scholarly journals TASKS AND PRINCIPLES OF ENSURING THE INTERACTION OF COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE BODIES WITH OTHER ENTITIES OF THE SECURITY SECTOR FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL PROTECTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (4(106)) ◽  
pp. 82-88
Author(s):  
Т. І. Жук

The purpose of the article is to formulate the tasks and principles of ensuring the interaction of counterintelligence bodies with other actors in the security sector in order to protect national interests. The article is devoted to the disclosure of tasks and principles of interaction of counterintelligence bodies with other subjects of the security sector for the purpose of protection of national interests. It is determined that in the studied context the tasks answer the question why it is necessary to organize the implementation of situational or systematic jointly coordinated actions of counterintelligence bodies with other security sector entities and what positive results can be achieved by using this activity to protect national interests. It is noted that the basis for its organization and implementation should be considered the need for a permanent counterintelligence regime, ie timely receipt of operational information that will prevent the implementation of intelligence and subversive activities to the detriment of Ukraine by foreign intelligence services or organizations and groups. It is emphasized that it is not entirely appropriate to generalize the interaction of counterintelligence bodies with other actors in the security sector in order to protect national interests only by the existence of a permanent counterintelligence regime, as it has a number of other tasks – global and specific. These tasks are formed by specially authorized authorities – the strategic management of the security sector and the direct leadership of counterintelligence agencies. In order to do this correctly, efficiently and properly (within the legal norms), these entities must be guided by specific principles. They are classified into two groups – general principles of ensuring the interaction of counterintelligence bodies with other actors in the security sector in order to protect national interests related to the administrative procedure and special principles dictated by the specifics of counterintelligence activities.

2021 ◽  
pp. 67-74
Author(s):  
Nelli Tsybulnyk

Problem setting. The issue of legal regulation of the security sector in Ukraine is one of the most pressing problems of the state. Launched in 2014, the process of decentralization has strengthened the motivation for inter-municipal consolidation in the country and still creates appropriate conditions and mechanisms, including legal, for the formation of capable territorial communities which, uniting all their efforts, will be able to solve specific pressing problems. The purpose of the research is to identify the features of administrative and legal regulation of relations in the security sector in the context of decentralization of state power to identify ways to further improve their legislation, based on the analysis of the provisions of domestic regulations Analysis of resent researches and publications. An important contribution to the study of regulatory and legal support of the security sector of Ukraine, the development of its qualitatively new model, the peculiarities of its implementation and provision were made by such scientists as Bodruk O., Duchyminska L., Ezheev M., Kolb O., Ponomarev S. and others. Article`s main body. During the development of Ukrainian statehood, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine began to adopt regulations aimed at regulating public relations in the field of state defense, in particular the Law of Ukraine № 19911934-XII «On the Armed Forces of Ukraine» and № 1932- XII «On the Defense of Ukraine». Later (March 25, 1992) in order to resolve legal and functional issues in the field of state security, the Law of Ukraine № 2229-XII – «On the Security Service of Ukraine» was adopted. Twelve years have passed since the proclamation of Ukraine's independence until the adoption of a single legal act that regulated the issue of national security. Administrative and legal regulation of the security sector can be defined as regulated by administrative and legal norms of the system of public authorities, which by the laws of Ukraine in order to ensure the national security of Ukraine is entrusted with the function of protecting the national interests of Ukraine from threats. Conclusions. Thus, administrative and legal regulation of the security sector is regulated by administrative and legal norms of the system of public authorities and local governments, which are responsible for the protection of national interests of Ukraine from threats, in order to ensure national security of Ukraine. The analysis of administrative and legal regulation of the security sector of Ukraine gives grounds to believe that this area significantly needs further improvement and some changes. The domestic regulatory framework governing national security and defense needs to eliminate conflicts and significantly clarify the categorical apparatus.


Author(s):  
Raymond J. Batvinis

Counterintelligence is the business of identifying and dealing with foreign intelligence threats to a nation, such as the United States. Its main concern is the intelligence services of foreign states and similar organizations of non-state actors, such as transnational terrorist groups. Counterintelligence functions both as a defensive measure that protects the nation's secrets and assets against foreign intelligence penetration and as an offensive measure to find out what foreign intelligence organizations are planning to defeat better their aim. This article addresses the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) foreign counterintelligence function. It briefly traces its evolution by examining the key events and the issues that effected its growth as the principle civilian counterintelligence service of the U.S. government.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-27
Author(s):  
Ю. О. Загуменна

A comprehensive theoretical and legal study of the transformation of ideas about the nature of national security reform in domestic jurisprudence has been carried out. The author has defined the priorities and directions of the reform in the field of national security and, more importantly, its theoretical and methodological basis. It has been determined that the main object of the reform in the field of national security is the whole complex of public relations, which is subject to special protection by the system of entities of ensuring national security. The system of such social relations is centered around the defining national interests, which usually include the vital interests of a man, society and the state and the implementation of which ensures the state sovereignty, its progressive development, and safe living conditions and welfare of citizens. It has been noted that the main purpose of national security reform is to improve legislation and governance in the national security sector, which can provide qualitative strengthening in accordance with current and future needs of society to protect key national interests from external and internal real and potential threats. It has been concluded that national security is not considered in modern, both domestic and international science, exclusively as an “acquisition” and a sphere of monopoly responsibility of the state; we cannot eliminate the active participation of civil society structures, which should exercise public control over the course of such a reform and, if necessary, should have the tools of close communication with state authorities at the stage of initiating the reform, constructing its goals and objectives, directions and perspectives and at the stages of its implementation. Restriction of the capacity of the state, especially in times of economic crisis, highlights the need to optimize the participation of non-government actors in ensuring national security. Obviously, such activity of the non-governmental sector should be strongly encouraged by legislative instruments, legitimizing measures for national security reform through its close involvement and providing them with additional public support.


2020 ◽  
pp. 92-104
Author(s):  
Rustam Madaliev

The article provides an overview and stages of the development of law and legislation on administrative procedures and administrative justice in the Kyrgyz Republic. The article discusses the adoption, implementation, content and the application of the new Law on Administrative Procedure and the Administrative Procedure Code of the Kyrgyz Republic. At the beginning, the socio-political background and the rationale for the ongoing judicial reforms and the efforts of the state to strengthen the rule of law in the Kyrgyz Republic are described. A significant part of article considers steps for developing a law on administrative procedures of the Kyrgyz Republic and the problems associated with its development. Then, the content and issues of implementation and the problems of the practical application of the new law on administrative procedures of the Kyrgyz Republic are disclosed. A separate part is devoted to the development, content, implementation and practice of the application of the new Administrative Procedure Code of the Kyrgyz Republic. The article also outlines the problems and shortcomings in the practice of applying legal norms on administrative procedures and administrative justice in the Kyrgyz Republic. In general, the article summarizes that a new system of administrative law has been formed in Kyrgyzstan to replace “Soviet” administrative law, but there are still problems in understanding and applying the new administrative legislation: not all the regulatory framework and practice of administrative agencies are brought into line with the new legislation; there are facts of not understanding, ignoring and not applying the new legislation by public authorities; not all curricula of higher legal education are brought in line with a new understanding of administrative law. It is necessary to continue the implementation measures to put into practice the new administrative legislation through organizational measures to educate and train law applicators, as well as the development of judicial practice in administrative cases.


2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Oeter

AbstractThe analytical tension between legal norms, moral values, and national interests seems no uncharted territory in political science, but has found very little interest in legal academia. For lawyers, moral values and national interests are largely “unknowns,” dealt with by other disciplines. Looking a bit deeper, the picture becomes more nuanced, however. As part of a roundtable on “Balancing Legal Norms, Moral Values, and National Interests,” this essay argues that norms, values, and interests are not different universes of legal normativity, morality, and specific interests, but are interrelated concepts. Values clearly influence norms and often underpin them, while seemingly concrete norms (rules) are themselves often fragile constructs trying to balance competing interests. Value systems are quite diverse within societies, and this is even truer for interests; each society is a dynamic system of social interaction where conflicting interests are constantly playing out. In a way, underlying conflicts of values and interests are constantly being renegotiated in the legal system, with the norms enshrined in the text of statutes and treaties serving to constitute transitory reference points.


Subject Shake-up in Russian security and law enforcement Significance A shake-up of Russia's security and intelligence agencies, in which the Federal Security Service (FSB) would expand at other institutions' expense, has been discussed in insider circles for some weeks, with the Kommersant newspaper reporting the plan on September 19. The overhaul is still unconfirmed, but shifts in the security sector are already evident, most recently with the September 22 appointment of parliamentary speaker Sergey Naryshkin to head the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR). Impacts The consolidation of overlapping functions may extend to other government agencies. Unwieldy, hard-to-supervise institutions will make governing Russia harder. Systemic corruption is likely to worsen due to lack of oversight.


2021 ◽  
pp. 35-41
Author(s):  
O. I. Mykolenko ◽  
О. M. Mykolenko

The article reveals the main contradictions that arise between the scientific worldview and the worldview of the legislator on measures of administrative coercion. Emphasis is placed on the fact that in the development of regulations that contain administrative law, often ignore the achievements of the science of administrative law and process and use the achievements of related sciences, in particular, the theory of state and law, theory of public administration, theory of procedural law, etc. On the one side, this indicates the openness of knowledge of administrative law, because it uses the experience of other sciences, and, on the other – the chaos of scientific knowledge about administrative law phenomena, as well as the further process of unbalancing the existing doctrine of administrative law. On the example of the provisions of the Law of Ukraine “On the National Police” the inconsistency of the norms of the administrative legislation with the provisions of the doctrine of administrative law on measures of administrative coercion is revealed. Also, on the example of the provisions of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, the influence on the process of formation of norms of administrative law on measures of administrative coercion of the provisions of the theory of civil procedural law is revealed. It is proved that the measures of procedural coercion are heterogeneous in terms of target orientation and consequences of application. Some of them are aimed at providing evidence in the case, some – to ensure court proceedings, and some of them – to punish the person who violated the requirements of procedural law. Instead, administrative procedural legislation, regulating measures of procedural coercion, ignores the theory of administrative law and process and borrows the experience of civil procedural and economic procedural regulation. It is emphasized that the unification of procedural legislation, which is taking place today in Ukraine, destroys the system of science of administrative law and process. It is concluded that the rules of administrative law, which enshrine measures of administrative coercion and measures of procedural coercion, indicate a significant gap between the theory of law and rule-making, which threatens the continued existence and development of the theory of administrative law and process.


2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Bradley

AbstractWorldwide, growing numbers of refugees are pushed from their homes. At the same time, fewer and fewer are able to access so-called “durable solutions” to their displacement. This has prompted a flurry of efforts to repair the foundering refugee regime. Many such efforts attempt, implicitly or explicitly, to resolve tensions between legal principles, moral duties, and national interests surrounding refugees. As part of a roundtable on “Balancing Legal Norms, Moral Values, and National Interests,” this essay questions the drive toward oversimplification that has characterized these debates, recognizing that some such tensions are “baked into” the problem of refugeehood. While debates have typically focused on the obligation to admit refugees, and on “responsibility sharing,” I advance the conversation by exploring how law, morality, and national interests are entangled in efforts to support durable solutions for refugees, focusing on voluntary repatriation. What does recognition of the intrinsic and in some senses irreconcilable tensions in the refugee regime mean for efforts to support solutions? I argue that advancing durable solutions, however imperfect, for refugees does not mean definitively overcoming these tensions, but rather navigating them to identify context-specific opportunities to reposition refugees as full and equal citizens as a critical step toward reducing their precarity.


Author(s):  
Joël Glasman

Drawing on archival material and oral sources from historical research on the Togolese police, this chapter argues that the notion of professionalization, until now a hidden passenger of police studies, is not a useful analytical category to make sense of police organisations. Like many of the notions used in police support and Security Sector Reform projects, it is both teleological and Eurocentric, and as such creates analytical problems. The underlying presupposition is that African police are still not professional enough; and professionalization is often equated with adherence to strict bureaucratic standards. Yet this chapters shows that the bureaucratizsation of late colonial Togolese police was also perfectly in line with a rise in police violence and the neglect of legal norms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document