scholarly journals Legal procedure of official interpretation of legal texts

2021 ◽  
pp. 200-204
Author(s):  
K. V. Nykolyna

The scientific article is devoted to the substantiation of the procedural nature of the official interpretation of legal texts. The author emphasizes that it is on the official interpretation that legally significant decisions are based, which establish the specific rights and obligations of the subjects. However, today there are no systematized methodological recommendations, requirements, officially established legal procedure and principles of interpretive activity, which could determine common standards of official interpretation. The procedure of interpretation consists in the sequence of actions of the authorized subjects within separate stages.The article formulates the author’s definition of legal interpretation procedure as a system of successive legally significant actions of authorized entities, which are aimed at clarifying, constructing and explaining to other legal entities the meaning and scope of legal norms formulated in legal texts. Taking into account the latest methodological approaches to interpretation and the requirements of the rule of law,the author reveals the content of legal interpretation, which consists of separate stages, which in turn include a number of successive procedures. In particular, the stage of clarifying the content of the legal text involves the following procedures: initial study of the legal text and the form of its consolidation in the provisions of the legal act, comprehensive analysis of the legal text, analysis of the received interpretation in terms of justice, human rights, rule of law, design normative rule. The explanation, according to the author, includes the following procedures: preparation of a draft interpretative act, namely a legal document that contains an explanation of the content and application of the legal norm, formulated by the authorized body within its competence; adoption of a legal interpretation act, making it universally binding for all those who apply the clarified rules of law; promulgation of an interpretative act, namely, bringing its content to the attention of society or law enforcement agencies; control over the use of the act of interpretation of the law by the subjects of its application; generalization of legal interpretative acts in order to systematize them. Given the importance of official interpretation of legal texts, the feasibility of determining at least the general principles of legal interpretation at the regulatory level is considered. Keywords: interpretation of law, official interpretation, legal procedure, legal interpretation activity.

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 59-61
Author(s):  
Vladilen V. Strelnikov ◽  

The scientific article analyses issues related to the practical implementation of legal norms governing the procedure for disciplinary liability of prosecutors. A theoretical analysis of the interpretations of disciplinary responsibility in the public service formulated by leading legal scholars was carried out. A comparative legal analysis has been carried out of the regulations governing the procedure for the imposition of disciplinary penalties in State bodies, including law enforcement agencies and the legal documents governing these issues in the prosecutor’s office.


2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Inayatul Anisah

Studi hukum tidak akan lepas dari sebuah kondi?kasi teks yang memiliki tujuan tertentu. Agar tujuan yang terkandung dalam makna teks secara hakiki dapat tercapai, diperlukan adanya dekonstruksi hukum. Melalui  dekonstruksi, upaya pembangunan hukum di Indonesia yang selama ini dikenal hanya sebatas hukum yang berlaku secara yuridis formal, perlu dimaknai kembali sehingga mencakup nilai-nilai kemaslahatan yang berlaku secara universal. Meskipun perlu diakui, bahwa nilai-nilai kemaslahatan tetap tidak akan mampu menciptakan kepastian hukum, kecuali melalui upaya supremasi hukum yang berupa teks-teks itu sendiri. Untuk menciptakan kepastian hukum (legal certainty), ajaran itu hampir pasti mutlak diperlukan, namun dalam  realitas empirisnya ajaran hukum modern tersebut tidak begitu saja dapat diterapkan begitu saja menjadi rule of law tanpa melihat sebagai rule of morality.<br /><br />The study of law coincides with the codi?cation of texts, and the deconstruction of law is considered necessary to understand the true meaning of the legal texts. Through the process of deconstruction, the legal development of the country which is merely focused on formal and juridical aspect of law needs to include new nuance of universal public bene?t, despite any doubt on its legal uncertainty. In order to achieve legal certainty, reference to the legal text is a necessity, even though in reality modern legal theory cannot operate as rule of law without implementing rule of  morality.<br /><br />Kata kunci: Teks, Dekonstruksi, Kemaslahatan, Kepastian hukum<br /><br /><br /><br />


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (Extra-B) ◽  
pp. 335-342
Author(s):  
Vladimir Gavrilovich Rotan ◽  
Vladimir Nikolaevich Koval ◽  
Sergey Zenin ◽  
Ivan Mikhaylovich Yapryntsev ◽  
Yuliya Valentinovna Chertkova

The article deals with the problem of the connection of legal norms with the texts of the provisions of legislative acts, in which the legal norms are fixed. The purpose of this article is an attempt to develop such aspects of the doctrine of legal norms that would allow the concept of legal norms to cover almost all the legal content of the recognized theories, law, and practice of legal enforcement sources of law and create a holistic view of the legal norm. There are legal norms that are fixed textually (expressed verbally), and legal norms that are fixed logically. The latter type of norms usually does not fall into the field of view of scholars. The article substantiates the need to study the legal norms that are logically fixed in the provisions of legislative acts and the corresponding development of the doctrine of legal norms.


Author(s):  
Scott Soames

This chapter is concerned with the content of legal norms governing the interpretation of legal texts by legally authoritative actors in a legal system. As such, a theory of legal interpretation is a theory of the content of the law, codified or uncodified, governing legally authorized interpreters. Thought of in this way, it is a nonnormative empirical theory related to, but distinct from, (a) empirical theories about what the mass of judges in a particular legal system actually do in the cases before them; (b) moral theories about what they morally should do in particular cases; and (c) politically normative theories about what the role of the judiciary should be in an ideal system. The most important question to be answered by such a theory is, what precisely is required of legally authoritative interpreters, how much and what kind of latitude are they allowed, and what factors are they to take into account in their interpretations?


Author(s):  
Виталий Васильевич Оглезнев

Проблема лингвистической неопределенности является наиболее обсуждаемой темой современной философии права, суть которой сводится к вопросу: предопределяют ли юридические правила (правовые нормы) результат судебного решения (или иного правоприменения) в каждом конкретном случае. Представители юридического формализма (и отчасти юридического позитивизма) отвечают на этот вопрос положительно, поскольку считают, что задача судьи состоит в разрешении судебных споров посредством применения непротиворечивых принципов к фактам. Судебное решение, таким образом, трактуется как непротиворечивое применение общепринятых принципов к установленным фактам для получения результата, то есть судебное решение уподобляется дедуктивному умозаключению, где истинность вывода гарантируется истинностью посылок (правовых норм и фактических обстоятельств дела). Напротив, представители юридического антиформализма утверждают, что юридические правила и содержащиеся в них понятия (и право в целом) являются «радикально неопределенными» и прежде всего из-за неопределенности самого языка, в котором они выражены. Антиформалисты, отстаивая позицию лингвистической неопределенности, исходят из того, что если у юридических текстов (как и у слов, которые в них содержатся) нет самостоятельного значения, то применение отдельных положений закона не может быть непосредственно выведено из самого его текста. Их аргумент состоит не столько в том, что некоторые слова являются двусмысленными или нечеткими, а потому мы не можем быть уверенными в их правильном применении, но прежде всего в том, что применение всех слов будет неизбежно неопределенным, только если единицей значения выступают сами эти слова. Они утверждают, что уверенность и определенность в применении слов зависят исключительно от согласия лингвистического сообщества в том, как то или иное слово надо применять. Формалисты для подтверждения своей позиции ссылаются на идеи «позднего» Витгенштейна, в то время как антиформалисты – на интерпретацию Крипке. Но есть философы права, которые ставят под сомнение применимость идей Витгенштейна для решения проблемы неопределенности права, хотя и не отрицают, что некоторые из его идей вполне уместны для анализа проблемы интерпретации права и судебного правоприменения. The linguistic indeterminacy of law is the most discussed topic of modern legal philosophy, the key issue of which is whether legal rules determine the result of judicial decision in each case. Legal formalists (and partly legal positivists) respond positively to this question, since they believe that the task of a judge is to resolve judicial disputes by applying consistent principles to facts. The judicial decision, therefore, is interpreted as the consistent application of generally accepted principles to established facts, that is, a judicial decision is reduced to a deductive inference where the truth of the conclusion is guaranteed by the truth of the premises (legal norms and facts). On the contrary, legal anti-formalists argue that legal rules and the concepts they contain (and law in general) are “radically indeterminate” and primarily because of the indeterminacy of language in which they are expressed. Anti-formalists, defending the position of linguistic indeterminacy, proceed from the fact that if legal texts (as well as the words that they contain) do not have an independent meaning, then the application of certain provisions of the law cannot be directly derived from its text. Their argument is not that some words are ambiguous or vague, and, therefore, we cannot be sure of their correct application, but that the application of all words will inevitably be indeterminate only if the unit of meaning is words themselves. They argue that certainty and determinacy in use of words depend solely on the agreement of linguistic community on how a particular word should be used. Formalists refer to the ideas of “late” Wittgenstein to confirm their position, while anti-formalists refer to Kripke’s interpretation. But there are legal philosophers who question the applicability of Wittgenstein’s ideas to solve the problem of legal indeterminacy, although they do not deny that some of his ideas are quite appropriate for analyzing the problem of legal interpretation and judicial enforcement.


2018 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 7-25
Author(s):  
Marta ANDRUSZKIEWICZ

The aim of this article is to present the notion of clarity as considered from the linguistic and theoretical-legal perspectives. Clarity, similarly to communicativeness and adequacy, constitutes a desirable feature of any legal text. The necessity of considering the three features has been formulated in normative regulations regarding the tenets of a legislative technique. Furthermore, the requirement is part of a constitutional principle of proper legislation. Clarity characterizes legal texts; it is required due to the editorial correctness which should be achieved in the process of the writing of a legal text. It arises from the rules for making laws according to the principles of state under the rule of law. The requirement for the consideration of the desirable features of a legal text by a legislator has both formal and ethical dimensions, because the clarity of a legal text not only constitutes a structural property but also guarantees that values such as legal certainty, legal security of citizens as well as trust in both state and law are recognised. The point is, however, that it is not always possible to achieve such clarity. The objective of this analysis is to investigate the causes which confirm that the requirement for the clarity of any legal text is complicated and not easy to meet. It is due to the fact that the requirement is conditioned not only by strictly legal factors but also linguistic, contextual as well as ethical ones.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-26
Author(s):  
Vladimir Valentinovich Kozhevnikov

Introduction. This scientific article is devoted to the consideration of the problem of using the hermeneutic method of cognition of legal phenomena in modern domestic jurisprudence. Purpose. The purpose of the article is to show the potential possibilities of the hermeneutic method in the field of law. To achieve this goal, the following tasks were set: 1) to substantiate the significance of the methodological foundations of jurisprudence; 2) to consider the issue of the concept of hermeneutics in a historical aspect (the views of Aristotle, V. Dilthey, F. Schleiermacher, F. Nietzsche, G.G. Gadamer, M. Weber and others; 3) to analyze the views of Russian scientists substantiating the need for the hermeneutic method in the study of legal phenomena (D.A. Kerimov, M.M. Rassolov, P.M. Rabinovich, V.A. Suslov, I.L. Chestnov); 4) show the weaknesses of the hermeneutic method in jurisprudence, the arguments of the opponents of this approach (V.M. Syrykh, I.Yu. Kozlikhina, V.N. Zhukov and others). Methodology. When writing this article, we used a complex of both special (philological, cybernetic, psychological and others) and private-scientific (formal-legal, interpretation of law and others) methods of studying legal reality. Results. The result of the study in the framework of this article was the following: without denying some fruitfulness of metaphysics, which is the basis of the analyzed method, we note that the hermeneutics method is practically not used in jurisprudence due to the lack of an appropriate methodology and is replaced by the historical way (method) of interpreting legal norms. Conclusion. In conclusion, it is summarized that even those scholars who pinned certain hopes on legal hermeneutics in the research plan have now begun to doubt its potential, believing that this approach to law as an independent has not yet taken place. Paying attention to the fact that the last decade is characterized by the search for a new paradigm, they are increasingly trying to find it outside the law, to attract to the study of law the knowledge developed in the bosom of other sciences, it is emphasized that such attempts should be welcomed, but only if they deepen our knowledge of law, and not of the subject of those sciences to which we turn.


Author(s):  
Svetlana Pirozhok

The relevance of determining the theoretical and methodological determinants of the Robert von Moll’s concept of the social state is due to the need to determine the patterns of evolution of ideas about the state and law, as well as the need to assess the ability to use the potential of the Robert von Moll’s theoretical and legal heritage, his predecessors and contemporaries to identify the optimal model of the social state. Modern Russia attempts to build such state. The proclamation and consolidation of Russia as a social state governed by the rule of law at the constitutional level requires attention both to the experiments carried out in social and legal development, and to the practices of social reform, and also to those ideas that have not yet been embodied. The ideas of European scholars regarding the evolution of the state-legal organization of society in the early modern period, based on which Robert von Mohl (1799–1875) developed original concepts of a social state and a state governed by the rule of law are discussed in the article. An analysis of the state of European political and legal thought and identification of the factors that have a significant impact on the development of Robert von Mohl’s doctrine of a social state governed by the rule of law are the purposes of the scientific article. The methodological basis of the study was the dialectical-materialistic, general scientific (historical, systemic) and special (historical-legal, comparativelegal) methods of legal research. The method of reconstruction and interpretation of legal ideas had great importance. As a result of the study, it was concluded that in the first half of the 19th century in European political and legal thought various approaches was formed to consider the problems of social protection and how to resolve them. The development trend of European political science became the transition from ideas and principles formed in the conditions of police states and enlightened absolutism to the ideas of a state governed by the rule of law (constitutional) that protects the rights and freedoms of a citizen. At the same time, it was a question of the rights and freedoms of only a part of the population: the proletariat growing in number and significance was not always evaluated as an independent social stratum. The axiological principles of state justification have also changed. Rights and utility principle became dominant principles. In the first half of the 19th century the social issue as an independent scientific problem of the European political and legal thought was not posed and not systematically developed. Questions about the social essence of the state, the specifics of the implementation of the state social function, the features of public administration in the new stage of socio-economic development of society predetermined the emergence of the idea of a social state. This idea was comprehensively characterized in the Robert von Mohl’s works. He went down in the history of political and legal thought as founder of the concepts of social and governed by the rule of law state.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 162-170
Author(s):  
IGOR’ YU. SAMOKHVALOV

Introduction: the paper investigates migration situation in the country, reasons and prerequisites for migration-related crime, and identifies features of state prevention of migration offenses. Aim: by analyzing current migration situation, to identify problems in the field of migration-related offenses and how to counteract them at the current stage of society development. Methods: general scientific dialectical method of cognition, comparative legal method, empirical methods of description and interpretation; method of interpretation of legal norms. Results: having analyzed manifestations of migration-related crime we determine its signs, internal content, essence, types, and objectivity of existence; this allows us to put forward ways to counteract the current state of this type of crime. Conclusions: when studying how migration offenses are counteracted, we propose a number of measures that can change the existing crime situation in the migration sphere. Among them: strengthening the registration of migrants when passing the state border; increasing the responsibility of an unscrupulous employer who provides work to migrants in violation of current legislation, obliging unscrupulous employers to cover expenses related to the expulsion of illegally located migrants, strengthening the responsibility of the employer; tightening the sanctions of existing legislation for submission of false documents for registration by migrants and for registration based on false documents; strengthening the functional activities of the Federal Migration Service by granting it the right to perform intelligence-gathering activities and interaction with operative units of law enforcement agencies engaged in such activities; determining the priority of external and operative services to identify the facts of illegal stay of migrants in the territory of the metropolis; establishment of a single codified act – the migration code, regulating legal relations arising in the migration sphere. Keywords: migration-related crime; labor migration; uncontrolled migration of labor resources; legal status; victimization; migration diasporas.


Linguistica ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-252
Author(s):  
Matej Accetto

This paper revisits the delicate relation between law and language, with language inevitable serving as the vehicle of legal deliberations and pronouncements, and in particular their seemingly irreconcilable qualities: while law is predicated on the concept of the rule of law (or Rechtsstaat) which in turn calls for a clear and predictable system of norms ensuring equal treatment, language is often indeterminate or ambiguous, the meaning of words unclear or uncertain. Is language even properly equipped to perform the role asked of it by law? This question is addressed by outlining and analysing the path traversed from the open-ended vagueness of linguistic terms to the uncompromising confines of their legal interpretation, both in the course of adopting legislation and in particular in the course of adopting judicial pronouncements on the meaning of linguistic terms employed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document