Emergency powers of the authorities of the constituent units of the federation (states) in Russia, the USA and Brazil amid the spread of a new coronavirus infection

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 86-107
Author(s):  
Alexander Merkulenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Emergency Powers ◽  
Lack Of Control ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government

Due to the new coronavirus pandemic, high alert regimes were introduced across the Russian Federation in spring 2020. These emergency regimes were established exclusively by the state bodies of the Russian Federation’s constituent units – federal authorities did not introduce their own emergency regimes. This decentralized strategy of fighting the pandemic was also introduced by the USA and Brazil. Their states, without the sanction of the federal government, and in the case of Brazil, ignoring its bans, set emergency restrictions similar to those in Russia. The legal regulation of emergency regimes existed before 2020, when constituent units of the federation (states) actively used their emergency powers. However, the regimes introduced during the fight against the pandemic were slightly different to previous ones. The restrictions on rights and freedoms within these regimes were so severe that not only their proportionality was questioned, but there were also doubts as to whether the regional level of the government had the authority to establish such strict restrictions. In addition, the pandemic exposed old problems and revealed new shortcomings in the legal regulation of emergency regimes: lack of control over the realization of the emergency regime by legislative (representative) authorities, and gaps in legislative regulation – notably in the establishment of possible restrictions and of a mechanism for scrutinizing their proportionality. All this raised questions about the proportionality of the established restrictions. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation resolved a very insignificant amount of the problems. While the United States and Brazil faced similar issues, the practice of scrutinizing implemented restrictions in these countries was more common. This article takes domestic and foreign experiences into account, while examining certain aspects of the establishment and the operation of regional emergency regimes.

scholarly journals GENOMIC RESEARCH LEGAL REGULATION SYSTEM: EXPERIENCE OF RUSSIA AND THE USA

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 546-564
Author(s):  
Emil V. Alimov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Genomic Research ◽  
Regulation System ◽  
Scientific Institutions ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Russian Federation

This article is devoted to the analysis of the genomic research legal regulation in the Russian Federation and the USA. In the United States, in addition to the legislation great importance is attached to medical and scientific institutions self-regulation, and such information is usually open. It is concluded that in Russia, despite the presence of both state and non-state scientific institutions engaged in genomic research, the mechanism of self-regulation as a whole is fragmented. It is also noted that Russia and the United States have specific legal regulation of these relations, which is reflected in the text of the article. For example, in the United States, unlike Russia, most organizations conducting genomic research, including genomic testing, are non-governmental. Currently, the general trend in the legal regulation of genomic research in Russia and the USA is the active development of normative legal regulation. Moreover, a significant difference in the approaches of these countries is the active role of the US states in the development of regional legal regulation on these issues. Despite the fact that Russia is a federal state, the subjects of the Russian Federation are significantly limited in the genomic research legal regulation possibilities. This is largely due to both legal and political reasons that were given in this article. In the United States, a number of statutes have been adopted at the state level that regulate genomic research in such aspects as health insurance, confidential of personal information, the prohibition of discrimination, screening of newborns, and certain types of clinical and scientific research. It should be noted that the genomic research regulation in the United States is not integrated into a single national consolidated act, which is a feature of this legal system. A comparative legal study of the fundamentals of legal regulation and self-regulation of genomic research in Russia and the USA made it possible to understand the specifics of regulation of these issues in different legal systems. The positive regulatory experience in conducting genomic research in the United States can be used to improve the regulatory framework of the Russian Federation in this area.

scholarly journals Main Trends in the Development of Russian Law on Non-Profit Organizations

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 81-103
Author(s):  
A. Avtonomov ◽  
V. Grib
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Russian Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

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.

SOME ISSUES OF LEGAL REGULATION AND ORGANIZATION OF THE REGIME IN PENAL IN STITUTIONS IN CONDITIONS OF THE CORONAVIRUS INFECTION SPREAD (COVID-19)

2021 ◽  
pp. 131-136
Author(s):  
Сергей Евгеньевич Илюхин ◽  
Оганнес Давитович Мкртчян
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Correctional Institution ◽  
Closed Space ◽  
Penal Institutions ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
Close Contacts

Распространение и выявление новой коронавирусной инфекции (COVID-2019) как на территории РФ, так и в структуре объектов УИС актуализирует необходимость трансформации средств обеспечения жизнедеятельности как всех субъектов права, так и в особенности подозреваемых, обвиняемых и осужденных. Доказано, что данная категория граждан находится в особо уязвимом положении с точки зрения подверженности заболевания коронавирусом по причине специфики режима отбывания наказаний, который предполагает замкнутость пространства. Введение мер ограничения, регламентированных Правительством РФ, конкретизируемых нормативно-правовыми актами ФСИН России и главного государственного санитарного врача ФСИН России, спровоцировали необходимость решения ряда вопросов, возникающих при реализации системы мероприятий по отбыванию осужденными наказаний в учреждениях УИС. Вышесказанное обуславливает важность и своевременность исследования, связанного и изучением проблем и дискуссионных положений, обуславливающих процесс исправления осужденных и предупреждения совершения ими новых преступлений через призму осуществления санитарно-противоэпидемических мер для предупреждения распространения коронавирусной инфекции. The spread and reveal of a new coronavirus infection (COVID-2019) both on the territory of the Russian Federation and in the structure of penal institutions have prompted us to talk about the need to transform the means of ensuring the life of all subjects of law, and especially suspects, accused and convicted. It is proved that this category of citizens is in a particularly vulnerable position in terms of exposure to coronavirus due to the specifics of the regime of serving sentences, which implies a closed space and close contacts of persons located on the territory of the correctional institution. The introduction of restrictive measures regulated by the Government of the Russian Federation, specified by regulatory legal acts of the Federal penitentiary service of Russia and the chief state sanitary doctor of the Federal penitentiary service of Russia, provoked the need to address a number of issues that arise in the implementation of the system of measures for serving sentences in penal institutions. The above explains the relevance of research related to the study of problems and controversial provisions that determine the process of correcting convicts and preventing them from committing new crimes through the prism of implementing sanitary and anti-epidemic measures to prevent the spread of coronavirus infection.

scholarly journals Constitutional-legal conditions for application of international treaties of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
pp. 72-83
Author(s):  
Egor Krivosheev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government

This article discusses the questions of application of international treaties concluded on behalf of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation, federal executive branches, or authorized organizations. The subject of this research is the constitutional norms of the Russian Federation and other normative legal acts that regulate the procedure for concluding, executing and terminating the international treaties of the Russian Federation, legal provisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, as well as scientific works on the topic. Special attention is given to the analysis of the constitutional principle that the international treaties of the Russian Federation are part of the legal system of the country. The author reveals the gaps in the current legislation of the Russian Federation specifying the constitutional provisions on the conditions for application of international treaties in the Russian Federation. It is established that the 2020 constitutional reform has improved the mechanism for protecting state sovereignty, and led to formulation of the constitutional-legal condition for application of the decisions of intergovernmental bodies adopted based on the provisions of international treaties of the Russian Federation. The article makes recommendations for the improvement of constitutional-legal regulation of application of international treaties of the Russian Federation. The conclusion is drawn on the existence of mandatory (compliance of the international treaty with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, its formalization, enactment, and consent to its universal binding), as well as optional (publication of domestic acts for application of the international treaty) constitutional-legal conditions for application of international treaties of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT IN THE SYSTEM OF JURISDICTIONAL BODIES (OF GODLY SINS OF CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE)

2017 ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Николай Бондарь ◽  
Nikolay Bondar
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
World Order ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Special Role ◽  
Constitutional Justice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government

Analyzing the place and role of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the institutional system of national and supranational jurisdictions, there is the author’s approach to the study of this institution in particular through the prism of the so-called constitutional paradoxes (“godly sins”) of the constitutional justice. Among them: legal involvement of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the resolution of important constitutional questions at the intersection of law and policy; entering into the system of justice and at the same time transcending it as the trial of the government and the law; the legal force of the final acts, which are not laws, can be above the law; the stability of the Constitution in conjunction with socio-historical dynamism, the problems of guaranteeing its supremacy in collaboration with supranational jurisdiction, the need to ensure by the constitutional justice of the Constitutions’ supremacy in collaboration with the international-legal regulation and supranational jurisdictional practices. The article explains that the status characteristics of the national organs of constitutional justice, manifested in the contemporary world order and in relations with bodies of international jurisdiction, have a constitutional good nature and serve as a confirmation of the special role of these bodies in the justice system in modern constitutional democracies.

Legal Regulation of Cooperation between the Russian Federation and the United States of America in Science and Technology

2019 ◽  
pp. 115-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. G. Barabashev ◽  
D. V. Ponomareva
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Space Station ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Cooperation Agreement ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government

The paper is a review of the regulatory framework of the Russian-American cooperation in science and technology. The authors analyse the interstate and intergovernmental agreements concluded by Russia and the United States in this field (1992 Agreement between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on Cooperation in the exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes, 1993 Science and Technology Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the United States of America, 2013 Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Russian Federation On cooperartion in nuclear- and energy-related scientific research and development). The paper highlights the key problems of legal regulation and provides specific examples of the implementation of the provisions of bilateral agreements, in particular, joint Russian-American projects in the area of space, scientific, technological and educational cooperation (the program «Soyuz-Apollon», international project «International Space Station», the Russian Academy of Sciences and the US scientific institutions cooperation agreements). In conclusion, an attempt is made to identify the main trends in the development of the legal framework for cooperation between Russia and the United States in the scientific and technological field.

scholarly journals Legislative regulation improvement of health protection in the context of the COVID-19 epidemic

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-86
Author(s):  
D. A. Morozov ◽  
D. V. Vtorushin ◽  
A. A. Polutsigan ◽  
G. I. Seleznev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The State ◽  
Health Protection ◽  
Equipment Construction ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Special Health

The experience of the health protection legal regulation during the spread of a new coronavirus infection (SARS-CoV-2) is presented. The key areas that required a number of state decisions to ensure the sanitary and epidemiological well-being of the Russian Federation and the protection of citizens are outlined: assigning the Government of the Russian Federation and State authorities of the Russian Federation subjects the authority to regulate special health protection; introducing responsibility for non-compliance with the rules of conduct in an emergency or threat of its occurrence; providing citizens with medicines, medical devices and personal protective equipment; construction, re-profiling and financing of medical organizations; support for medical workers, implementation of incentive payments. The review is based on the analysis of normative legal acts adopted by legislative and Executive authorities at all levels, their interaction, as well as the work carried out by the State Duma, the State Duma Committee on health protection, and parliamentary control. The proposals of the State Duma Committee on health protection on further improvement of the legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of health protection are reflected.

Comparison and analysis of the fda approved orphane drugs registerand the vital and essential drugs list of the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
pp. 4-16
Author(s):  
D.S. Yurochkin ◽  
◽  
A.A. Leshkevich ◽  
Z.M. Golant ◽  
I.A. NarkevichSaint ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Rare Diseases ◽  
Orphan Drugs ◽  
The United States ◽  
Orphan Diseases ◽  
Essential Drugs ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Comparison And Analysis ◽  
The Government

The article presents the results of a comparison of the Orphan Drugs Register approved for use in the United States and the 2020 Vital and Essential Drugs List approved on October 12, 2019 by Order of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 2406-r. The comparison identified 305 international non-proprietary names relating to the main and/or auxiliary therapy for rare diseases. The analysis of the market of drugs included in the Vital and Essential Drugs List, which can be used to treat rare (orphan) diseases in Russia was conducted.

THE ACTIVITIES OF THE USA AND CHINA IN THE REGIONS OF THE WORLD, AFFECTING THE REALIZATION OF RUSSIA'S INTERESTS. Part 1: country interests and activities

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (10) ◽  
pp. 149-166
Author(s):  
Dmitry V. Gordienko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The World ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Military ◽  
The Impact

The paper examines the interests of Russia, the United States and China in the regions of the world and identifies the priorities of Russia's activities in Europe, Central Asia and the Caucasus, the Asia-Pacific region, the Arctic, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America, their comparative assessment with the interests of the United States and China. An approach to assessing the impact of possible consequences of the activities of the United States and China on the realization of Russia's interests is proposed. This makes it possible to identify the priorities of the policy of the Russian Federation in various regions of the world. The results of the analysis can be used to substantiate recommendations to the military-political leadership of our country. It is concluded that the discrepancy between the interests of the United States and China is important for the implementation of the current economic and military policy of the Russian Federation.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document