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.

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.

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.

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 Legal substantiation of retaliatory measures of the Russian Federation to economic sanctions of the United States, European Union, and their allies

2020 ◽  
pp. 24-37
Author(s):  
Larisa Yur'evna Dobrynina ◽  
Anna Viktorovna Gubareva
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
Economic Sanctions ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

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.

Territories with special status within Federal States (constitutional and legal research)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Игорь Ирхин ◽  
Igor Irkhin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Federal States ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Russian Federation

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.

ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIP OF THE "STRATEGIC TRIANGLE" COUNTRIES RUSSIAN FEDERATION – PRC – USA (PART 4): PROSPECTS FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND CHINA, RUSSIA AND THE USA

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 102-117
Author(s):  
D. V. GORDIENKO ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
Global Integration ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
National Economies

The paper analyzes the prospects of economic cooperation between the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China, the Russian Federation and the United States in the context of economic relations of this strategic triangle. An approach is proposed to analyze the prospects for cooperation between Russia and China in the framework of global integration projects, as well as trade and investment cooperation between Russia and the United States. These relationships determine the interdependence of the national economies of these countries. An attempt is made to forecast the development of economic relations between the countries of the strategic triangle. The results of the work can be used to justify recommendations to the leadership of our country.

scholarly journals Food Security: Results of Russian Embargo on Poultry Meat Import

2018 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 01084
Author(s):  
Vladimir G. Svinukhov ◽  
Marina V. Konysheva ◽  
Irina G. Makarova
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Food Security ◽  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Market Share ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Poultry Meat ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper presents a geographically based assessment of the volume and value of imported poultry meat into the Russian Federation under the embargo restrictions. The assessment is based on the foreign trade statistics issued by the Customs Service of the Russian Federation. In volume terms, the import of poultry meat to the Russian Federation in 2015 decreased by 14 % as compared to the volume of 2014; in value terms it decreased by 6%. The geography of the import also changed. Before the embargo, the main suppliers of poultry meat to the Russian Federation were the USA (51%), Belarus (16%) and Brazil (10%). After the embargo was introduced, the United States (30%) still remained the main supplier along with Brazil (21%). A significant market share of poultry meat supplies to the Russian Federation was captured by Belarus (26%).

scholarly journals Peculiarities of the Contemporary State Youth Policies in Russia and the United States: Comparative Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-199
Author(s):  
Alexey S. Butorov ◽  
Roman A. Adlov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Youth Policy ◽  
Contemporary State ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Local Levels

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.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of mortality from acute forms of ischemic heart disease during a 15-year period in the Russian Federation and the United States and the factors influencing its formation

2017 ◽  
Vol 89 (9) ◽  
pp. 53-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
S A Boytsov ◽  
I V Samorodskaya ◽  
N N Nikulina ◽  
S S Yakushin ◽  
E M Andreev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
World Health ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Russian Federation

Aim. To comparatively analyze the registered mortality rates from coronary heart disease (CHD) as a whole, as well as myocardial infarction (MI) and other acute forms of CHD during a 15-year period in the Russian Federation (RF, 2000—2014) and the United States of America (USA, 1999-2013). Materials and methods. Primary data were obtained from the database of the RF State Statistics Service, the World Health Organization Mortality Database, Human Mortality Database, then converted into standardized mortality rates and are presented in three age groups (30+, 30-49, and 50+ years old) in men and women separately. Results. The analysis revealed a substantial excess of the registered mortality rates from CHD in the RF versus in the USA, as well as a lower incidence of MI and a higher incidence of other acute CHD forms registered as the cause of death. It also showed considerable differences in the structure of registered types of MI as the cause of mortality. Conclusion. The differences found in the mortality rates from CHD, MI, and other acute forms of CHD in the RF and the USA can be explained by objective (the higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors, the higher and earlier incidence of CHD in the RF, as well as differences in the organization of medical care and, as a result, actually higher mortality rates from CHD in Russia) and subjective (differences in approaches to statistically developing a population-based mortality rate, as well as defects in filling out the medical documents and coding the causes of death) factors.

EUROPEAN POLICY COMPONENT OF THE USA, CHINA AND RUSSIAN FEDERATION (part 1)

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (12) ◽  
pp. 90-103
Author(s):  
D. V. GORDIENKO ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Military ◽  
The Impact

The paper considers the impact of the European component of the policy of the United States of America, the people's Republic of China and the Russian Federation on the national security of these countries. An approach to comparing this influence is proposed, which allows us to identify the priorities of Russia's policy in Europe and other regions of the world. The proposed comparison can be used to justify recommendations to the military and political leadership of our country. It is concluded that the European component of the policy of the United States, China, and Russia occupies a dominant position in the implementation of current economic and military policies in the European region.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document