„Sierp”, „Młot”, „Trybuna Radziecka”: tytuły polskojęzycznej prasy wydawanej w międzywojennym ZSRR

Sierp (The Sickle), Młot (The Hammer), Trybuna Radziecka (The Soviet Tribune): Titles of the Polish-Language Press Published in the Interwar USSRThis study is devoted to the titles of newspapers and magazines published in Polish in the USSR in 1918–1939. These periodicals are a reflection of a unique period – they were issued during the first decades after the 1917 revolution, under the conditions of state monopoly on information. The titles of newspapers and magazines had to conform to the single party line and ideology enforced in the USSR. The vocabulary used in the titles under scrutiny is discussed in the context of the features of Russian political propaganda at the time, as well as those of the Polish-language propaganda created on its basis. „Sierp”, „Młot”, „Trybuna Radziecka”: tytuły polskojęzycznej prasy wydawanej w międzywojennym ZSRRPrzedmiotem badania są tytuły gazet i czasopism publikowanych w języku polskim w latach 1918–1939 na terenie ZSRR. Periodyki te stanowią świadectwo szczególnej epoki – ukazywały się w pierwszych dekadach po rewolucji 1917 roku w warunkach państwowego monopolu informacyjnego. Tytuły gazet i czasopism zostały dostosowane do jednej linii politycznej i ideologicznej obowiązującej w ZSRR. Słownictwo wykorzystane w badanych tytułach prasowych zostało omówione na tle właściwości ówczesnej rosyjskiej propagandy politycznej i kształtującej się na jej wzór propagandy polskojęzycznej.

Transnational law – a new system of law?

The paper presents the emergence and evolution of the concept of transnational law, from the Philip Jessup’s 1956 novation to the latest approaches, mainly from the western legal scholarship. In the legal writings from Romania or Republic of Moldova, the phenomenon of transnational law remains unexplored or, at best, mentioned incidental as a synonym of a modern “lex mercatoria”. Likewise, in Russian scholarship, research on transnational law bears a strong private imprint and ubiquitous reluctance may be noted. This article aims to discuss, from the perspective of legal pluralism, the loss of the state monopoly in law making, the pluralization of sources of legitimacy for transnational actors, and the reconsideration of the scope of the law, by de-territorializing it. Transnational law is seen thus not just a private regime, but as a system of normative law that transcends international or national law, acts in a distinct social space and addresses specific actors, not only private, but also public or hybrid. In Romanian legal knowledge this approach is missing.

The Right of Access to Non-State Dispute Resolution in the Legal Order of Larger Europe: A Yardstick to Harmonise Approaches to State and Non-State Dispute Settlement in Ukraine

The Ukrainian legal thought has traditionally regarded the right of access to justice as a right of access to the State court, or to State managed or controlled procedures for dispute settlement. One of the main reasons for that was that the non-state, or uncontrolled by the State dispute settlement was not formally permitted, prohibition being imposed by the Soviet system and even to a certain extent during the period of domination on parts of the territory of the modern Ukraine, of the various externally imposed requirements of various legal systems in force at the material time. Non-state dispute settlement in its traditional forms, mainly based on the custom, was also left outside the attention in the pre-Soviet times and could not find its dignified place between accessible schemes and instruments for dispute settlement. Moreover, the understanding that justice delivery for the parties to the dispute should remain within State monopoly, became commonly accepted as from 1996. The adoption of the Constitution of Ukraine to a certain extent perverted approach to settlement of conflicts, focusing on the main role for the State courts, to these ends. In particular, the courts are having “direct jurisdiction” over any dispute, this led to perception of pre-trial settlements as unnecessary, even as regards those that remained in force, notably, the commissions on labour disputes that were recognized in the case-law of the European Court as equating in legal force to binding and enforceable legal instruments. Thus, the traditional historical approach to seeing judicial examination of disputes as an exceptional step in dispute settlement, in the absence of agreement or settlement by the parties, notably through mediation, arbitration or conciliation, variousforms of third party involvement, steadily disappeared. However, alternative examination of disputes is returning back to its original standing. It is gaining its place in the discussions on the judicial reform and reform of the system for settlement of disputes. This reform is far from being finalised and possibly has not even started in practice. The new approach to settlement of disputes, aimed at breaking the principle of State monopoly on examination of disputes and seeing State dispute settlement by court as an exception, is still not firmly entrenched into the mentality of lawyers, public servants, judges, law enforcement employees and politicians in Ukraine. Thus, the article suggests and points out to importance of taking into account with these changes of a wider European perspective. Such a perspective should relate not only to theoretical and practical advantages of the non-state dispute settlement, but also provides that the privatisation of the dispute settlement procedures and breaking the state monopoly on it, is a part of wider international obligations, also being a part of the supranational legal order of the European Union. This obligation of Ukraine is also seen as part of the requirements stemming from the Council of Europe law. Both the EU law and the Council of Europe provide for extensive soft law recommendations, legal principles, which are formed by the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. Such an approach provides that alternative means of dispute settlement, including arbitration, do not run contrary to the principles of human rights with regard to fair judicial proceedings. On the contrary, they could be seen as a highly relevant actual means of dispute settlement for any modern European society, built on the principles of respect to rule of law and human rights.

Forced Enforcement, or The State in Search of Enforcer

The article examines a specific situation that is emerging in Russia and is associated with the erosion of the state monopoly of the legitimate use of violence. With the example of a seemingly routine private event that looks like a single failure in the system, the authors show that it represents one of the most significant practices of power holders, the essence of which they define as “forced enforcement” and analyze its origins and possible implications. In a gigantic country, the regions of which vary significantly in the level of their socio-economic development, enforcement of rules is associated with costs that exceed the amount of the resulting benefits. Therefore, the state limits its function as an enforcer to the control only over the key industries and does not encroach on the rest. However, under the contemporary conditions this tactic stops working. Since key industries are no longer able to meet the needs of the enlarged state, it begins to extend its control to the new social and economic spheres. The dramatic expansion of the area of application of the enforcement tools and complicated procedures associated with the need to control these tools themselves make them more and more costly. Thus, the task is to make them less costly, while maintaining, or even increasing, the volume of work. The very fact of intentionally setting such an insurmountable task makes the corresponding organs look for non-trivial solutions that are outside the state-imposed rules. Created as “enforcement machines”, they acquire their own mind and interests, and thus their own subjectivity. They no longer enforce the rules, but begin to form them, trying to shift the fulfillment of their functions to citizens and thereby pushing them to search for new enforcers that are not at all connected with the state.

“Enjoy your experience”: Symbolic violence and becoming a tasteful state cannabis consumer in Canada

This article explores the legalization and marketing of recreational cannabis in Canada, specifically the province of Nova Scotia, that has extended state monopoly over sales. Beginning with Howard Becker’s classic analysis of “becoming a marijuana user,” this ethnographic investigation of the first day of state cannabis sales utilizes and extends Bourdieusian analyses, particularly by showing how “symbolic violence” and “taste distinctions” work beyond overt class reproduction to establish state classifications and rituals. The practices we observe show state formation in action at the point of sale, including education, warning, prohibition, and promotion. As we demonstrate, the state marketing of cannabis works to invite emotional identification toward becoming the state consumer as an embodied habitus. The citizen is not just redeemed morally by the legal recategorization of cannabis but brought into a new subject position as good consumer citizen at the moment of ritual consumption, that is, brought into a “tasteful state.”

La desafiante idea de molinari: la defensa en régimen de libre competencia

According to Gustave de Molinari (1819-1912) all monopoly is harmful to consumers because they receive worse goods and pay higher prices com­ pared to what it would happen in the free market. We don´t find either econom­ ic or logical reasons that justifies the state monopoly of the production of securi­ ty and its existence should be explained by other means. Molinari´s idea, which is no other than the laissez-faire doctrine driven to its ultimate consequences, is challenging because it implies de facto the dissolution of the State as we con­ ceive it at present. The authorities will oppose, with all the means at their dispos­ al, losing the coercive monopoly of production of security because it jeopardiz­ es their interests, namely, power. There have been historical examples of non -State societies only in a small scale or in primitive and underdeveloped so­ cial groups. Perhaps, the only production of private security, in free competition, will be seen in the free cities projects or free cities under statute. Keywords: Molinari, Laissez faire, Monopoly, Security, Defense. JEL Classification: D42, F52, H11, H42, H56 y H77. Resumen: Según Gustave de Molinari (1819-1912) todo monopolio es nocivo para los consumidores porque estos reciben peores bienes y a precios más elevados en comparación con lo que sucedería en el libre mercado. No encon­ tramos razones económicas ni lógicas que justifiquen el monopolio estatal de la producción de seguridad y su existencia debería ser explicada por otros medios. La idea de Molinari, que no es otra cosa que llevar la doctrina del laissez faire hasta sus últimas consecuencias, es desafiante porque implica de facto la disolución del Estado tal y como lo concebimos actualmente. Los go­ bernantes se opondrán, con todos los medios a su alcance, a perder el mono­ polio coactivo de la producción de seguridad porque perjudica sus intereses, a saber, su poder. Los ejemplos históricos de sociedades sin Estado sólo se han dado a pequeña escala o en grupos sociales primitivos y poco desarrollados. Tal vez, la única producción privada de seguridad, en libre competencia, la veamos en los proyectos free cities o ciudades libres bajo estatuto. Palabras clave: Molinari, Laissez faire, Monopolio, Seguridad, Defensa. Clasificación JEL: D42, F52, H11, H42, H56 y H77.

NEW MEANS OF COMMUNICATION AND THE OLD SYSTEM (INTEGRATION OF THE TELEPHONE ACTIVITY INTO THE SYSTEM OF STATE REGULATION OF COMMUNICATIONS IN RUSSIA IN THE LATE 19TH AND EARLY 20TH CENTURIES)

The paper analyzes the process of formulating the main principles of the state regulation of the telephone activities in Russia in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Even though the emergence of the telephone in Russia matched the process of the whole unified postal and telegraph service’s organizing, crucial necessity of including the telephone into the system of the state management of communications did not become just a step in these reforms’ development. It caused the discussion on another matter, namely on the main principle of the system’s functioning, i.e. perception of the communications as the subject of the state monopoly. Thus, the Russian government’s attempts to adopt the telephone to a broadly settled system of the state regulation happened to be followed by the debates on neither administrative no technical, but on the legal and economic matters. Lately, they moved to the principle of the state monopoly in the communications sphere as a whole and to perception of the latter as a source of the state income. Nevertheless, during the analyzed period, the focus of all the disputes was made on responding to the private capital’s threat to the monopoly status of the government. However, its main concern was not the monopoly itself, but one of its aspects, i.e. the most commercially profitable way to build and use the telephone communications.

Outsourcing Military and Security Functions

In “Are There ‘Inherently Sovereign Functions’ in International Law,” Frédéric Mégret suggests that the fact that international legal practice has sought to preserve a state monopoly over the use of force strengthens the argument that international law considers some functions to be inherently sovereign. Mégret's analysis goes much further than this in seeking to develop a thicker and broader understanding of inherently sovereign functions (ISFs) by reasoning inductively from international human rights law. This essay largely supports this approach through a case study of the approach taken by the United Kingdom to outsourcing military and security functions. It explores an understanding of inherently sovereign functions based on the state's monopoly on the legitimate use of force and claims that outsourcing military and security functions undermines state sovereignty.