THE RIGHT OF LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE IN THE SYSTEM OF POWERS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

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.

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.


Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 22-31
Author(s):  
S. V. Musarskiy

One of the most difficult issues of civil law is the determination of the criteria for abuse of rights prohibited by Article 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Among numerous points of view on this issue, the following has become very widespread in judicial practice: an abuse of the right can be established based on the negative consequences that have occurred for third parties as a result of the exercise of the right. Since these consequences are evident, then the exercise of the right constituted an abuse. Substantial support for this approach is provided by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation opining that the rule of Art. 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is aimed at implementing the principle enshrined in Part 3 of Art. 17 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Having studied the origins of this point of view and its legal foundations, the author noted a number of inherent shortcomings. In particular, this point of view does not distinguish between inflicting unacceptable harm and admissible actions causing harm to another person; it does not take into account the competition of legal norms; it does not take into account that causing harm prohibited by law is an offense and, therefore, it is not an act of exercising subjective rights. These and other shortcomings of the concept of causing harm, noted by the author of the paper, lead to the conclusion that the feature of “causing harm” in itself is insufficient to qualify the act as an act of abuse of the right and the application of Art. 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. In addition to the indicated feature, which is a prerequisite for the application of Art. 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the court must establish another (key) factor, namely: the fact that, in its opinion, allows to distinguish between legal abuse and other lawful and unlawful phenomena.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolay Taskayev ◽  
Anna Oleynik

The article examines the process of emergence, formation and development of the constitutional justice institution in Russia. It carries out an analysis of organization and activities of the USSR Constitutional Control Committee, the RSFSR Constitutional Court and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The authors draw a conclusion of the need of conducting constitutional and legal reforms in Russia, introducing amendments and additions to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. In order to increase efficiency of the constitutional jurisdiction, improving the organization and activity of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the General Prosecutors Office of the Russian Federation, the Investigation Committee of the Russian Federation, the Executive Office of the Human Rights Commissioner in the Russian Federation, the authors offer proposals of introducing amendments and additions to Articles 104, 125, 129 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Federal Constitutional Law of 21.07.1994 № 1-ФКЗ «On Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation» in terms of authorizing the above-mentioned office-holders with the right of legislative initiative and making inquiries to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. In particular, on issues of constitutionality of the laws, normative legal acts of the supreme bodies of the governmental power and office-holders of the Russian Federation and the entities of the Russian Federation; on solvation of disputes in terms of competence between the supreme bodies of the governmental power and office-holders of the Russian Federation and the entities of the Russian Federation; on violence of citizens constitutional rights. The authors also offer to expand the Article 129 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation up to a separate chapter of the Constitution in which to establish the place in the system of the governmental power the designation, system, structure, principles of organization and activity, the authorities of the prosecutors office bodies, including in the sphere of constitutional jurisdiction.


The right to education is a fundamental human right guaranteed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and international human rights instruments. At the same time, there are some difficulties for those who combine work and studying. The Labour Code of the Russian Federation stipulates guarantees and compensations exclusively for workers obtaining degrees of respective levels for the first time. Getting a degree of the same level of education by workers can become impossible. The author considers the issues of realization of the right to education by a worker who has already had a respective degree. On the basis of international law, the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and also decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation the author concludes that there should be a differentiated approach to determining the amount of guarantees provided to employees combining work with studying. From the author’s point of view, only workers obtaining respective degrees for the first time should enjoy material guarantees. At the same time, non-material legal guarantees should be applied to all workers combining their works with studying. Otherwise those workers who obtain degrees of respective levels not for the first time don’t enjoy a constitutional principle of equality and can suffer from impossibility of realization of the right to education.


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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ksenia Minakova

The article analyzes methods of ensuring the migrants rights by the public authorities of the Russian Federation, the individual elements of the migration policy of the Russian Federation relating to the activities of public authorities. It considers the activities in the field of protection of the migrants rights by such authorities as the Russian President's Office for Constitutional Rights of Citizens, the Presidential Council for Civil Society and Human Rights, the Council for Interethnic Relations, General Directorate for Migration, Chief Directorate for Migration Issues of Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, their normative documents, that regulate their activities. It examines separately the activities of the RF Government in the field of protection of the migrants rights, as well as judicial authorities; it identifies the special role of the RF Constitutional Court in the field of ensuring the rights of migrants, refugees, the internally displaced and stateless persons. It underlines the role of authority bodies of the RF entities in ensuring the migrants rights in terms of Irkursk Oblast. The article offers to differentiate strictly the role of each authority body in the field of migrants rights protection, as well as to pay specific attention to regulation of activities of the FR entities authority bodies in this direction.


Author(s):  
Andrei V. Bezrukov ◽  
Andrey A. Kondrashev

The article raises the issue of state sovereignty in a federal state and reveals its legal nature. The authors draw attention to the diversity of approaches to the concept and essence of sovereignty, reveal its correlation with related categories, describe the concepts of unity and divisibility of state sovereignty. The paper proves that sovereignty is not a quantitative, but a qualitative characteristic of a state, which is either present or not. The authors substantiate the exclusive possession of state sovereignty by the Russian Federation. Based on the analysis of the doctrinal, regulatory sources and the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the authors show that the Russian constitutional model explicitly outlines the principle of solid and indivisible state sovereignty spreading throughout the whole territory of the Russian Federation. Recognition of the principle of state sovereignty of Russia presupposes a clear definition of the scope of rights that the Federation should possess in order for its sovereignty to be ensured. The article examines the main features of the state sovereignty of Russia enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, among which are the supremacy of federal law over the law of the subjects of the Federation, the inviolability of borders and territorial integrity, the unity of the economic space, fiscal, banking and monetary systems, common army (Armed Forces), the right of the state to protect its sovereignty and rights of citizens. Despite the unequivocal decision on the integrity of state sovereignty of the Russian Federation expressed the Constitution of the Russian Federation and by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, this fundamental principle is not completely ensured since the idea of the sovereignty of the republics as components of Russia continues to retain its potential threat to Russian federalism, taking into account the provisions of Art. 73 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation that provide for the full state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Михаил Пресняков ◽  
Mikhail Pryesnyakov

In article the question of validity of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and some other sources of the right which can also possess the highest validity is considered. In particular the author comes to a conclusion that legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation possess the highest validity and in total with the constitutional provisions represent the actual Constitution. On the other hand, both laws on amendments to the Constitution, and the universally recognized norms of international law on the validity stand below constitutional precepts of law. Acts of the Constitutional Assembly of the Russian Federation may in future be qualified as having the highest judicial effect. Such acts may abolish or change any provision of the present Constitution. At the same time the universally recognized norms of international law and the laws of the Russian Federation regulating amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation as independent juridical acts and sources of constitutional law are inferior as compared with the constitutional legal norms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document