of the budget system are considered. It is stated that the achievement of this goal is directly related to the change in the federal law “on the suspension of certain provisions of the budget code of the Russian Federation” legal terms through the adoption of legal acts at the federal level, the level of the subject of the Russian Federation and the municipality.


Author(s):  
Елена Татаринцева ◽  
Elena Tatarintseva

Adoption is a complex social and legal institution designed to best meet the interests of children who have lost parental care, in family education. Violation of the principle of subsidiarity of international adoption at the adoption of Russian children by U.S. citizens has led to multiple negative consequences, expressed in the loss of the Russian Federation the national resources of the country. A rethinking of this process was the adoption of the Federal law dated 28.12.2012 № 272-FZ, known as the "Dima Yakovlev Law" banning the adoption of children - Russian citizens - American citizens. In this monograph the author for the first time on the basis of primary sources, carried out comprehensive comparative legal analysis of current legislation of the Russian Federation and the United States of America in the field of adoption. It is concluded that the differences in the legal effects of adoption due to contradictions of the traditional Russian model of legal adoption and similar American functional model and the ways of their legislative improvement. The monograph contains law enforcement materials for the work of bodies of trusteeship and guardianship authorities and courts of the Russian Federation. The author's work is designed not only for specialists but also for a wide range of readers.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Вера Романова

The article analyzes the structure of the legal responsibility institute of the state. The article reveals the peculiarities of legal regulation of constitutional, civil and international legal responsibility of the state. The features of the subinstitute of constitutional responsibility of the State, which aims to ensure the inviolability of the principles of democracy and supremacy of the Constitution, as well as to protect the rights and freedoms of man and citizen are being shown. The author analyzed foreign experience of legal regulation of the legal responsibility of the state. The history of the formation and functioning of the procedure for impeachment of the Institute in the following countries: United States, United Kingdom, Denmark, Norway and the Federal Republic of Germany are expounded. Also considered are the basics of civil responsibility of the state. According to para. 2, Art. 8 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the Russian Federation it is recognized and protected equally private, state, municipal and other forms of property. Equal protection of all forms of property means, in particular, establishing the inadmissibility of any exception regarding the property responsibility for individual subjects, including the state. On this basis, we analyzed the concept of functional and absolute immunity of foreign states. The main provisions of both international law and the Federal Law of 11.03.2015, № 297-FZ "On the jurisdictional immunities of foreign States and property of a foreign state in the Russian Federation." are reviewed. The features of subinstitute of international legal responsibility of the state are investigated. It is generally known that one of the fundamental principles of contemporary international law is sovereignty. However, this principle does not indicate a lack of interaction and interdependence of the state, since no state can exist and develop in isolation from the world community. The article was supported by the Russian Foundation for Humanities, the project № 16-33-00017 «A comprehensive, interdisciplinary institute of legal responsibility: the concept, structure, relationships and place in the legal system".


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-199
Author(s):  
Alexey S. Butorov ◽  
Roman A. Adlov

This article examines the main causes and processes for the development of US public youth policy due to legal regulation of governmental and public institutions. The research identifies the main legal terms used by American and Russian legislators and the systems of youth policy, analyze the mechanisms of functioning of state and public institutions for working with youth. In addition, the study provides examples of the implementation of youth policy in the United States and the Russian Federation at the federal, regional and municipal (local) levels.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document