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

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 32-41
Author(s):  
N. G. Stenichkin ◽  

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.

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Гарри Минх ◽  
Garri Minkh

The legal content of the legislative initiative of the President of the Russian Federation is characterized by diversity of this phenomenon. It illustrates the relationship of legislative initiative as a constitutional head of state powers and as the stage of the legislative process; justifying the importance of the constitutional-legal institute of legislative initiative of the President of the Russian Federation in the legal system of the Russian Federation. Particular attention is given to the positive and negative characteristics of the presence of the head of state of this legal instrument. Being legislative initiative is seen in the existence of constitutional and legal relationship between the subject of the right of legislative initiative and representative organ of state power over the application, taking in consideration and issued a legislative proposal on the various stages of the legislative process. Substantiates the role of the legislative initiatives of the President of the Russian Federation in various stages of the legislative process. There is a trend to strengthen the executive power in the legislative process, with the result that the center of the legislative initiative is moved from the parliament to the executive branch and to the President. It is concluded that a legislative initiative of the President acts as a practical manifestation of the principle of separation of powers, the observance of which helps to maintain the authority of the country´s presidency, predetermining the leading position of the President of the Russian Federation in the state and society.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 81-103
Author(s):  
A. Avtonomov ◽  
V. Grib

The article is a comparative study of legal regulation on non-profits in the Russian Federation by federal law, including the Constitution, federal statutes, decrees of the President of the Russian Federation, resolutions of the Government and Constitutional Court rulings in connection with certain international legal acts dealing with the right to association, and by the law of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The main stages of the development of the law on non-profits both at the federal level and at the level of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as the main trends in the development of non-profit law in modern Russia, are explored.


Author(s):  
Vladimir Suchkov ◽  
Vladimir Filonov

The authors examine the juridical idea of extremist used in the criminal law of the Russian Federation. This work is an attempt to solve the problem of differentiating between this concept and the freedom of expression. The establishment of boundaries and limits of these phenomena is important for both lawmakers and law enforcers. The authors use the attributes of the phenomenon of «extremism» in an attempt to understand its form and contents. To achieve this, they analyze views on different scholars on extremism, the law and its amendments, clarifications of the highest court authorities of the country regarding the object of this research, and study the doctrinal practice of experts – linguists and psychologists. They synthesize the discovered meanings of extremism and identify its features. The obtained information allowed the authors to conclude that the definition of extremism formulated in the law is not precise, it lacks clear boundaries and, at the categorial level, could be viewed as an abstract concept. This concept, incorporated in the law, has a negative impact on the quality of the law and impedes the right choice of interpretation by national courts. The fuzziness of legal prescriptions has not yet been eliminated by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the law enforcement practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. All this creates endless opportunities for interpreting the law at the local level. The authors present disturbing statistics that show a tremendous growth in the number of offences in this area in recent years. They believe that the cause of the problem is the above-mentioned law that allows excessive interpretation by the law enforcer. The presented research deals with the bottlenecks of constitutional law as it analyzes the freedom of expression with its boundaries and limits. The authors discuss the conflict of constitutional and criminal laws from the viewpoint of enforcing specific law clauses. The research includes constructive criticism of the instruments used by experts (linguists and psychologists) who perform their tasks for criminal cases and materials on speech goals, which belongs to the domain of criminalistics. The authors present their own vision of this problem based on the opinion of scholars, historical experience and court practice.


2021 ◽  
pp. 46-52
Author(s):  
Dmitrii V. Zmievskii

The article considers the right of legislative initiative of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the light of amendments made to the Fundamental Law of our state in 2020, as well as subsequent updating of special federal constitutional legislation. It is noted that the problem of practice deficiency in implementing the mentioned power by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is not new for the Russian legal science; in general, it is naturally determined and is due to a number of objective factors. However, the process of updating and developing the constitutional provisions on the supreme judicial control body of Russia and, in particular, creating the system of preliminary judicial constitutional control, bring the problem under consideration to a qualitatively new level. The approach itself in terms of granting the mentioned power to supreme courts in the Russian Federation is characterized as atypical for the countries near and far abroad. At the same time, the current lack of practice in exercising the power in question by the Constitutional Court is due to the special role of the latter in the system of supreme state authorities, in particular, the judiciary. The point of view is expressed that the problem cannot be unambiguously solved at the present stage of the statehood development. The author does not share the increasingly expressed point of view today that the right of legislative initiative should be excluded from the powers of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, since this will lead to a violation of the equality of the constitutional and legal statuses of the two independent supreme judicial authorities. In addition, the shortcomings in the wording of certain constitutional provisions have been identified and possible ways to eliminate them have been proposed.


Author(s):  
Лев Бардин ◽  
Lev Bardin

The law establishes that representatives in the courts can be both lawyers and other persons providing legal assistance, as well as legal representatives. The Constitutional Court in its Resolution No. 15-P of 16.07.2004 indicated that representatives of legal entities in arbitration proceedings can be any person. But in accordance with Item II (A) (a) of the List of Specific Obligations of the Russian Federation for Services Included in Annex I to the Protocol of 16 December 2011 "On the Accession of the Russian Federation to the Marrakesh Agreement on the establishing of the WTO", only those who received the status Lawyer in accordance with Russian law, has the right to represent in criminal courts and Russian arbitration courts, as well as act as a representative of organizations in civil and administrative proceedings and proceedings on cases of administrative violations. Appropriate legislative changes are needed. The law states that the use of the terms "advocacy", "lawyer", "lawyer's chamber", "lawyer’s entity" in the names of organizations is allowed only by lawyers. Every year, Russia's tax inspections register dozens of organizations set up by non-layers, illegally including the above terms in their names. The law should provide not only prohibitions, but also sanctions for violation of these prohibitions. Collegiums of advocates often include the phrase "partners" in their names. But lawyers - members of the board are not partners and do not sign partnership agreements. Partners can not be among the governing bodies of the collegium . The application by collegiums of lawyers of the rules provided for non-commercial partnerships by the Federal Law "On Non-Profit Organizations" in the part of partners is illegal. Only lawyers can establish a lawyer’s bureau and conclude a partnership agreement. But in practice in lawyer’s bureau, persons who do not have the status of a lawyer become partners. In other countries, in associating lawyers limited liability partnerships, along with partners, there are "associates". The introduction of such "associates" in our lawyer’s bureau will be a good alternative to attempts to include commercial organizations in the composition of lawyer entities.


2020 ◽  
pp. 43-46
Author(s):  
Valentina N. Gaponova ◽  
◽  
Varsenik A. Vinogradova ◽  

The article analyzes the changes in the legal regulation of the house arrest and the practice of its imposition. Particular attention is given to the controversial issue of the right of the accused under house arrest to leave the premises for a walk. The authors note that the Normative Transformation of House Arrest, which brought it closer to detention, set the law enforcement task to overcome the established stereotypes in the interpretation of specific provisions related to the essence of this preventive measure. First, it concerns the “regime” of isolation, specifically, the possibility of the accused to take walks. Today, when the house arrest implies ultimate isolation of the accused with the right to live in their home, the court’s permission for the accused to leave the place of residence is not based on the law. The authors conclude that the positive decision of the court is permissible only because of applying the law by analogy. At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the responsibility of the state to take care of the health of persons whose possibilities in this part are limited due to the election of preventive measures with isolation from society.


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 0-0 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatyana Shubert

The article discusses the role of judicial practice in legislative drafting activities, judicial precedent as a source of law, analyzes the problem of revealing legal gaps and contradictions in the current legislation. The author stresses the need for clarification of the term the “right to legislative initiative of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on issues within their jurisdiction”, and proposes a mechanism for accounting court practice during consideration of draft laws. The author submits the proposal on the adoption of the Federal Law “On Regulatory Legal Acts in the Russian Federation”, which, in the author’s opinion, will permit to overcome legal conflicts between the law and other regulatory legal acts and will create a solid legal framework for law-making and lawenforcement processes, will contribute to the prevention of infringement of legality in the activities of state bodies, business entities and other organizations, and strengthening the guarantees for realization of citizens’ rights and legitimate interests. Besides, the author proposes to amend the State Duma Regulation by adding the provision that when introducing the draft law to the State Duma, the subject with the right of legislative initiative must submit the materials containing system analysis and judicial practice trends regarding the regulation of the draft law in question.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 47-52
Author(s):  
Lidia Terekhova

Introduction. Decisions made by the courts on emerging procedural issues are not subject to the rule of universal appeal and can be appealed only if there are two conditions specified in the law, the correctness of which is questioned in the literature. Purpose. The aim of the work is to substantiate the necessary conditions for an independent (separately from the decision) appeal of the rulings of the court of first instance. Methodology. The author used formal legal method, analysis, synthesis, formal logical method. Results. The proposals put forward in science are considered to supplement and amend the current civil procedural legislation in part of appealing the rulings of the court of first instance. The author, with reference to examples, noted that the current law does not always look fair and consistent in the sutuation of which particular definitions are subject to appeal. It is not always possible to agree with the legislator that he correctly singled out those definitions that are adopted on the most important procedural issues, delaying the verification of definitions on which may make it difficult or impossible to protect violated rights. Accordingly, there are reasonable claims that the legislator classifies specific definitions as appealed. The assignment of definitions to the number excluding the further movement of the case faces constant difficulties, since it is not always possible to understand by the nature of the definitions that they exclude the movement of the case. An important role in resolving disputes is played by the legal positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation periodically clarifies controversial issues when appealing against rulings that arise in judicial practice. The Constitutional Court clarifies both private issues and formulates general rules. Conclusion. The author recognizes the correct approach chosen in the current legislation, notes other than independent appeals, ways to protect rights, as well as the role of the highest judicial authorities in clarifying disputed situations. Thus, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation formulated a general rule: from the right to judicial protection guaranteed by the Constitution, the right to arbitrarily choose the procedure for appealing court decisions does not follow.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-32

The relevance of the work is determined by the fact that the right to life belongs to the basic constitutional human rights, therefore, its observance and protection is the duty of the state. Despite its undeniable importance, today the right to life anywhere in the world is not really ensured in sufficient quantities. The constitutional consolidation of the right to life raises a number of issues related to the concept, nature, legislative and practical implementation of this right. It should be noted that various aspects of the human right to life were considered in the scientific works of G.B. Romanovsky, O.G. Selikhova, T.M. Fomichenko, A.B. Borisova, V.A. Ershov and other Russian authors. The aim of the study is to study and comparative analysis of the legal content of the constitutional norm that defines the right to life, to comprehend and identify possible problems of the implementation of this right. To achieve this goal, this article discusses relevant issues of ensuring the right to life, proclaimed by Article 20 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Article 27 of the Constitution of Azerbaijan Republic. The results of a comparative analysis of these constitutional norms and the relevant norms of industry law allow us to determine, that there is no contradiction between Article 20 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the norms of the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation, which imply the death penalty as an exceptional measure of punishment, because a moratorium has been imposed on the death penalty in the Russian Federation since April 16, 1997. However, after the abolition of the death penalty in the criminal legislation of the Republic of Azerbaijan in 1998, there was a discrepancy between parts II and III of Article 27 of the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the criminal legislation of Azerbaijan Republic that requires the introduction of the necessary changes in the content of the analyzed constitutional norm. The value of the work is determined by the fact that the introduction of appropriate changes will contribute to the further improvement of the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the effective implementation of the right to life of everyone.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document