Memory Laws as a Misuse of Legislation

Memory laws are often accused of enforcing an inaccurate, manipulative or populist view of history. Some are also said to violate fundamental rights, in particular the right to free speech. These accusations are not entirely unjustified. Yet, a discussion of memory legislation that concentrates on these faults might be missing its mark. The main problem with memory legislation is not necessarily with the merits of any particular law. Rather, the determination of historical facts is not the kind of matter that should be entrusted to the legislator in the first place. The role of legislation is to make social cooperation possible despite substantial disagreement, but only when such social cooperation is indeed required. Disputes about historical facts, I argue, are not a coordination problem that requires a legislative solution. Still less can they justify legal coercion.

Administrative and legal coercion: theoretical issues

The article discusses the problems of disclosing the content of administrative and legal coercion, analyzes various classifications. It is noted that the existing opinion that one of the first authors of the three-term classification of administrative and legal coercion is M. I. Eropkin, is not entirely correct, since other classifications were proposed much earlier. In the article they are analyzed and on this basis the signs of administrative and legal coercion are formulated. This is their state-imperious nature, coercion is applied exclusively on a legal basis. This is a sectoral method of influence, which consists in the application by the competent state authorities and their officials of temporary measures established by law and restrictions on the rights and freedoms of a citizen.Comparing the content of administrative responsibility and administrativelegal coercion, it was concluded that it is broader than coercion, coercion is only part of the responsibility. Administrative-legal coercion is always the forcible submission of the will of the controlled subject to the will of the manager, and this subject can take responsibility without violence, voluntarily. This conclusion is based on specific examples.

Law and Social Dynamics of Society

This research aims to explain the influence of law on the social dynamics of society. The method used in this research is normative legal research. One of the sciences that studies the social dynamics of society is the Sociology of Law. Every dynamic that occurs as a result of social change requires a legal response. Social dynamics is a general phenomenon that occurs throughout the ages in every society, changes that occur in accordance with the nature and nature of humans who always want to make changes. The occurrence of social dynamics is influenced by several factors, including law, technology, community structure, culture, an open system of social stratification, and advanced education. Community institutions are considered truly valid if their norms fully assist the implementation of social patterns. The system of social layers can occur by itself or is deliberately structured to pursue a common goal. Legal coercion in the implementation of social institutions that apply as regulations is not always used. Instead, the emphasis is on the coercion of society.

Features of administrative and legal coercion in the migration sphere

The article examines the features of administrative and legal coercion in the field of migration. It provides an analysis of regulatory legal acts in which the function of migration control is assigned to the internal affairs bodies and measures to prevent and reduce uncontrolled migration are determined. A special place is occupied by the directions of improving public administration in the field of migration policy.Analysis of constant changes in the legal status of "migration" units, when they then raised their status to a federal service, first subordinate to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, then to an independent federal service subordinate to the Government of the Russian Federation, then they returned to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, but now to the level the usual structural divisions of the ministry showed that these decisions were erroneous. The abolition of the Federal Migration Service in 2016 and the transfer of its functions to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia entailed fundamental institutional changes, which reflects a stable pattern in the prevalence of administrative and legal coercion measures in public administration, does not contribute to an increase in the efficiency of public administration in the field of migration, complicates problems of implementing the functions of social adaptation and integration of migrants, which the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia is unable to effectively implement.

The Regulation of Informal Trade Credit (Ograyi) in Afghanistan

This article explores the creation, circulation, and regulation of informal trade credit or “ograyi” in Afghanistan. The practice of ograyi allows businesses to access short-term credit, from either their suppliers or third parties, to acquire specified goods. This paper provides an account of the non-legal practices that regulate ograyi transactions. Ograyi vitally depends on the development of trust between parties. Clientelism helps to maintain stable relationships that can offset market unpredictability. Widespread market norms and practices establish the general behaviour of participants. Parties also renegotiate the terms of the contract if circumstances make it impossible for the creditor to repay the loan in the agreed timeframe. Furthermore, bank credit remains largely unavailable or unappealing to many businesses, and the legal system provides limited recourse in the case of contractual breach. Thus, the non-legal practices regulating ograyi serve as a substitute for legal coercion.

Is There Material Liability of Workers and Employees as a Type of Legal Liability in Contemporary Russian Law and Legislation?

The subject of this article is the social relations regulated by the legal institution of material responsibility of workers and employees. The purpose of the article is the argumentation of the position according to which material liability does not have the status of legal liability. To achieve this goal, the following tasks were implemented: 1) the positions of the overwhelming number of supporters - theorists of law and scientists of labor law - were considered - recognition of material responsibility as one of the types of legal responsibility, along with criminal law, administrative law, etc., which is interpreted as compensation for harm caused to a worker or employee to an enterprise (organization, institution): 2) the views of scientists (Anatoly Borisovich Vengerov, Mikhail Mikhailovich Rassolov, Magomed Imranovich Abdulaev), who do not recognize material responsibility as a type of legal responsibility, have been analyzed; 3) analyzed approaches to understanding legal responsibility; 4) the author's position of understanding legal responsibility and its signs is given, focusing on such as the onset of negative consequences, imposing new additional duties on the offender; 5) the problem of correlation of legal liability measures and protection measures is considered. In conclusion, it is concluded that the identification of measures of legal responsibility and measures of protection have led, first, to an incorrect definition of civil liability, with which material liability is often compared; secondly, the controversial allocation of both the legal function of legal responsibility and material responsibility as a kind of legal responsibility, which, despite its consolidation in labor legislation, in our opinion, in its essential and substantive characteristics refers to protection measures. The scientific article also emphasizes that the problem of distinguishing between legal liability and protection measures is extremely important for law enforcement entities, who must adequately understand what measures of state-legal coercion they apply, which thereby realize their goals. At the same time, they should keep in mind that in practice the named types of state legal coercion are often applied simultaneously (for example, a civil suit in criminal proceedings).

Moral Goals and Legal Coercion: Philosophical and Legal Arguments of Patrick Devlin

The paper analyzes the arguments of the British jurist P. Devlin on the possibility of ensuring the achievement of moral goals by legal means. The views of P. Devlin and his debate with H. L. A. Hart gave rise to deep discussions on the relationship between moral and legal prescriptions in legislation and the search for moral grounds for legal norms and practice of its application. The paper also reconstructs P. Devlin’s arguments on the specifics of the application of the principle of harm compensation in assessing actions that contradict public morality

The Dizziness of Freedom: Understanding and Responding to Vaccine Anxieties

The rise in vaccine hesitancy in high-income countries has led some to recommend that certain vaccinations be made compulsory in states where they are currently voluntary. In contrast, I contend that legal coercion is generally inappropriate to address the complex social and psychological phenomenon of vaccine anxieties.

ADMINISTRATIVE COERCION: PROBLEMS OF THEORY, LEGISLATION AND PRACTICE

The paper deals with the mechanism of administrative coercion. The peculiarity of the article content is a system analysis of the problems of theoretical, normative-legal and empirical (law-enforcement) aspects. The author defines the essence of administrative coercion, based on the modern system of legislative regulation and practice of its application, which has developed since March 2020. The article explores various aspects of administrative coercion. It is pointed out that the knowledge of administrative-legal coercion is impossible without its consideration in interre-lation with such categories as freedom, expediency, administrative responsibility.On the basis of the analysis of some coercive measures, applied in the conditions of pandemic, their legal assessment is given. Attention is drawn to the fact that in conditions of pandemic the measures of constraint which, according to their developers, fully conform to the require-ments of the Federal law "About protection of the population and territories against emergen-cies of natural and technogenic character" were and are often taken. It is not so! This Federal Law defines the general organizational and legal norms in the field of population and territory protection from emergencies, its effect covers the relations arising in the process of activity of state authorities of the Russian Federation and subjects of the Russian Federation, local authorities, as well as organizations and population in the field of population and territory protection from emergencies. In the context of the epidemic, the debate about the balance between voluntary submission and coercion in the form of fear of responsibility has intensified. Under conditions of uncer-tainty and unpredictability of the situation, the reality of risks, the legal regulation should be oriented towards protecting the population, excluding compromises and exceptions, blanket norms. But always possible in such conditions situations when the state in order to protect citizens, applies coercive measures not based on the law, when they are forced to be estab-lished by the executive authorities. The author of article used following methods: system analysis, dialectical, logical, com-parative-legal, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction. As a result of the study conclusions were drawn that doctrine and practice convincingly prove that measures of administrative coercion should be formalized as much as possible. When the need arises to apply them, there is no time to discuss what measures, when, to what extent to apply. It is necessary to apply what is already there. When the situation returns to normal, the applied measures should be analysed and both the substantive norms and even more carefully the procedural norms should be improved. Provisions on executive authorities should include a mandatory section on "coercive measures applied by these authorities, grounds and procedure for their application".