theoretical and legal analysis of the position of the prosecutor’s office in the system of separation of powers

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladislav Topilin ◽  
Roman Fedorov
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
State Structure ◽  
Independent State ◽  
State Apparatus

The article is devoted to the problems of the legal status of the prosecutor’s office in the system of separation of powers. In the study, the author uses grammatical (philological, linguistic) logical, systematic and other methods of scientific knowledge. The author proposes to separate the prosecutor’s office into a separate (supervisory) branch of government, which will not belong to either the executive branch or the judicial branch, as a result of which the state will receive an independent state structure that will be able to exercise its supervisory functions independently of anyone, which will allow for better and faster suppression of possible violations by any branch of government, as well as improve the work of the state apparatus as a whole.

scholarly journals The Parliament of the Russian Federation: Evolution of the Establishment and Functioning

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 65-68
Author(s):  
Saida A. Saybulaeva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Development ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The State ◽  
State Structure ◽  
Legislative Body ◽  
Russian State ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Changes

The article deals with the establishment, formation and activity of the Supreme representative (legislative) body of the Russian Federation. It is shown that the bicameral Parliament of the Russian state was formed under the influence of international, national political, legal and social development. It is noted that the essence of the bicameral Parliament is a legal reflection of the specifics of the development and state structure of Russia. The influence of reception and succession on the formation of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation is considered. The article analyzes the consequences of modern constitutional changes in the sphere of political and legal status of the Russian Parliament and their subsequent impact on the state mechanism of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Legal regulation of price formation in Mengjiang in the context of economic function of the Mongolian Statehood: a historical-legal overview

2021 ◽  
pp. 37-46
Author(s):  
Pavel Nikolaevich Dudin
Keyword(s):  
Economic Policy ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The State ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Price Formation ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Economic Management ◽  
Independent State ◽  
Broad Array ◽  
Economic Function

The object of this article is legal regulation of the economic policy of Japan in the occupied territories of Northeast China. The subject of this research is the legal mechanism for regulating price formation in Inner Mongolia during the existence of Mengjiang State. Based on the fact that the Japanese side sought to ensure that the new political unit, i.e. the State of Mengjiang would formally comply with the attributes of an independent state, the author infers the substantive part from the economic function of the state. The goal of the article consists in carrying out a historical-legal analysis of the legal regulation of price formation in Mengjiang. The author sets the task to give characteristics to the normative legal acts of Mengjiang that pertain to price formation; reveal their meaning, content, as well as the legal and social consequences of their application. The author concludes on the effectiveness of legal instruments of economic policy implemented for controlling price formation, with reservation that the military and economic efficiency should not be confused with social and humanitarian efficiency, as it was practiced by the Mengjiang government. The author’s special contribution consists in reconstruction of the legal instruments for economic management of a large region in East Asia, as well as in updating the existing information with new facts. The scientific novelty lies in introduction into the scientific discourse of new data that was previously unknown to a broad array of researchers.

scholarly journals External functions of the President of Ukraine in the context of ensuring the security of the state

1970 ◽  
pp. 402-405
Author(s):  
Taisiia Barilovska
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Complex Structure ◽  
The State ◽  
International Level ◽  
Interstate Relations ◽  
Head Of State ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Stability

The purpose of the article is to clarify the external functions of the President of Ukraine in the context of ensuring the security of the state. The mechanism of performing the external functions of Ukraine is characterized by the complex structure of interrelated and interacting relations. Of particular importance in this mechanism is the President of Ukraine, who, in accordance with the powers enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine and Ukrainian legislation, heads this mechanism and coordinates the operation of its parts. The foreign policy activities of the President of Ukraine are based on the general principles of separation of powers, of the rule of law, of constitutional responsibility, and on the specific principles of the unity and of the support of foreign policy. In order to improve the operation of the mechanism of implementing foreign policy, headed by the President of Ukraine, the measures aimed at intensifying foreign policy activities and enhancing the independence of the Government of Ukraine and developing the scientific component of this mechanism are required. The process of performing external functions of the state implies the existence of an appropriate mechanism. The mechanism of performing Ukraine’s external functions includes elements that are heterogeneous in their task, legal status, organization and other characteristics, which in their turn are interrelated and interacting. The President of Ukraine has a special place in this mechanism. In accordance with the Constitution of Ukraine, he directs the foreign policy of the country and as a head of state represents Ukraine in international relations. The logic of the current stage of the development of interstate relations strongly confirms that in order to effectively strengthen the common peace and international security, a unified strategy of interacting and regulating the external functions and powers of the presidents at the international level in ensuring this security must be developed. Perhaps, one of the most important functions of the President of Ukraine at the international level is the external function of ensuring the security of the state. Until the state has the security of its own territory and borders, other functions do not matter, because security is the guarantee of the stability, and therefore, the possibility of ensuring other functions.

Separation of Powers and Alternative Dispute Resolution before the European Court of Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-271
Author(s):  
Cedric Jenart ◽  
Mathieu Leloup
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Level ◽  
European Court

Alternative dispute resolution procedures before the European Court of Human Rights – The state agent, a member of the executive branch, tasked with representing the respondent state – Judicial and legislative branches of the respondent state limited or bound by concessions by the state agent – Convention framework effectively increases the power of the executive branch to the detriment of the other branches of government in the respondent state – Tension with national separation of powers – Possible solutions on a national and international level

Act of State Doctrine

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfonso Iglesias
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The State ◽  
The Political ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Foreign State ◽  
Political Question

According to the act of state doctrine, national courts must refrain from prosecuting the validity of official acts carried out by a foreign state within its own territory, except if it commits violations of international norms with broad consensus of international society, such as, for example, a case of genocide. Both its judicial self-restraint character and its reflection in the judicial deference to the executive branch would justify the ex officio application of the act of state doctrine by the courts. This doctrine is neither a rule nor a legal obligation required by international law, although it arises from the relevance of the international rule of territorial sovereignty of the state. It was not introduced by a constitutional or legislative provision, but is a common law principle developed mainly by Anglo-Saxon jurisdictions on the basis of considerations of international comity, respect for the principles of sovereign equality and non-intervention in the internal affairs of other states, separation of powers, and the choice of law freedom. To some extent, the legal basis of the doctrine of immunity for acts of state was analogous to the basis of immunity granted to the foreign sovereign state and its agents. The underlying rationale of this doctrine consists in preventing domestic courts from issuing adverse judgments against foreign governments that could embarrass international relations and interfere with the conduct of foreign affairs by the executive branch power. The doctrine of the act of state (and that of the political question) has important differences with the immunity of the foreign state: (1) This immunity is per se a general rule of public international law of a customary nature accepted and applied universally—in addition to being regulated in various international conventions, one of them of universal vocation—unlike the doctrines cited, which are not regulated by national legislations or by international codification efforts. (2) The moment of operation is also different, since the immunity of the foreign state functions ex ante as a procedural exception to the exercise of jurisdiction by the court of the territorial state (or court of the forum), which for that reason is obliged to recognize its lack of competence to try the case before it, while the doctrines of the state act and the political question act later—only if the defendant does not enjoy immunity—when the court is already exercising its competence and knowing the merits of the case. (3) The application of the immunity of the foreign state requires that the foreign state be sued before the courts of the forum, whereas the act of state doctrine does not require that the foreign state itself be a party to the proceedings, but it is sufficient to question the validity of an internal act of the foreign state during the judicial proceedings.

scholarly journals STATE SERVICE OF RUSSIA AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES: COMPARATIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4(73)) ◽  
Author(s):  
S.N. Keramova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Public Service ◽  
The State ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
State Structure ◽  
State Service ◽  
The Public ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Russian Federation

Article considers the experience of the state structure of the state service of the Russian Federation and foreign countries. The purpose of this article is a comparative legal study of the problems of the Institute of state service in Russia and abroad in several foreign countries: USA, UK, France, Germany. The analysis oflegal regulation of the state service of foreign countries and the Federal state service of the Russian Federation is conditioned by the possibility of improving the legislation of the Russian Federation. The result of the study is the formulation of conclusions and proposals for improving the administrative legislation regulating the structure of the public service of the Russian Federation, using the experience of foreign countries

The Law and Foreign Prisoners in Texas: A Socio-Legal Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-30
Author(s):  
Jurg Gerber ◽  
Kate Angulski
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Dietary Restrictions ◽  
Indefinite Detention ◽  
The Law

We examine in this article the legal status of foreign prisoners in the United States in general, and in the State of Texas in particular. With few exceptions, the law does not distinguish between domestic and foreign prisoners, granting similar rights and obligations to each. We conclude this article by examining current controversies in the treatment of foreign prisoners in the United States. Issues examined include dietary restrictions, use of languages other than English, length of hair, and mandatory and indefinite detention of aliens.

GUARANTEES AS AN ELEMENT OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF A JUDGE

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vitaliy Hudyma ◽  
◽  
Myroslav Kovaliv ◽  
Andriy Pryveda ◽  
Khrystyna Kaydrovych ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Independent Judiciary ◽  
The Status ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

The article is devoted to the study of guarantees as an element of the legal status of a judge. The article considers the effectiveness of justice by the judiciary as an independent branch of state power, which is entrusted with the function of protecting the rights and legitimate interests of persons in the state. It is argued that the right to judicial protection can be properly realized only if there is an effective mechanism of judicial protection, which becomes real if there are guarantees for the activity of a judge. The independence and independence of the judiciary is due to the constitutional principle of separation of powers, proclaimed in the Constitution of Ukraine. However, it is in democracies that this principle acquires special significance, because we are talking about legally enshrined guarantees and effective mechanisms of «containment and balances» in the organization and activities of various branches of government. Each of the branches of government – legislative, executive and judicial, independently performs only its inherent functions, not obeying each other. Decisions are made by the judiciary due to their independence, because no additional approval by the bodies of other branches of government is required. The most important prerequisite for this is the protection of the judiciary from unlawful influence or interference from other actors. Only an independent judiciary can become the guarantor of the rule of law, the implementation of effective and accessible justice and a fair judicial decision of cases in the state. The guarantees of the judge's activity in the administration of justice are divided into three groups: guarantees of the procedural activity of the judge as the bearer of judicial power, the subject of the process; organizational and legal guarantees for the activity of a judge as a person holding a public office and is a member of the judicial community; social and legal guarantees of a judge as a citizen with a special legal status, limited in civil rights by legislation on the status of judges and occupying a separate position in society.

Evolution of Representative Bodies in Russia

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 47-54
Author(s):  
A. M. Osavelyuk
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
State Power ◽  
The State ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper based on the analysis of the provisions of the Constitution of the RSFSR of 1918, the Constitution of the USSR of 1936, the Constitution of the USSR of 1977 shows the basic principles of organization and activity of the Soviets as representative authorities of the Soviet State. The author has analyzed research papers, primarily research papers and studies by Prof. Ekaterina I. Kozlova explaining the main stages and features of evolution of the essence and activity of the Soviets at all levels of the State. Also, the author has examined the shortcomings of the legal status and functioning of domestic representative bodies of state power — the Soviets — during the Soviet period.The study has demonstrated that with the adoption of the Constitution of Russia in 1993 , the Russian Federation witnessed the development of a fundamentally new, democratic stage of development of representative bodies of state power, as well as local self — government, based on the principles of democracy, separation of powers, federalism, autonomy of local self — government and its representative bodies.Having analyzed Prof. Kozlova research papers, the author has come to the conclusion that even on the example of her research of one of the most important institutions of the state — representative bodies of state power and local self-government in the Russian Federation — Prof. Kozlova made an outstanding contribution to the development of the science of constitutional law of Russia.

State Sovereignty and Federal Sentencing

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-61
Author(s):  
Stephen R. Sady
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The State ◽  
State Court ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Federal Law Enforcement ◽  
Federal Sentencing ◽  
Enforcement Authority ◽  
Bureau Of Prisons

This article addresses one of the most difficult areas of federal sentencing law: concurrent and consecutive sentences in dual state and federal prosecutions. Prior to the Sentencing Reform Act, the Supreme Court in Ponziset out the norm of full comity and mutual respect for the respective judgments of state and federal courts. In implementing the SRA, the Bureau of Prisons has interpreted statutes to, in effect, assert federal supremacy over state judgments, claiming the authority to execute a sentence as consecutive even where the federal judgment is silent on the issue and the state judgment calls for concurrency. This practice violates the separation of powers and the required comity for state and federal law enforcement authority. When viewed together, the Supreme Court’s recent decisions in Setserand Bond establish that the Bureau of Prisons must defer to a state court judge’s concurrency decision when the federal judgment is silent on the question. First, Setseremphasized that the concurrent/consecutive decision is a core judicial function, highlighting the separation of powers problems inherent in the Executive Branch both prosecuting a defendant and determining the amount of time the prisoner will serve. Second, in limiting the scope of federal law enforcement pursuant to a treaty, Bondheld that, absent a clear statement from Congress, federal law does not override "the usual constitutional balance of federal and state powers." In the sentencing context, because Congress has not authorized intrusion into state sentencing power, the BOP has no authority to trump a state judgment of concurrency because only the state has the power to say how much, or how little, punishment the defendant should receive for a violation of a state statute. To avoid serious constitutional questions, the courts should construe any of three federal sentencing statutes -- 18 U.S.C. §§ 3584, 3585(b), and 3621(e) -- in a manner that restores the constitutional balance and protects prisoners from over-incarceration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document