Introduction. The problems of realizing the right to life are relevant to varying degrees in all countries of the world. Their importance can hardly be overestimated, since the preservation of a full-fledged family, society and the state as a whole depends on their solution. The article examines the problems associated with abortion, surrogacy, the development of biotechnology, death penalty, and analyzes the legislative experience of various states and Russia in these areas. The purpose of the study is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the problems arising in connection with the realization of the right to life and its possible restrictions. In the course of studying the problems, both general scientific and special legal methods were used: historical and dialectical methods, methods of analysis and synthesis, as well as the comparative legal method. Theoretical analysis. Russia (RSFSR) was the first country in the world to legislate in 1920 to allow abortion. According to the author, artificial termination of pregnancy solely at the request of a woman (without taking into account medical and social factors) causes irreparable harm to society, especially given the difficult demographic situation in modern Russia. In addition, this does not correspond to the guiding thesis of responsibility to future generations, enshrined in the preamble to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. In the context of realizing the right to life, each state faces a problem related to death penalty. Can a state, where the right to life is guaranteed, take the life of criminals? Apparently, each state should decide this issue based on the extent to which a particular crime poses a threat to society, a threat to life and health of people. Results. In our opinion, in countries with liberal legislation in relation to abortion, such as Russia, it is necessary to prohibit abortion at the request of a woman, since in this case the woman’s desire violates the right to life of an unborn child. The state should protect the right to life from the moment of conception, not birth, but this is a long process that should lead to an extensive interpretation of Part 2 of Art. 17 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. In addition, Russia needs to pay attention to the legislative experience of Germany and France in relation to surrogacy. In these countries, the legislator has clearly substantiated why surrogacy is in fact a crime against the family. In these countries, surrogacy is criminalized. Also, with the development of biotechnology all over the world, the problems of IVF and cryopreservation of human embryos are acute. This problem can also be solved at the level of legislation by allowing IVF only to married couples (man and woman) who cannot give birth to a child, and by limiting the number of fertilized eggs to a minimum, so that later the issue of destroying unclaimed embryos is not resolved. In general, it seems that in a mature society that wants to develop and tries to prevent the destruction of its state, it is necessary to protect the right to life by all possible legislative methods.
State Sovereignty of the Russian Federation in View of Amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation Adopted in 2020
