scholarly journals Constitutional justice in the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 396-400
Author(s):  
Elena Yevgenievna Grishnova ◽  
Tatiana Viktorovn Larina ◽  
Andrey A. Soloviev ◽  
Yuri Viktorovich Stepanenko ◽  
Yuriy Nikolaevich Tuganov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Research Problem ◽  
Inductive Method ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Main Research ◽  
Systemic Analysis ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Constitutional Justice ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article aims at studying the legal nature and essence of constitutional proceedings with due regard to historical experience and modern legislative approaches to the structure and system of constitutional justice in Russia. The main research method was the deductive method which allowed the authors to study the legal nature of the Constitutional Court and its role in the separation of powers in Russia. The article also used the inductive method, the method of systemic analysis, and comparative-legal and historical methods. To solve the research problem, it is necessary to consider the legal foundations and features of constitutional justice based on the amendments made to the Constitution of the Russian Federation on July 1, 2020. The article proves that the legal nature and the main goal of constitutional control remain unresolved issues. According to the authors, the most important condition for the creation of a strong judicial power is its high independence. Judicial errors can also cause distrust in the judiciary.

scholarly journals Preliminary Constitutional Review and its Implementation in Russia: Problems of Theories and Applications

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
pp. 36-43
Author(s):  
O. V. Brezhnev
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Amendments ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Constitutional Justice ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper is devoted to the problems concerning the legal nature, normative regulation and the procedure for the implementation of the institute of preliminary constitutional review in the Russian Federation. Although the exercise of this type of constitutional control ensurs the prevention of the detected violations, it also carries certain risks associated with the limited time frame of its implementation, impossibility of taking into account interpretation of the contested norm in law enforcement, etc. The author demonstartes permissible forms of the use of preliminary control in the activity of the bodies of constitutional justice in Russia (when checking the constitutionality of international agreements and treaties of the Russian Federation, evaluating constitutional amendments, etc.). The author also investigates the practice of implementing the relevant powers. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation that stipulate the limits of the implementation of preliminary judicial constitutional review. The paper examines the issue of the powers of constitutional (charter) courts of constituent entities of the Russian Federation in the area under consideration.

CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION AS A LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY TYPE: ON THE ISSUE STATEMENT

2018 ◽  
pp. 133-140
Author(s):  
N.E. Sadokhina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Special Kind ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Changes ◽  
The Stability

The relevance of the research topic is due to the uncertainty of the provision of constitutional responsibility in the system of legal responsibility types. The study purpose is to the legal nature analysis of constitutional and legal responsibility, allowing it to be viewed as a form of legal responsibility. The conducted research is based on general scientific analysis methods, deduction, and also private law – the formal legal method. So, on the basis of the analysis of the current legislation and law-enforcement practice, we conclude that the political and legal nature of constitutional responsibility is special. On the one hand, it is a form of legal responsibility and is applied to subjects of constitutional responsibility in cases provided for by constitutional norms. On the other hand, it helps to regulate relations that arise in the sphere of public administration, ensure the stability of the functioning of the state apparatus. It is established that this feature explains also the fact that constitutional responsibility can occur not only in case of an offense, but also in case of lawful behavior. It is determined that for consideration of the constitutional responsibility as a special kind of legal responsibility it is necessary to introduce a special procedural order of calling to account, including in particular the procedure for appealing the dissolution of the State Duma, giving the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation the powers to consider such cases. And it is also necessary to fix a list of circumstances that may form the basis for a decision on mistrust in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The conclusion is made that these legislative changes will underline the specificity of constitutional and legal responsibility and leave no doubt about its status as a kind of legal responsibility.

scholarly journals PROCEDURE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND IN THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS

2016 ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Екатерина Ганичева ◽  
Ekaterina Ganicheva
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Practical Interest ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Constitutional Justice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic

The article is devoted to the problems of development of legislation which determines the procedure of the constitutional proceedings, the procedural status and terms of participants’ activity in the Russian Federation and in the Republic of Belarus. Constitutional justice is a relatively new Institute in a legal system of Russia and other former Soviet republics. Conditions for its formation in the former Soviet Union have common as well as specific features. The comparison of the place and role of the constitutional court in system of public authorities and the procedural legal regulation of the constitutional justice is of obvious scientific and practical interest now because a clear, systematic regulation is very important for creating the conditions to allow objectively and comprehensively examine and resolve the constitutional conflict. Highlighting the characteristic features of the Federal constitutional law «On the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation» and the Law of the Republic of Belarus «On constitutional proceedings», the author comes to the conclusion about the necessity of development and specifying of the activity of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation by improving the using of traditional procedural-legal institutions taking into account the unique status of the highest judicial body of the constitutional control.

scholarly journals Topical Problems of Criminal Prosecution for Illegal Banking Transactions

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 962-970
Author(s):  
Diana Alekseeva ◽  
Irina Mikheeva ◽  
Tatyana Suspitsyna
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Bank Employees ◽  
Uniform Assessment ◽  
Unambiguous Interpretation

In recent years there has been an increase in the number of crimes under Art. 172 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation («Illegal banking»), whose subjects, among other things, act as intermediaries for their clients and are not one of the sides in a contract with the bank. Such practice is not indisputable, because innocent people could be prosecuted if there is a mistake in the qualification of actions. The authors of the article assess the actions of physical persons providing the services of intermediaries for the bank clients who open accounts, make payments, conduct encashment and different cash operations. Specifically, the authors note that different actions of the bank and the client connected with banking transactions are designated in law in the same way, which leads to controversial situations, including the qualification of such actions as crimes. The authors determine the legal nature of banking as an aggregate of systemic banking operations and conclude that the actions of physical persons — intermediaries who are not bank employees or managers or other persons authorized by the clients of the bank — do not correspond to the characteristics of a crime under Art. 172 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They stress that the current edition of Art. 172 of the CC of the RF does not allow for an unambiguous interpretation of the subject of the analyzed corpus delicti; the authors also present data from court practice that testify that it does not have a uniform assessment. The position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on this issue raises questions. The authors support the legal approach according to which Art. 172 of the CC of the RF refers to a special subject (head or other employee of a credit organization). They also point out that the disposition of the norm, in the part that includes subjective characteristics, makes it possible to prosecute a person for both intentional and negligent actions, which is not very well-grounded; the authors support the position that a person can only be prosecuted for illegal entrepreneurship if the intention is determined.

scholarly journals The category of certainty of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation’s judgments as a legal standard for the implementation of its decisions by the courts

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 ◽  
pp. 02010
Author(s):  
Dmitry Gvozdetsky
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Direct Action ◽  
Practical Importance ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Main Task ◽  
Legal Standard ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Constitutional Justice ◽  
The Russian Federation

This article analyzes the problems of the category of certainty of the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the judicial enforcement practice of courts of general and arbitration jurisdiction. The key role played by the Constitutional Court in ensuring the direct action of the “living” Constitution of the Russian Federation in the work of the courts is substantiated. The certainty and uncertainty of the implementation of the judgments of the Constitutional Court as the paired legal categories in judicial law enforcement practice are analyzed. Their content side is disclosed. It is noted that the failure to comply with the requirements of the category of certainty of the decisions of the Constitutional Court leads to ambiguity, incorrectness, and also complicates the process of their implementation by judicial instances. Taking into account the foregoing, the regulation of relations is not based on the uniform practice of law enforcement that entails a violation of rights and legitimate interests of specific applicants and an indefinite number of persons. It is also explained in the paper that in the judicial law enforcement practice, the main task of constitutional law is the certainty of the text of decisions of the Constitutional Court. Theoretical problems in the sphere of the domestic constitutional justice, which are of theoretical and practical importance for ensuring the unity and consistency of judicial enforcement practice, have been developed. Conclusions referring to the problem under study are drawn and suggestions are made.

Problems of Creation and Functioning of Constitutional (Charter) Courts of the Subjects of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
pp. 51-57
Keyword(s):  
Local Government ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
Justices Of The Peace ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Constitutional Justice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Judicial Protection

Constitutional (statutory) courts are among the most effective bodies to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens. As a result of constitutional (statutory) legal proceedings, not only the person who filed the complaint receives judicial protection, but also other citizens whose rights were violated or could be violated, since recognizing a normative legal act as inadequate to the constitution, such a court cancels it. In his work, the author attempts to objectively assess the level and state of constitutional justice in the regions of the Russian Federation. In view of the fact that, with the exception of justices of the peace, the constitutional (statutory) courts are the only courts of the subjects of the Russian Federation, their absence in most entities violates the principle of separation of powers that is necessary in any democratic state. In addition, constitutional (statutory) courts play an important part in protecting the rights and freedoms of citizens, including allowing them to challenge the constitutionality of a particular law of the subject, as well as, for example, the regulatory legal act of the local government. The author concludes that there is a necessity to organize such courts, analyzes the problems in the already established courts of this category, and also formulates proposals for improving constitutional justice in the subjects of the Russian Federation.

Issues of Superion Courts of the Russian Federation when Implementing the Legislative Initiative

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 32-41
Author(s):  
N. G. Stenichkin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Initiative ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

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.

The Legal Nature of Purposes and Principles of Federal Parliamentary Control

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (7) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Наталья Петухова ◽  
Natalya Petukhova
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Bound State ◽  
Control Activity ◽  
Evolution Path ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Regulatory Impact ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Modern Era

The aim of this Article is to analyze purposes and principles of federal parliamentary control, its comprehensive interrelation and regulatory impact on public relations. In this Article the author considers problems associated with the achievement of purposes and implementation of principles for the control activity in the modern era of development of popular representation in Russia. Essentially, solution to such problems lies in eliminating the formalist approach to the principle of separation of powers and limits of parliamentary control. The author comes to the conclusion that determination of purposes and principles, preparation of the list of parliamentary control forms is just the beginning of a long evolution path. Conceptual improvement of the content of forms of parliamentary control will become possible only under the comprehensive revision of the order of formation and organization of the activity of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. Development of parliamentary control in the Russian Federation requires a set of legislative solutions, based on constitutionally relevant purposes and principles, which will ensure real democracy of the popular representation in the Russian Federation, necessary for the formation of a law-bound state.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document