scholarly journals Generally recognized principles and norms of jus cogens and erga omnes obligations: Legal nature and hierarchy in the Russian legal system

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 783-802
Author(s):  
Petr P. Kremnev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Jus Cogens

The article provides a conceptual and theoretical analysis of the hierarchy of conventional and customary universally recognized principles and norms of international law in relation to the Russian Constitution and federal legislation. The author points out the imperfection of the relevant provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in relation to the generally recognized principles and norms of international law. It is noted that provisions of only ratified treaties of Russia have precedence over the norms of the laws of the Russian Federation and examples and consequences of violations of the procedure for ratification of treaties are provided. The main aspects of the origin and content of generally recognized principles and norms of international law are considered, as well as the difference between jus cogens norms and erga omnes obligations is shown with concrete examples. A doctrinal analysis of the legal nature, and the process of formation, of universally recognized principles of international law, as well as the relationship between jus cogens norms and erga omnes obligations is presented. The author notes the peculiarities of some legal systems of the world in relation to the legal position on the supremacy of Islamic Sharia law over the obligations of a number of Muslim States under human rights treaties. The article also points to the universal recognition of the domestic legal doctrine of ten “basic principles” of international law and, in addition, substantiates the existence and consolidation in modern international law of another ten norms of jus cogens and erga omnes obligations.

scholarly journals On the hierarchy of normative legal acts in the legal system: experience of consular work abroad

2020 ◽  
pp. 95-105
Author(s):  
A. P. Lyubimov ◽  
A. M. Oreshenkov
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Degrees Of Freedom ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Work Abroad

INTRODUCTION. The article analyzes the current problems of the consular service. In the practical work of officials of the consular service of the Russian Federation, periodically arise situations in which it is necessary to make decisions taking into account the hierarchy of national legal acts and norms of international law, which are an integral part of the legal system of Russia. The situation complicated by the lack of a normative document that clearly and unambiguously regulates the hierarchy of legal acts that make up this system. The present article, based on the experience of the authors' work abroad, is a comprehensive study for making possible decisions within the framework of the issue under consideration on those non-standard issues that periodically are faced by employees of consular offices.MATERIALS AND METHODS. This article is based on the analysis of the provisions of article 15 of the Russian Constitution (taking into account the recently introduced amendments to the Constitution), on the decisions of the Constitutional and Supreme courts of Russia, laws of the Russian Federation, in particular, of the Civil code of the Russian Federation and the Federal law «On international treaties of the Russian Federation», and also in comparison of the legal systems of Russia, USA and Norway in the question of the primacy of national or international law, as well on real situations that occurred during one of the author's work in the consular service of the Russian MFA. The research method is based on the General scientific method of cognition.RESEARCH RESULTS. The article leads to the conclusion that in the question of the primacy of national or international law in the domestic legal system of a state gives its legislation different degrees of freedom to the Supreme state bodies in a flexible approach to the implementation of international legal obligations within the framework of the generally recognized principle of international law «pacta sunt servanda» – «treaties must be observed». Besides, within the framework of Russian national law, there are legally established opportunities to implement the norms of subordinate normative acts in the presence of a law that regulates the same type of relations in a different way.DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS. The article provides a regulatory framework that can be used by Russian foreign offices and the MFA in case of violation by the authorities of the host country of the norms of bilateral and multilateral treaties to which Russia and the country concerned are parties. As a conclusion, it is suggested that a clear understanding of the hierarchy of normative acts in the Russian legal system is necessary for its competent application by officials of Russian foreign offices in solving issues in the field of national legislation, as well as the use of international law by these persons in protecting the rights and interests of the Russian Federation, its legal entities and individuals.

Immunities of State Officials and the Responsibility for the International Crimes: International and National Law

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Светлана Глотова ◽  
Svetlana Glotova
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The immunities of high-rank officials regarding to the responsibility of serious crimes of international community concern are analysed in the present paper. Relevance of the topic is maintained in its consideration of the International Law Commission. Principle of the irrelevance of official capacity (Art. 7 IMT, Principle III of the Nuremberg principles, art. 27 Rome Statute of ICC) is universally recognized and has the character of jus cogens. We critically examine the state practice (Pinochet case, Georgia case). The international documents, Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and doctrine are analyzed. By virtue of the constitutional priority of universally recognized principles and norms of International law (Art. 15.4 Constitution), the provisions of the Criminal Code must be fixed in accordance with the Nuremberg principles. This concerns especially principle of irrelevance of official capacity. In case of conflict, the principle of interpretation in accordance with international law should be applied.

8 Generally-Recognized Principles and Norms of International Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Butler William E
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal System ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
Recent Addition ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Russian Law

This chapter studies the generally-recognized principles and norms of international law as an integral part of the Russian legal system. Most international lawyers would "rank" them higher than mere treaties because they are more fundamental, more universal, perhaps more venerable at least in origin. Indeed, in Article 15(4) of the 1993 Russian Constitution they are enumerated ahead of international treaties of the Russian Federation. However, they become important in Russian law and State practice precisely because they are provided for in Article 15(4) and thus are a comparatively recent addition to the repertoire of rules which Russian institutions, officials, and courts must apply, as a rule in priority over Russian normative legal acts. Chronologically, therefore, they appear in the Russian legal system long after treaties.

scholarly journals The principle of reciprocity in international cooperation in cases of administrative offences

2021 ◽  
pp. 48-58
Author(s):  
Anastasia Vladimirovna Nesterova
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Cooperation ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Legal Aid ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Legal Subjects ◽  
Peremptory Norms

The subject of this research is the principle of reciprocity. This principle is perhaps one of the first principles of international law that remains unchanged up until today. The scientific literature studies the essence of the principle of reciprocity in correlation with one or another institution (legal aid in criminal cases, legal aid in cases of administrative offenses, recognition of foreign bankruptcy, enforcement of the decisions of foreign courts, etc.), as an element of private or public international law. The principle of reciprocity also characterizes the process of interaction between the legal subjects. In the Russian legislation, the principle of reciprocity is implemented for regulation of international cooperation in civil, criminal, and administrative cases. The author’s special contribution consists in determination of certain essential characteristics of the principle of reciprocity and its role within the system of principles of administrative law of the Russian Federation; as well as in examination of the practice of its application. The principle of reciprocity is identified with certain imperative rules or universal behavioral norms. In the international law, the principle of reciprocity correlates with such concepts as “jus cogens” or “peremptory norms”, as well as “comitas gentium”. Among the principles of administrative law of the Russian Federation , it can be attributed to the procedural principles in cases of administrative offenses. The analysis of case law demonstrates that application of the principle of reciprocity expands the opportunities for international cooperation in different spheres, namely in the absence of normative regulation or restrictions thereof.

The applicability decision of the ECHR in legal proceedings

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 211-218
Author(s):  
Полина Виноградова ◽  
Polina Vinogradova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
European Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Russian Federation

In modern conditions, changing approaches to the implementation of international law there is both the need and opportunity. The article considers some issues of the relation of national and international law. The legal position about resolution of conflicts of constitutional and conventional interpretations are based on the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the so-called request for the applicability of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. Since 2014 there is a new version of Article 101 of the Federal Constitutional Law on the Constitutional Court, which establishes opportunity to apply to the Constitutional Court against the decision of the ECHR. This provision contains an important mechanism for harmonization the constitutional and conventional interpretation.

3 Contemporary Treaty-Making in the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Butler William E
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Standard Procedures ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Federal Laws ◽  
The Government ◽  
General Guidance

This chapter discusses Russia's standard procedures for entering into an international treaty. The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and Russian international legal doctrine offer general guidance. In addition, certain requirements are imposed by the 1993 Russian Constitution, 1995 Law on treaties, edicts of the President and decrees or regulations of the Government, other federal laws, and subordinate legal acts of the Russian Federation. Aside from these, the chapter describes how, within a vast government, uniformity of approach and understanding is achieved with respect to treaty-making and how institutional memories are preserved with respect to past practices. As such, the chapter examines subjects ranging from the power to conclude treaties, to draft decisions and treaty proposals, to submissions to government, treaty signatures, and even the termination of a treaty's application.

Some Issues of the Implementation of “Regulatory Guillotine” Events

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 34-42
Author(s):  
Valentin V. Letunovskiy ◽  
◽  
Aleksey A. Ageev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

In the article, the authors bring forward proposals for solution of a number of conceptual issues of the modern administrative law based on an analysis of international law provisions, the applicable laws of the Russian Federation, legal acts that have been in effect earlier and files of the law enforcement practice in their comparison with the legal doctrine. In particular, the authors describe the correlation between control and supervision and possible ways of the establishment of the main legal support areas, the so-called “regulatory guillotine”.

scholarly journals International “mechanisms” in modern criminal justice

2020 ◽  
pp. 20-28
Author(s):  
Alexandr Borisovich Meziaev
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Law ◽  
Sierra Leone ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Justice ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Grounds

This article reviews the new international criminal justice agencies jointly falling under the term “international mechanisms”: International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, Residual Mechanism of Special Court for Sierra Leone, International Investigative Mechanism for Syria, and International Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar. Analysis is conducted on the legal nature of these institutions, primarily from the legal grounds of their establishment, competence, and some aspects of activity. Particular attention is paid to the legal position of the Russian Federation with regards to the indicated agencies. The research is carried out on the basis of analysis of constitutional documents of international mechanisms, resolutions of international organizations within the framework of which are created the corresponding institutions of international justice. The following conclusions were made: all “mechanisms” that are currently in force within international justice experience the deficit of legitimacy: methods and circumstances of their formation to one or another degree do not align with the existing norms of international law; there is a tendency to go beyond its scope of competence; the concept of the indicated mechanisms consists in the activity, which in essence represents a judicial and/or investigative activity implemented in both, “preceding” and “residual” forms. All of the aforementioned peculiarities do not deprive the indicated agencies of their judicial and investigative nature.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document