Pour voir les autres types de publications sur ce sujet consultez le lien suivant : Constitutional courts – Russia (Federation).
Articles de revues sur le sujet « Constitutional courts – Russia (Federation) »
Créez une référence correcte selon les styles APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard et plusieurs autres
Consultez les 50 meilleurs articles de revues pour votre recherche sur le sujet « Constitutional courts – Russia (Federation) ».
À côté de chaque source dans la liste de références il y a un bouton « Ajouter à la bibliographie ». Cliquez sur ce bouton, et nous générerons automatiquement la référence bibliographique pour la source choisie selon votre style de citation préféré : APA, MLA, Harvard, Vancouver, Chicago, etc.
Vous pouvez aussi télécharger le texte intégral de la publication scolaire au format pdf et consulter son résumé en ligne lorsque ces informations sont inclues dans les métadonnées.
Parcourez les articles de revues sur diverses disciplines et organisez correctement votre bibliographie.
1
Henderson, Jane, et Marina Lomovtseva. « Constitutional Justice in Russia ». Review of Central and East European Law 34, no 1 (2009) : 37–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157303509x406223.
Texte intégralRésumé :
AbstractThe 1993 Russian Constitution and 1994 Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation” define the jurisdiction and activity of the Federal Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. However, these pieces of legislation do not comprehensively address all the issues, and there has been some broadening of the Court's power through interpretation and the effect of some other legislation. This article examines the Court's jurisdiction and some of the issues that arise in the exercise thereof, as well as the relative role of the constitutional or charter courts of the subjects of the Federation, and the relationship between the Constitutional Court and the other courts in the Russian federal system. Issues of the methods of constitutional interpretation are addressed. The importance of the Constitutional Court as the federal agency of constitutional court supervision (review) in ensuring the effective application of the Russian Constitution is highlighted in the context of this growth of a comparatively new branch of law in the Russian legal system.
2
Abashidze, A. Kh, M. V. Ilyashevich et A. M. Solntsev. « Anchugov & ; Gladkov v. Russia ». American Journal of International Law 111, no 2 (avril 2017) : 461–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2017.31.
Texte intégralRésumé :
On April 19, 2016, in The Case Concerning the Resolution of the Question of the Possibility to Execute in Accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation the Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 4 July 2013 in the Case of Anchugov and Gladkov v. Russia in Connection with the Request of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation (Anchugov & Gladkov (Russ.)), the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (Constitutional Court) held that decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are binding on Russian courts, in accordance with Article 15(4) of the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the Constitutional Court stressed the necessity of ensuring a reasonable balance between the obligation to implement ECtHR judgments and respect for the fundamental principles of the Russian Federation's constitutional system. The Constitutional Court found that because the ECtHR judgment in question implicitly conflicted with provisions of the Russian Constitution, Russian courts are not obliged to comply with the judgment regarding issues that remain in conflict; however, other means are available to the Russian legislature to give effect to the judgment. While the decision marks an important development in Russia's relationship with the European system of human rights, it is not inconsistent with the approach taken by a substantial number of European domestic courts in holding that treaty obligations to enforce decisions of international courts cannot justify violating domestic constitutional norms.
3
Savoskin, Alexandr V., Vitali V. Kuriatnikov et Veronika A. Meshcheryagina. « Prospects for normative control in the subjects of the Russian Federation after the 2020 amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation ». Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research 8, no 4 (2022) : 113–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.21684/2411-7897-2022-8-4-113-130.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Prior to the amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation in 2020, three types of courts could carry out normative control in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation: the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, constitutional (charter) courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and courts of general jurisdiction. Amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation led to amendments to the Federal Constitutional Law “On the Judicial System of the Russian Federation”. The constitutional (statutory) courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation were abolished. The competence of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to verify the normative acts of the authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation on complaints from citizens was expanded. The partial overlap of competence between the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, courts of general jurisdiction and constitutional (charter) courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation has disappeared. However, the issue of verification of normative acts arose if these acts were adopted by the authorities of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation within the exclusive jurisdiction of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation (based on Article 73 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation” expressly prohibits verification of such normative acts by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Verification of such acts in courts of general jurisdiction is not formally prohibited by the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation, but contradicts the federal nature of the state and Article 73 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. They cannot invalidate contested acts, but they can use other mechanisms to ensure the regime of constitutional and legal legality in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.
4
Krjažkova, Ol’ga. « Die Bedeutung der russischen Verfassungsreform des Jahres 2020 für die Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit ». osteuropa recht 67, no 1 (2021) : 27–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.5771/0030-6444-2021-1-27.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article analyzes the 2020 Russian constitutional reform with a special focus on constitutional justice. The author discusses the changes of the Constitution and the legislation on the Federal Constitutional Court and the Constitutional Courts of the constituent entities (subjects) of the Russian Federation. The analysis shows three main developments: First, the liquidation of the constitutional (charter) courts of the subjects of the Federation and their possible replacement by councils within legislative bodies. Secondly, changes of the organization of the Constitutional Court (the reduction of the number of its members, the decision that dissenting opinions of judges are no longer published), and of its relationship with other state bodies (increased dependence on the president and the Federation Council). Thirdly, the changes of the powers of the Constitutional Court (expansion of the powers and reduction of the capacity to consider complaints about violations of constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens). The analyses also looks on previous changes of the legal regulations in this area and the case law of these courts. The article shows that the changes were made gradually and are affected by the current Russian political regime. Lastly, it shows that the constitutional reform did not strengthen, but weakened the institutions of constitutional justice in Russia.
5
Kurilyuk, Yu E., et D. A. Garanin. « Constitutional and Statutory Courts of Constituent Entities of Russia in the National Judicial System : Past, Present and Future ». Humanities and Social Sciences. Bulletin of the Financial University 11, no 4 (28 janvier 2022) : 66–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2021-11-4-66-72.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The regional bodies of constitutional control have existed for more than 30 years, and during their work, they caused heated debates among legal scholars regarding their necessity. From January 1, 2023, these courts will cease to exist throughout the country because the wording of the federal Constitution and the law “On the Judicial System of the Russian Federation” has been changed. The researchers consider the legal regulation of the activities of constitutional and statutory courts and the history of their activity, draw parallels with the legal regulation of such instances abroad, analyse the problems of the “high cost” of the functioning of constitutional and statutory courts, and propose approaches that could significantly optimise the financing of the constitutional and statutory courts of the subjects. The authors present a comparative table on the number of cases considered by the courts, analyse their competence, consider the problematic issues of its differentiation from the competence of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the possibility of assigning consideration of matters under the jurisdiction of the constitutional (statutory) courts to the courts of general jurisdiction.
6
Stenichkin, N. G. « Issues of Superion Courts of the Russian Federation when Implementing the Legislative Initiative ». Rossijskoe pravosudie 10 (25 septembre 2020) : 32–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.37399/issn2072-909x.2020.10.32-41.
Texte intégralRésumé :
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.
7
BARTSITS, IGOR N. « Rethinking the relationship between international and national law at the turn ». Public Administration 22, no 1 (2020) : 33–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.22394/2070-8378-2020-22-1-33-42.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is devoted to revealing the specifics of the implementation of such areas of constitutional law as the constitutionalization of international law and the internationalization of constitutional law by the example of additions to Article 79 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as well as the practices of the Italian Constitutional Court, the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, etc. The author examined in sufficient detail the procedures for extending the effect of international law and international treaties of Russia to the national legal system, analyzed the concept of counter-limits in European and national judicial practice, presented the basic principles of interaction between European and national courts (the principle of subsidiarity, the principle of proportionality, the principle of ‘sincere cooperation’, method of ‘dialogue of judges’). There is a need for an updated understanding of the term ‘constitutional sovereignty of the state’, which is based on domestic norms on fundamental rights and norms on the foundations of the constitutional system, which presupposes the inadmissibility of any foreign or international influence that violates the requirement of priority of the norms and principles of the national Constitution in the national legal system. The article substantiates the expediency of using the doctrine of counter-limits in the Russian Federation as an instrument of constitutional self-defense, ensuring constitutional sovereignty and preserving constitutional identity.
8
Sviridenko, O. M. « The 2020 Constitutional Reform : An Independent Constitutional and Legal Status of Commercial (Arbitrazh) Courts being fixed for the First Time ». Actual Problems of Russian Law 17, no 12 (16 décembre 2022) : 39–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2022.145.12.039-045.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The paper analyzes the interim results of the 2020 constitutional reform, which affected the foundations of the judiciary in the territory of the Russian Federation. The author assumes and justifies that there is a change in priorities and vectors of legislative work in the field of commercial (arbitrazh) procedural legislation. Based on the analysis of the history of the creation of commercial (arbitrazh) courts, the author makes a conclusion about the formation and development of commercial (arbitrazh) courts as an independent procedural form of the exercise of judicial power in modern Russia. An assessment of the role of Professor V.F. Yakovlev in the creation of commercial (arbitrazh) courts in Russia is given. The author notes the importance of fixing the constitutional and legal status of the system of commercial (arbitrazh) courts. The author shares the opinion, which is of enormous theoretical and practical importance, that the activity of commercial (arbitrazh) courts is a form of exercising judicial power both in the sphere of civil and administrative proceedings. In the context of the problem of a possible «absorption» by the unified Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, including the Commercial (Arbitrazh) Procedure Code, the adoption of amendments to the Constitution reduces such a threat. The author concludes that the rules of commercial (arbitrazh) procedural law, being improved, undergoing different editions, allowing for disputes and discussions at the scientific and practical level, have been preserved as an independent branch of law. At the same time, these rules are, along with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the fundamental basis of the independent legal status of the commercial (arbitrazh) courts system.
9
Brezhnev, O. V. « Preliminary Constitutional Review and its Implementation in Russia : Problems of Theories and Applications ». Actual Problems of Russian Law 15, no 10 (29 octobre 2020) : 36–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.119.10.036-043.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The paper is devoted to the problems concerning the legal nature, normative regulation and the procedure for the implementation of the institute of preliminary constitutional review in the Russian Federation. Although the exercise of this type of constitutional control ensurs the prevention of the detected violations, it also carries certain risks associated with the limited time frame of its implementation, impossibility of taking into account interpretation of the contested norm in law enforcement, etc. The author demonstartes permissible forms of the use of preliminary control in the activity of the bodies of constitutional justice in Russia (when checking the constitutionality of international agreements and treaties of the Russian Federation, evaluating constitutional amendments, etc.). The author also investigates the practice of implementing the relevant powers. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation that stipulate the limits of the implementation of preliminary judicial constitutional review. The paper examines the issue of the powers of constitutional (charter) courts of constituent entities of the Russian Federation in the area under consideration.
10
Dzidzoev, Ruslan Mukharbekovich. « Questions of federal structure in the revised version of the Constitution of Russia ». Юридические исследования, no 7 (juillet 2020) : 29–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.25136/2409-7136.2020.7.33720.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The subject of this research is the questions of constitutional reform regarding the federal structure of Russia, which require scientific assessment. The object of this research is the legal acts that laid the groundwork for the constitutional reform in Russia: Message of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation of January 15, 2020; Law on the Amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation; Conclusion of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on Conformity with the Amendment of the Current Constitution of Russia. Detailed analysis is conducted on the content of the constitutional amendments, their correlation with the legal logic and the needs of constitutional federal progress in Russia. The combination of applied methods (general scientific and private scientific, such as formal-legal, comparative-legal, systemic) allows determining the degree and limits of impact of the constitutional amendments upon the federal structure of Russia. The key conclusions consist in ascertainment of the large-scale constitutional federal reform in Russia oriented towards the principles of state unity and territorial integrity, which received prominent and holistic reflection in the revised version of the Constitution; need to complete federal reform at the current legislative level via amending the Federal law “On The General Principles Of Organization of Legislative (Representative) and Executive Authorities of Constituent Entities of the Russian Federation”, as well as the Constitution and statues of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, which should be brought into compliance with the new revision of the Main Law of Russia. The author's special contribution to this research lies in a systemic analysis of recent amendments to the Constitution of Russia, which testify to substantial changes in federal structure of the country. The novelty is defined by the analysis of new constitutional provisions characterizing the content of the constitutional reform in Russia with regards to federal structure, which have not been previously examined in legal science.
11
Dzidzoev, Ruslan Mukharbekovich. « The questions of organization of state power in new revision of the Constitution of the Russian Federation ». Право и политика, no 9 (septembre 2020) : 156–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0706.2020.9.33640.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The subject of this research is the organization of state power in Russia in light of the amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation introduced in 2020 that require systematic scientific assessment. The object of this research is the legal acts that laid groundwork for the constitutional reform in Russia: Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation of January 15, 2020, Law on Amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Opinion of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on correspondence of the amendment to the current Constitution of Russia. The author examines the content of the constitutional amendments, their reference with legal logic and requirements for the constitutional progress in Russia. The following conclusions were formulated: the significance and magnitude of the recent constitutional amendments allows speaking of the large-scale constitutional reform that adumbrates the new stage of constitutional evolution in Russia that results in the reform of state superstructure; constitutional amendments noticeably changes the configuration of state power with regards to ratio of the branches of power, checks and balances, objects and redistribution of the institutions of state power, which testifies to transition of the Russian Federation from semi-presidential (presidential-parliamentary) form of government towards presidential, characterized by dominant role of the President within the state system. The novelty of this research lies in analysis of the new constitutional provisions that describe the content of the Russian constitutional reform in the aspect of characteristics of the leading institutions of state power.
12
Zmievskii, Dmitrii V. « THE RIGHT OF LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE IN THE SYSTEM OF POWERS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION CONSTITUTIONAL COURT ». Oeconomia et Jus, no 4 (23 décembre 2021) : 46–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.47026/2499-9636-2021-4-46-52.
Texte intégralRésumé :
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.
13
Levin, V. V. « Features of Judicial Practice in the Russia as the Basis of Precedent ». Sociology and Law, no 4 (31 décembre 2020) : 98–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.35854/2219-6242-2020-4-98-106.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is devoted to the analysis of judicial practice as the basis of law-making activity in the Russian Federation, on the basis of which it is possible to create a precedent. Case law in Russia is Advisory in nature and is not mandatory for law enforcement practice. Courts use the signs of case law in their decisions in the reasoned part. Signs of case law is a ruling of the constitutional court of the Russian Federation and regulations of the armed forces of the Russian Federation.
14
Levin, V. V. « Features of Judicial Practice in the Russia as the Basis of Precedent ». Sociology and Law, no 4 (31 décembre 2020) : 98–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.35854/2219-6242-2020-4-98-106.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is devoted to the analysis of judicial practice as the basis of law-making activity in the Russian Federation, on the basis of which it is possible to create a precedent. Case law in Russia is Advisory in nature and is not mandatory for law enforcement practice. Courts use the signs of case law in their decisions in the reasoned part. Signs of case law is a ruling of the constitutional court of the Russian Federation and regulations of the armed forces of the Russian Federation.
15
Bobrova, Natalia A. « The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation as a subject of constitutional responsibility ». Law Enforcement Review 4, no 4 (28 décembre 2020) : 23–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.24147/2542-1514.2020.4(4).23-34.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The subject of the article is justification of the main elements of the constitutional responsibility of the Russian Constitutional Court in the context of constitutional reform. The purpose of the article is confirmation or refutation of the hypothesis that the Constitutional Court must be subject to constitutional responsibility. The methodology. The author uses methods of complex analysis of legislation, synthesis, as well as formal-logical and formal-legal methods. The main results, scope of application. Russia as a democratic state excludes the existence of legally irresponsible subjects of state power. It concerns the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Legal irresponsibility characterizes only the absolute monarchy. The article comprehensively examines the problem of responsibility of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the reasons for the poor development of this institution in legislation and academic literature are also considered. The reasons for the Constitutional Court's dependence on the President of the Russian Federation as a "guarantor of the Constitution of the Russian Federation" have been systemized. The author considers duumvirate of guarantors of constitutional legitimacy as a nonsense. The reasons for the Constitutional Court's peculiar use of the law of the legislative initiative are considered. This initiative was used only in the direction of increasing the term of the powers of judges of the Constitutional Court from 65 up to 70 years. The life-long status of the President of the Court is seen as a violation of the principle of equality of judges, which is the most important guarantee of the independence of the Constitutional Court. Constitutional reform-2020 completed the process of dependence of the Constitutional Court on the President of the Russian Federation and the "second government" - the Administration of the Russian President. Some constitutional and legal torts of the Constitutional Court of the Russia are considered also. The author comes to the conclusion that judges of the constitutional court have a special responsibility - political, moral and historical. The main questions are need to be resolved: who has the right to state the torts of the constitutional court and what are the consequences of this statement?
16
Zbaratsky, В. A. « Judicial Legislative Initiative in Constituent Entities of the Russian Federation ». Actual Problems of Russian Law, no 10 (9 novembre 2019) : 29–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2019.107.10.029-037.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article investigates the legislative initiative of judicial authorities at the level of constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Comparing legislative initiative assigned to the courts under the Constitution of the Russian Federation and constitutions (charters) of subjects of the Russian Federation, the author has come to the conclusion that the content of the right to legislative initiative in the vast majority of constituent entities of the Russian Federation is similar to the content thereof in federal legislation. The author investigates various approaches of constituent entities’ law-makers to granting legislative initiative to judicial bodies. The author singles out peculiarities of assigning judicial initiative not only to the judicial bodies at the level of constituent entities of the Russian Federation (constitutional (statutory, charter) courts), but also to federal courts (courts of general jurisdiction and arbitrazh courts). The author distinguishes the concepts of judicial bodies, presidents of courts and courts presidiums as subjects endowed with the right of legislative initiative. Analyzing the variety of wordings regarding the allocation of judicial authorities, their officials and internal structural units, the author concludes that the right to legislative initiative could be possessed only by the court as a whole. According to the author, some constitutions (charters) of constituent entities of the Russian Federation contain obvious contradiction to federal legislation. However, it is still necessary to empower the courts with the right of legislative initiative at the level of constituent entities of the Russian Federation.
17
Sychev, Vitalii B. « Content and forms of participation of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in lawmaking ». Izvestiya of Saratov University. New Series. Series Economics. Management. Law 21, no 2 (25 mai 2021) : 223–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.18500/1994-2540-2021-21-2-223-231.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Introduction. The judicial constitutional review authorities ensure the supremacy and direct application of the constitutions. They also participates in lawmaking activities. Constitutional review authorities can participate in lawmaking activities directly or circumstantially. There are two kinds of the direct participation of such authorities in lawmaking activities: legislative initiative and participation in lawmaking activities in connection with the implementation of the constitutional review. The methodology of research is based on general scientific and special legal research methods. Theoretical analysis. Some authors note that the decisions of the constitutional review authorities can modify conditions of public life. Authors often emphasize that court decisions that rules certain norms as unconstitutional have the same goals as statutory acts. Empirical analysis. Constitutional courts administer a special kind of lawmaking, such as “positive”, “negative”, “adjusting” and “interpretative” lawmaking. “Positive” lawmaking is connected with the adoption of statutory acts, which regulate the activities of the constitutional courts. “Negative” lawmaking consists in ruling certain legal norms and sources of law unconstitutional and making them void. By means of “adjusting” lawmaking constitutional courts do not rule the norms as completely unconstitutional, but constitutionally interpret them. “Interpretative” lawmaking consists in clarifying legal norms of constitutions. The constitutional review authorities may also provide recommendations to the legislative authorities. Results. The constitutional review authorities can directly participate in lawmaking activities as a legislative initiative or in connection with the implementation of the constitutional control as “positive”, “negative”, “adjusting” and “interpretative” lawmaking. Circumstantial participation of such authorities in lawmaking activities is administered by adopting special messages.
18
Komarova, V. V. « Constitutional Reform 2020 in Russia (Selected Issues) ». Actual Problems of Russian Law 15, no 8 (30 août 2020) : 22–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.117.8.022-031.
Texte intégralRésumé :
On the basis of the analysis of Law of the Russian Federation on Amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation as of March 14, 2020, No 1-FKZ “On improvement of regulation of certain issues of organization and functioning of public power,” legislation, acts and legal standings of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, as well as the practice of transforming the Constitution of Russia, and Presidential directives, the author investigates some issues concerning the Constitutional Reform 2020 initiated by the Head of the State. The paper examines the issues of the new constitutional approach to the implementation of the principle of separation of powers, some additional powers of the President of Russia in the context of their expansion. The author argues her view concerning consideration of some legal phenomena rooted in the legal reality of Russia at the constitutional level on the example of the terms “public power” and “instructions of the President of the Russian Federation.” The author monitors the dynamics of formation and manifoldness of instructions of the President of the Russian Federation. The paper highlights some terms and definitions that are new for the constitutional level, some of which can be considered as goals in the development of public and state life. The paper formulates author’s assessments and conclusions, author’s opinion concerning the ongoing transformations of the Constitution of Russia and, at the same time, it is proposed to continue scientific discussions devoted to the implementation of the proposed constitutional novellas.
19
Ivanova, Еlena L., et Aleksey A. Petrov. « REGULATION OF PRELIMINARY CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW IN THE POST-SOVIET STATES (COMPARATIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS IN RUSSIA) ». Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research 8, no 1 (2022) : 189–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.21684/2411-7897-2022-8-1-189-208.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The issues of preliminary constitutional review are not thoroughly researched in the scientific field of constitutional law mainly due to relatively small volume of relevant practice both in the Russian Federation and in affairs of competent bodies of foreign states. At the same time, the changes in the legal regulation of the powers of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which occurred within the framework of the constitutional reform of 2020, indicated once again the relevance of the study of preliminary constitutional review. Whereas prior to these transformations the competence of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the field of preliminary review encompassed only international treaties (of the Russian Federation) that did not enter into force and issues on referendums of the Russian Federation, now it also includes verification of the constitutionality of federal legislative acts of all types, including laws on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as well as the laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation prior to their promulgation. In this regard, it seems important to refer to the relevant experience of other countries and above all of those that are historically and geographically close to the Russian Federation. The article provides a brief overview of the concepts of preliminary constitutional review developed in constitutional and legal science, its merits and controversial points. Using the comparative legal method, the authors investigate the state of constitutional and legislative regulation of preliminary constitutional review carried out by constitutional courts and other similar bodies of the post-Soviet states. The subject of the analysis includes approaches to determining the objects of such review, as well as practice and features of the regulation of the constitutional review procedures under study. Despite the sufficient development and high quality of legal regulation of these issues in the Russian Federation, the authors come to a conclusion that it is advisable to adopt certain aspects from the relevant experience of the states from the former USSR.
20
Koshel, Alexey S. « The Interaction of the Parliament and the Judiciary of the Russian Federation ». Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, no 460 (2020) : 258–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.17223/15617793/460/31.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article discusses the constitutional problems of consolidation, implementation and improvement of the mechanism of interaction between the parliament and higher courts in parliamentary procedures. The research methods are analysis, synthesis, normative (formal-logical), and historical-legal. The key aim of the study is to identify a mechanism for ensuring the control function of the parliament to control the implementation in the Russian Federation of laws adopted by the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. The author came to the following conclusions. In recent years, the higher courts of the Russian Federation have been more actively involved in the work on improving legislation in various ways. At the same time, in his annual address to the Federal Assembly on January 15, 2020, President of Russia Vladimir Putin outlined proposals to strengthen the role of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the legislative process. Since 2008, a trend has been outlined in Russia to strengthen the control powers of the parliament. One of the most important control powers of the Russian Federal Assembly, fixed in the Federal Law “On Parliamentary Control”, is, in the author’s opinion, the study of the application of laws (legal monitoring), the development of proposals for their improvement. However, along with the annual reports of the General Prosecutor of the Russian Federation at the Federation Council regarding effectiveness of legislation, it is seen necessary to oblige the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to present reports on judicial practice in the State Duma. The Supreme Court, realizing the constitutional function of summarizing the judicial practice of the courts of the Russian Federation and developing a uniform interpretation of the norms of the law, often quite independently eliminates legal gaps, sometimes developing new legal rules, which is not fully consistent with the doctrine of separation of powers in continental law systems. Such new rules are developed within the framework of not only procedural law, but also substantive (civil and criminal) law. In fairness, it is worth noting that this is not a modern trend, it is the Russian practice that has developed over centuries: the Senate of the Russian Empire, being the highest court, developed new legal rules long before the legislator. All this, of course, does not fully correspond to the role of the court in the continental legal system. However, the same Senate of the Russian Empire, in accordance with the decree of Emperor Alexander I, also had the right to inform the emperor of the need to improve legislation. In this regard, taking into account the historical parallel, the author comes to the conclusion that there is an urgent need for Russia to introduce the annual practice of the Supreme Court’s reports to the State Duma as part of the parliamentary legal monitoring of legal gaps and conflicts identified by the Supreme Court when summarizing judicial practice, with its proposals for improving legislation.
21
Latysheva, N. A., et E. A. Kolesov. « INFLUENCE OF ACTS OF HIGHER COURTS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ON THE ACTIVITY CONTENT OF STATE CIVIL SERVANTS – EMPLOYEES OF THE COURT APPARATUS ». Vestnik Povolzhskogo instituta upravleniya 22, no 2 (2022) : 31–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.22394/1682-2358-2022-2-31-39.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The impact of the judicial practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the content of the official activities of civil servants - employees of the apparatus of courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts is analyzed. As a result of the study, the orienting nature of the acts of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation was recorded, which is expressed in taking into account the legal positions contained in them during the court activities organizational support.
22
Mityukov, Mikhail. « The formation of the composition of the Constitutional Court of Russia in 1994–1995 (on the history of the issue and constitutional and legal aspects) ». Sravnitel noe konstitucionnoe obozrenie 30, no 4 (2021) : 155–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.21128/1812-7126-2021-4-155-171.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The modernisation of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in 1993–2000 was a result of the political and legal transformations of the 1990s, and the period of its procedural inaction for a year and a half was by no means time lost. It was used to prepare a new law for the Constitutional Court, which was largely prepared by the Court itself and accompanied by disputes with the State Legal Department of the Russian Federation’s president and various factions of the State Duma of the first assembly (LDPR, KPRF). Discussions were primarily held about the status of the Constitutional Court, such as the Court’s term in office, as well as its number of members, which greatly determined the effectiveness of the future “second” Constitutional Court of the 1993–1995 model and its internal structure. Filling the Constitutional Court’s six vacant seats as defined by the 1993 Constitution was not carried out by electing judges as in the previous legislation, but instead by appointing them to each of the chambers on the suggestion of the head of state. This predetermined an acute political struggle, primarily to establish the procedure for selecting candidates for judicial positions and determining the role of the president in each chamber of the Federal Assembly, the State Duma factions, legal institutions, and scientific communities of legal scholars. The independent “game” of each of these elements delayed the process of starting a functioning Constitutional Court for many months, but the democratic procedure for electing the courts’ heads allowed the issue to resolve without delay.
23
Ryabova, Elena. « The Constitutional Principle of Uniform Economic Area and Centralization of Public Finance in the Russian Federation : Analysis of the Russian Federation Constitutional Court’s Rulings ». Russian Law Journal 7, no 4 (15 décembre 2019) : 151–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2019-7-4-151-175.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The paper is devoted to the issue of centralization in public finance in Russia, and highlights one of the problems of interpretation of the Russian Constitution clauses. The Rulings of the Russian Federation Constitutional Court from the period 1997–2006 created legal grounds for the process of centralization and reduction of the regional powers regarding budgeting and taxation. But all arguments of the Court are debatable. Wherein, the centralization is justified by the constitutional principle of uniform economic area. The author argues that the Russian Constitution does not have clauses establishing the uniform budget and tax systems directly, and any model of intergovernmental relations might comply with the Russian Constitution. Uniformity of economic area does not imply uniformity in taxation and budgeting in the sense of sameness. Study of foreign practices shows different approaches to the understanding of uniformity in economy, and in taxation and budgeting. The contemporary Russian public finance law is formed under the influence of the Constitutional Court’s legal positions, and the process of centralization is still evolving. The Russian history of intergovernmental relations (1991–1997) shows another model of fiscal federalism – the decentralized federalism. Replacement of the fiscal federalism models is determined by the political considerations, not by constitutional requirements.
24
Starostina, Inga A., et Dmitriy G. Shustrov. « The Venice Commission and the Amendments to the 2020 Constitution of the Russian Federation : Opinion on the Draft of Amendments to the Constitution (Signed by the President of the Russian Federation on March 14, 2020) Concerning Enforcement of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the Russian Federation ». Constitutional and municipal law 10 (22 octobre 2020) : 24–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.18572/1812-3767-2020-10-24-28.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article reviews the Opinion of the Venice Commission on the Amendments to the 2020 Constitution of the Russian Federation concerning enforcement of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the Russian Federation, that constitute a contradiction to the obligations of Russia under the Convention, and a worry that the corresponding power of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation will be fixed in the Constitution.
25
Tsaliev, Aleksandr. « Judicial Power as Mandatory Attribute of a Constituent Entity of the Russian Federation ». Journal of Russian Law 4, no 4 (11 avril 2016) : 0. http://dx.doi.org/10.12737/18703.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article criticizes the idea of territorial federalism and on the example of judicial power the author demonstrates that attempts to reduce the constitutional and legal status of constituent entities of the Russian Federation to the level of administrative-territorial units only pursue the aim to divest them of state authority and property. In order to substantiate his point of view, the author analyzes the legal status of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and notes that judicial power is defined as their mandatory attribute. The author underlines social demand and necessity in founding and functioning of constitutional (charter) courts of constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The author criticizes the draft law which proposes to exclude justices of the peace from the courts of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and grant them the status of federal courts. The author describes German experience, where constitutional justice is carried out as part of the model of a two-level constitutional control — by the Constitutional Court of the Federation and bodies of specialized constitutional justice of constituent entities as its integral part.
26
Adelseitova, A. B., et A. A. Marieva. « ABOUT THE NECESSITY TO ESTABLISH A CONSTITUTIONAL COURT IN THE REPUBLIC OF CRIMEA ». Scientific Notes of V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University. Juridical science 7 (73), no 1 (2021) : 86–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.37279/2413-1733-2021-7-1-86-94.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article discusses the feasibility of establishing the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Crimea, analyzes the functioning of the judicial system in the Republic of Crimea, and concludes that it is necessary to create a body of constitutional control at the local level, which would be able to resolve current problems in a timely manner. The legislation regulating the creation and functioning of constitutional (statutory) courts in the subjects of the Russian Federation is analyzed, the activities of the constitutional (statutory) courts functioning today in the subjects of the Russian Federation are considered, the positive and negative sides are identified. The corresponding changes in the legislation necessary for the effective functioning of the system of constitutional courts in the subjects of the Russian Federation and in the Republic of Crimea are proposed.
27
Семеновский, Игорь, et Igor' Semenovskiy. « BASICS OF THE JUDICIAL CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW AND ENFORCEMENT IN RUSSIAN AND BRAZILIAN FEDERAL STRUCTURE ». Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law 3, no 3 (10 juillet 2017) : 43–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.12737/article_593fc343aac832.56581856.
Texte intégralRésumé :
This article is devoted to the comparative analysis of bases of legal regulation of the constitutional proceedings and enforcement in the Russian Federation and the Federative Republic of Brazil, whihc are the Member States of BRICS. The author provides a brief overview of the constitutional regulation of the judiciary and a comparative analysis of the models of judicial constitutional control in Brazil and Russia; examines in detail the legal regulation of judicial constitutional control of the two states, including a review of the constitutional regulation of judicial procedures used by the Federal Supreme Court of Brazil. The article contains a few examples of the application by the highest bodies of judicial constitutional control of the constitutional principles of the federal structure and analyzes some decisions of the Federal Supreme Court of Brazil and Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which have influenced the development of federalism in these states. On the basis of the study of the basic laws and other acts the author has made a conclusion about the similarities and differences in the legal regulation of judicial constitutional control in the sphere under consideration. So, he marked even more rigid interpretation of the Constitution by the Federal Supreme Court of Brazil, unlike the Russian practice, to the consideration of cases on conformity with Brasilian Constitution, state legislation and other normative-legal acts. For example, Brazilian and Russian federalism specifies and examines the constitutional principle of the Federal structure – the principle of symmetry. The conclusion is that the approach of the Russian legislator and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is more variable to regulate the issues and opportunities change the criteria of construction of models of organization of state power at the level of constituent entities of the Russian Federation with greater freedom in determining the internal structure then in Brazil.
28
Osetrov, S. A. « Constitutional amendment 2020 : from legal technique to legal meaning ». Juridical Journal of Samara University 7, no 1 (7 juillet 2021) : 51–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.18287/2542-047x-2021-7-1-51-56.
Texte intégralRésumé :
In the article, some features of legal technique of the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation On the improving regulation of certain issues of the organization and functioning of public authorities are observed. The author of the article pays attention to the difficulties of the legal understanding of some new provisions of the Constitution of Russia. In this context, the author concludes, that such constitutional provisions can be clarified by formation of legal positions by the Constitutional Court of Russia and by the adoption of amendments to the current legislation. Besides, in the article attention is paid to the need of rethinking of certain being formed legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Russia in the context of changing powers of public authorities. It is marked, that the forming of legal certainty regime is an urgent guarantee of the warning of the constitutional conflicts.
29
Zholobov, Yaroslav B. « The powers of presidents of general jurisdiction courts in the Russian Federation : Classification issues ». Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law 13, no 4 (2022) : 860–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2022.402.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Based on the practical experience of the retired court president, the article covers the issues of systematizing the powers of presidents of general jurisdiction courts in Russia through creating their classification. The material is presented in a problematic manner. The author identified four key issues related to the powers of presidents of general jurisdiction courts: the compliance of powers with new tasks and challenges that arise before the justice system; the binding nature of the powers of presidents of general jurisdiction courts; differences in the powers of presidents of general jurisdiction courts, despite the consolidation of the principle of unity of the system of general jurisdiction courts; distribution of powers between, on the one hand, the court president and, on the other hand, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, bodies of the judiciary and administrator — a professional manager, who is not a judge. It is shown that the powers of presidents of general jurisdiction courts are governed by various regulatory sources, which differ considerably in terms of their legal nature: the Constitution, federal constitutional laws, federal laws, presidential decrees, orders of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and decisions of the Council of Judges of the Russian Federation. The author considers the procedural powers divided into general powers and special procedural powers and the nonprocedural powers of presidents of general jurisdiction courts which are grouped into the powers related to personnel matters, the powers broken down by subjects and the powers categorized by the nature of actions. The article promotes the idea of interaction between the court president and judges following the principle of primus inter pares (first among equal) and the partnership model in the distribution of powers between the court president and the court administrator (professional manager), who is offered to take over all operational functions.
30
Grishnova, Elena Yevgenievna, Tatiana Viktorovn Larina, Andrey A. Soloviev, Yuri Viktorovich Stepanenko et Yuriy Nikolaevich Tuganov. « Constitutional justice in the Russian Federation ». LAPLAGE EM REVISTA 7, no 1 (4 janvier 2021) : 396–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.24115/s2446-6220202171750p.396-400.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article aims at studying the legal nature and essence of constitutional proceedings with due regard to historical experience and modern legislative approaches to the structure and system of constitutional justice in Russia. The main research method was the deductive method which allowed the authors to study the legal nature of the Constitutional Court and its role in the separation of powers in Russia. The article also used the inductive method, the method of systemic analysis, and comparative-legal and historical methods. To solve the research problem, it is necessary to consider the legal foundations and features of constitutional justice based on the amendments made to the Constitution of the Russian Federation on July 1, 2020. The article proves that the legal nature and the main goal of constitutional control remain unresolved issues. According to the authors, the most important condition for the creation of a strong judicial power is its high independence. Judicial errors can also cause distrust in the judiciary.
31
Константин, К. Л., et И. Р. Виталий. « Stages of Formation and Development of Judicial System of the Russian Federation : the First Stage - the 1990s ». ЖУРНАЛ ПРАВОВЫХ И ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКИХ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЙ, no 4 (15 décembre 2019) : 87–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.26163/gief.2019.83.32.014.
Texte intégralRésumé :
В статье рассматриваются основные вехи создания судебной системы Российской Федерации на первом этапе после провозглашения независимости и суверенитета России в 90-ые годы XX века. Раскрывается значение создания новой ветви судебной власти в России - системы государственных арбитражных судов и таких новых институтов, как: мировые судьи, Конституционный Суд РФ и конституционные/уставные суды субъектов Российской Федерации. Показывается дуалистичность судебной системы в России, взаимосвязь судебной системы с третейскими судами (арбитражами). Отмечается значение участия адвокатов при отправлении правосудия, подчеркивается последовательность совершенствования судопроизводства путем более четкого определения порядка рассмотрения жалоб на решения/приговоры судов первой инстанции, не вступившие и вступившие в законную силу; отмечается незавершенность судебной реформы на этом этапе, поскольку не произошло разграничение всех четырех судебных инстанций: первой, апелляционной, кассационной и надзорной. The article examines key milestones in the development of the judicial system of the Russian Federation since the independence and sovereignty of Russia in the 1990s. It stresses upon the importance of creation of a new branch of judiciary in Russia - the system of state arbitration courts and such new institutions as justice of the peace, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and constitutional/statutory courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The authors disclose the dual nature of the judicial system in Russia, the relationship of the judiciary with courts of arbitration (arbitration) with the importance of the participation of lawyers in the administration of justice being noted. Particular attention is given to the sequence of the development of procedure by more clear specifying the order of consideration of complaints on decisions/judgments of courts of the first instance entered and not yet entered into force. The article highlights the incompleteness of the judicial reform at this stage due to the lack of distinction of all four judicial instances: first, appellate, cassation and supervision.
32
Zbaratskiy, B. A. « Courts’ Participation in Lawmaking : Critical Analysis of the Theory and Practice of Legislative Initiative ». Actual Problems of Russian Law 15, no 8 (30 août 2020) : 55–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.117.8.055-065.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The paper explores the implementation of the power to initiate legislation by the highest judicial bodies of Russia—the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The author focuses on specific legislative initiatives of the higher judiciary and provides examples of judicial intrusion into the field of activities of other branches of power. The author highlights the need for additional doctrinal elaboration of draft laws initiated on behalf of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The paper analyzes the reasons for the non-application of the power to initiate legislation by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in particular: involvement in political life, the principle “nobody can be a judge in their own case,” authority impairment, judges’ opinion, the use of legal standings, complexity of the mechanisms. The author argues that the RF Constitutional Court participation in political activities is mediated. The conclusion is made about the necessity of using the structural-system method of scientific cognition in the study of the reasons for non-application of the institute of legislative initiative. The author substantiates the necessity for the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to apply the power to initiate legislation in exceptional cases, in cases of impossibility of using other forms of participation in law-making.
33
Sychev, Semen. « Law-Making and Law Enforcement of Civil Rights and Freedoms : Constitutional and Legal Aspects ». Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. Series : Humanities and Social Sciences 2022, no 1 (21 février 2022) : 64–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.21603/2542-1840-2022-6-1-64-74.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The author raises the question of improving the activities of public authorities that comply with the orders of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The research featured various issues related to the implementation of constitutional justice and their possible solutions. The study revealed the following needs: 1) to adjust the Federal Constitutional Law on the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to time-limits for State Duma draft laws; 2) to return the extraordinary adoption of bills in pursuance of decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation; 3) to develop a scheme for the practical enforcement of judicial acts; 4) to expand the functions of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation and its regional structural divisions by including normative legal acts of the subjects of the Russian Federation and acts of their constitutional and judicial review in the sphere of legal monitoring; 5) to develop a special system for informing about decisions taken by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to verify the laws of the subjects of the Russian Federation; 6) to improve criteria and procedures for recognizing regional normative legal acts as similar to provisions of law subjected to constitutional normative control; 7) to provide the Prosecutor's Office with powers to supervise the execution of decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation; 8) to amend the Constitution of the Russian Federation and indicate the authority of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to determine the executive body; 9) to change the regulatory and legal regulation aimed at expanding the mandatory powers of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation; 10) to specify the term of political activity with its current broad interpretation. The article also contains some recommendations aimed at improving the legislative regulation in the sphere of protection of civil rights and freedoms in modern Russia.
34
Kuzmin, S. E. « Sources of Legal Regulation of Mergers, Acquisitions, Consolidations, Joint Stock Companies in Russia and Corporations in the United States ». MGIMO Review of International Relations, no 1(40) (28 février 2015) : 209–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2015-1-40-209-214.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article outlines general characteristics of the sources of law, regulating relations associated with mergers, consolidations, acquisitions of joint stock companies in Russia and corporations in the United States respectively in the Russian legislation and the legislation of the United States and individual States. Both in Russia and in the USA there is a constitutional separation of powers between the Federal authorities and the Subjects of the Federation/States respectively. In both countries legal regulation of mergers and acquisitions of corporations is carried out first of all by a number of laws. These laws fall into three main groups: securities laws, antitrust (competition) laws and civil and joint-stock legislation in Russia and corporate laws in the US. All the three groups are federal laws in Russia, while in the US the first two are federal too, but the last one is state laws. It is necessary to highlight the important role of judicial decisions in the United States on legal regulation of mergers, acquisitions, takeovers in comparison with Russia, which is due to the differences in the legal systems of the states in question. However, although Russia is not a state of case law, such legal acts as the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Commercial Court will undoubtedly have an impact on law enforcement practice and, consequently, on the regulation of relevant relations. Of particular importance are the findings of the Constitutional Court, whose decisions may cancel acts or their separate provisions provided they are recognized as unconstitutional. Such acts are repealed. Decisions of courts and other bodies based on acts or their separate provisions, recognized by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation unconstitutional, are not subject to execution and shall be revised in accordance with the Federal law. The US case law implies existence of a hierarchy of precedents according to which decisions adopted by the higher courts are binding for cases adjudicated in lower courts. Judicial decisions have a major impact on the regulation of mergers and acquisitions of corporations, in particular, the state corporate Laws. The article analyses the main similarities and differences of sources of legal regulation of mergers, consolidations, acquisitions of joint stock companies in Russia and corporations in the United States.
35
Fedorova, T. V. « Review of the Practice of Consideration of Cases of Administrative Offenses under Article 6.1.1 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation ». Rossijskoe pravosudie 5 (17 avril 2020) : 60–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.37399/issn2072-909x.2020.5.60-75.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The review examines the procedure for judges of courts of General jurisdiction in resolving cases of administrative offenses under article 6.1.1 of the administrative Code of the Russian Federation, and analyzes the practice of courts in various regions of the Russian Federation. The paper offers solutions to controversial issues of judicial practice, considers the positions of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the circumstances to be clarified in the case of an administrative offense under article 6.1.1 of the administrative Code of the Russian Federation.
36
Kostyukov, A. « Quarter-century anniversary of the Russian Constitution ». Law Enforcement Review 2, no 3 (25 décembre 2018) : 5–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.24147/2542-1514.2018.2(3).5-18.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The subject of the paper is the constitutional development of Russia till 1990s up to 2018.The purpose of the paper is to identify the main trends in development of Russian consti-tutional legislation.The methodology of the research includes the formal legal analysis of Russian federal laws and their comparison with the decisions of Russian Constitutional Court.The main results and scope of their application. The author gives the legal assessment to main novelties in Russian constitutional legislation: an increase of the term of office of the President of the Russian Federation and the State Duma of the Russian Federation, the in-troduction of the annual reports by the Government of the Russian Federation to the State Duma of the Russian Federation on the results of their activities, the merger of the Supreme and Supreme Arbitration Courts of the Russian Federation, the strengthening of the posi-tions of the President of the Russian Federation when appointing prosecutors, judges, members of the Federation Council, officials of subjects of the Russian Federation, central-ization of local self-government. The identified trends may be used in future research of Russian constitutional legal order.The author comes to the conclusion that there is a need for strong state power in the con-ditions of reforming economic, social and state-legal institutions in Russia. The movement towards centralization and strengthening of the power vertical is a historically necessary and justified measure. It will be possible to implement decentralization and reduction of the regulatory functions of the state after the successful modernization of economic and social state and legal institutions.
37
Evdokimov, Vyacheslav, et Alexey Ushakov. « The Transformation of the Constitutional Control Institute in the Political and Legal Space of Russia ». Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Serija 4. Istorija. Regionovedenie. Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija, no 3 (juillet 2019) : 158–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2019.3.14.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Introduction. The article presents the author’s interpretation of the process of constitutional control institutionalization in Russia. The paper highlights the dominant factors and main vectors of the constitutional control transformation in the context of modernizing the political and legal systems of the Russian Federation. The authors pay a particular attention to the specifics of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation functioning in the current system of separation of powers and upholding the sovereignty of the Russian state in the context of contradictory modern processes of political globalization. Methodology and methods. The theoretical and methodological base of the work includes theses of Russian and foreign scientistsconstitutionalists A. Medushevskiy, V.E. Chirkin, L. Fridman, F. Luscher. The theories of political modernization and globalization (A.Yu. Melvil, S. Lantsov, S. Eisenstadt, S. Huntington, I. Wallerstein, Z. Bauman) were used to analyze the functional specificity of constitutional control institute activities in the conditions of forming a global and regional “risk society”, and a new Russian state after the Soviet Union collapse. The empirical base of the study was the following: the Constitution of the Russian Federation; Constitutional and Federal laws of the Russian Federation, other legal documents regulating the activities of state authorities and administration; periodical materials; research results of the leading sociological centers – Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM), Levada-Center. Analysis. The stages of forming the constitutional control institution and its transformation should be considered in the context of modernizing the Russian state, its political and legal systems. At the same time, the inconsistency of the statist model of political modernization in Russia has a significant impact on modern institutional reinforcement and the practice of implementing the principle of separation of powers, including the political and legal status of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The escalation of internal and external risks and threats to the Russian society and state objectively defines a number of restrictions to the comprehensive disclosure of the constitutional justice political potential. Discussion. The main discussion dominants in analysing factors and directions of the constitutional control institute transformation in modern Russia are the following: the degree of rootedness of constitutionalism principles and constitutional values in the public consciousness of Russian citizens, and first of all among the ruling elite; the effectiveness of implementing constitutional control in comparison with other types of control – public, civil, parliamentary, etc.; the indicators of performance of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to strengthen Russia as a legal, democratic state while ensuring stable and safe development of the national society. Results. The article highlights the main stages of the constitutional control institutionalization in the national history. The interrelation of modernization transformations of Russian society and the state with formation and functioning of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is traced. The paper presents the dominant vectors of the constitutional control institute transformation in the Russian political and legal space, taking into account real and potential risks and threats in the personality-society-state system.
38
Алимов, Эмиль, et Emil Alimov. « Certain Tendencies of the Constitutional-Legal Regulation of Party Formation in the Russian Federation ». Journal of Russian Law 4, no 2 (5 février 2016) : 0. http://dx.doi.org/10.12737/17643.
Texte intégralRésumé :
This article is devoted to the study of certain tendencies of the political parties constitutional regulation in the Russian Federation. With the aid of analysis of the political parties functioning legislation, the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights the author demonstrates the dynamics of the Russian legislation in the field of the party building, as well as the different approaches used in these courts in the interpretation of some restrictive regulation in context of the topic. It is noted that political parties are an important segment of modern democracy and they play an important part not only in the electoral process, but also in the deputy-voter mutual relationship; also political parties can affect certain public authorities. Accordingly showing up general rules of the legislation development in this area and their comparative legal analysis would not only clearly define the real situation of the political parties in Russia and reveal the existing problems, but also indicate a vector for the further development of the constitutional regulations in this field.
39
Dolidze, Timur Yu. « On the Legal Position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on Criteria of “Professional” Legal Assistance in Litigation ». Russian judge 11 (19 novembre 2020) : 32–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.18572/1812-3791-2020-11-32-37.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is devoted to a critical analysis of the legal position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, taken by him in the case of verifying the constitutionality of part four of Article 47 of the RSFSR Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with complaints by citizens B.V. Antipov, R.L. Gitis and S.V. Abramov (issued in 1997) in relation to the situation in modern Russia and the current procedural law. Using this methodology allows us to formulate a number of generalizations and conclusions, actualizing the discussion of 1997 today. Monopolization by the advocacy of the legal services market for the protection of criminal suspects and defendants has developed in Soviet Russia and, ultimately, has become established in modern society. This happened contrary to the intentions of the developers of the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation at the behest of the legislator, and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation did not dare to block this will with reference to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. One of the reasons for this state of the legal system is the uncertainty of the wording of Art. 48 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which in fact provided the legislator with excessively wide discretion.
40
Dzhamil’, Ella Z. « LAW-REGULATING POTENTIAL OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION NO. 44-П AS OF DECEMBER 6, 2018 ». Vestnik of Kostroma State University, no 1 (2020) : 212–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.34216/1998-0817-2020-26-1-212-216.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Every decision of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation attracts the closest attention of the legal community, as it affects a wide range of public relations and the development of law in general. There is therefore no surprise about the interest in the Decision of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, on the 6th of December, 2018, No. 44-П adopted on business about check of constitutionality of the Law of the Republic of Ingushetia «On approval of the Agreement on the establishment of the border between the Republic of Ingushetia and the Chechen Republic» and the agreement on the establishment of the border between the Republic of Ingushetia and the Chechen Republic in connection with the request of the Head of Ingushetia, which marks another stage in the development of federalism in Russia. The conclusions formulated in this judgement clarify the competence of the Federation Council in terms of establishing the boundaries of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, which explains the issues related to the referendum and to identifi cation of the views of the population of the respective municipalities when such a demarcation takes place, and defi nition of the limits of the discretionary powers of the constitutional (Charter) courts of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, in terms of blocking laws of the subjects. At the same time, many of the legal positions expressed by the Court appear to be at least controversial and need adequate refl ection.
41
Клишас, Андрей, et Andrey Klishas. « CONSTITUTIONAL REFORMS AT THE PRESENT STAGE OF LEGAL DEVELOPMENT ». Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law 2, no 1 (16 mars 2016) : 0. http://dx.doi.org/10.12737/18197.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article reveals the essence and importance of constitutional reforms at the present stage of legal development of Russia. According to the author, the success of constitutional reform depends on the choice of adequate implementation mechanisms, taking into account possible legal risks. In this regard, the article examines the main mechanisms and directions of constitutionallegal development and reformation. Among them the author emphasizes the active use of the interpretation of the Constitution that allows to adequately respond to public demands for constitutional reform, to further improve domestic remedies, and the establishment of effective cooperation mechanisms for the use of domestic remedies of protection of the rights and freedoms of man and subsidiary institutions for the protection of rights and freedoms. Accordingly, the important areas of constitutional and legal development are the implementation of judgments of international courts on the territory of the Russian Federation, primarily the European Court of Human Rights. The author substantiates the idea that the purpose of constitutional reforms is to increase the security of fundamental rights.
42
Adashkin, D. A. « The Essence and Social Functions of the Judiciary in Modern Russia ». Actual Problems of Russian Law 16, no 8 (4 septembre 2021) : 42–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2021.129.8.042-051.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The paper is devoted to the analysis of the correlation between the concept, essence and social functions of the judiciary of the Russian Federation. The author examines the main features of the dominant approaches in the domestic legal doctrine to the concept of the judicial power as a type of social power, a form of exercising state power and organizationally and procedurally formalized coercion with its inherent legal properties. Based on the analysis of theoretical and legal sources, to develop the concept of the judiciary, the author determines its essence as: a form of administration of social processes by resolving social conflicts; specific activities of state bodies through the constitutional, civil, administrative and criminal proceedings (justice) established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation; methods of using specific means of coercion on behalf of the state. In order to specify the concept and essence of the judiciary in Russia, the author examines its functions of ensuring constitutional law and order, legal protection, restoring violated rights, imposing legal responsibility on the offender, legal education, raising legal awareness and respect for the rights of citizens. The author makes a number of proposals aimed to improve the implementation of these functions in terms of respect for the law and the court, including by improving the activities of the courts themselves, expanding the openness and accessibility of certain judicial information through the National Automated Sistem "Justice" (GAS) of the Russian Federation and social networks.
43
Anichkin, Eugene. « Anomalies in the Constitutional and Legal Space of Modern Russia ». Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. Series : Humanities and Social Sciences 2022, no 1 (21 février 2022) : 42–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.21603/2542-1840-2022-6-1-42-48.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article examines constitutional and legal anomalies that prevent effective legal regulation of social relations and sustainable legal development in modern Russia. The research featured such types of anomalies as the dualism of nominal constitutional law and reality, interpretive and law enforcement deviations from the formal constitutional legal norm, normative contradictions, gaps, and other formal legal defects of certain sources and norms of constitutional law. The study was based on historical, comparative, systemic-structural, and formal-legal methods of studying the constitutional and legal doctrine, as well as the current legislation and law enforcement practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Constitutional and legal anomalies appeared to be a complex and controversial issue of great practical relevance that requires further research. Constitutional and legal anomalies proved to have a close connection with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, a special sphere of action, and specific content. They produce a negative effect on the entire legal system of Russia. New measures will prevent and eliminate anomalies, thus ensuring sustainable legal development.
44
Brezhnev, O. V. « Mandatory judicial constitutional review in Russia : problems of the theory and practice ». Actual Problems of Russian Law, no 3 (4 mai 2019) : 67–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2019.100.3.067-074.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The paper shows the specificity of compulsory judicial constitutional review, reveals its role in the mechanism of legal protection of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. This institution is intended to guarantee constitutionality in the exercise of certain powers of the supreme state authorities, being an integral part of the legal composition of a decision made by public authorities that has constitutional significance (the application of measures of responsibility of public authorities, acceptance of a new constituent entity of the Russian Federation, convening of a referendum of the Russian Federation). In some cases, mandatory constitutional review is used as a means of ensuring constitutional legality of judicial law enforcement. The paper analyzes the features of compulsory judicial constitutional review: the emergence of a constitutional law dispute in this case is not always a prerequisite for appeal to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation; the need for such appeal is provided for by mandatory legislation or follows from the legal stance of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation; some principles of constitutional proceedings in relation to the order of consideration of such cases demonstarte their regulatory impact in a special way.
45
Abramova, Marianna. « Constitutional Justice of Russia within the judicial landscape of contemporary Europe ». Revista Derecho del Estado, no 40 (13 décembre 2017) : 21–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.18601/01229893.n40.02.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The Russian Federation became a member of the Council of Europe in 1996. This step determined the development of Russia’s judicial system for the coming several decades and made it possible for Russia’s national system of law to integrate into judicial landscape of Europe, thereby enabling Russia to uphold democratic values. The emergence of new legislation affected all branches of Russia’s system of law. But the experience of the two decades has demonstrated that such modernization can be effective only by way of dialogue rather than by simple copying and implementing international rules. An important role in this process was played by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (RF) that was founded in 1991. The paper reviews the role it played in the 1993 Constitutional crisis, examines the Court’s structure and powers, and also analyzes the juridical nature of its decisions. The Author analyzes the collisions between decisions handed down by the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitution of Russia from the point of view of the stand taken by the Constitutional Court of the RF. In the¿ end, the Author arrives at the conclusion that there is a need for a dialogue among European and national systems of justice with the help of filtration mechanisms and multilevel constitutionalism.
46
Khramova, Tatiana M. « History of court and justice in Russia : in 9 vols / res. eds. V.V. Ershov, V.M. Syrykh. Vol. 9. History of constitutional justice in Russia / V.A. Kryazhkov, M.A. Mityukov ». Gosudarstvo i pravo, no 9 (2022) : 191. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/s102694520022212-4.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The review discusses a recent publication dedicated to the history of the Russian Constitution Court, its formation and evolution. The book is one-of-a-kind in the sense that it meticulously reveals the stages of transformation of constitutional justice in Russia. The authors present a rich historical and legal material – from the Orders of Catherine II, inspired by the ideas of the Enlightenment, until the aftermath of the constitutional reform 2020 – in a lively and thrilling manner. A balanced academic approach has enabled the authors to demonstrate the whole variety of viewpoints that exist in the literature regarding various aspects of the formation, organization and performance of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Overall, the book shows the specific features of the Russian model of constitutional justice, its role in the legal order and the peculiarities of its interaction with other actors. The book raises questions regarding the meaning and consequences of numerous transformations of the system of constitutional review that have taken place in Russia. Particularly, it identifies the risks associated with the large-scale reform of 2020, and highlights the challenges that the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is facing in the aftermath of the latest transformation.
47
Kleandrov, Mikhail I. « The future International Court of Human Rights with the participation of Russia : options for possibilities ». Gosudarstvo i pravo, no 1 (2023) : 12. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/s102694520024107-8.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article raises and examines the problem of the possibility of Russia’s participation in one of the future regional international human rights courts, which has matured after the termination of the Russian Federation's membership in the European Court of Human Rights. The author considers the following options: the Court of Human Rights in the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Court of Human Rights of the Union State of Belarus – Russia, the Asian Court of Human Rights (on the legal platform of the Association of Asian Constitutional Courts and Equivalent Institutions), etc. Being sure that Russia cannot be a member of two or more international human rights courts at the same time, the author justifies the need for States intending to create an International Human Rights Court to develop and adopt an appropriate international human rights act. Only by focusing and relying on this act, the International Court of Human Rights will be able to determine whether the rights of a person who has applied to the Court have been violated and make an appropriate ruling.
48
Podmarеv, Alexander A. « Unrestricted human rights and freedoms : Legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Russia (1995–2022) ». Izvestiya of Saratov University. Economics. Management. Law 22, no 4 (23 novembre 2022) : 449–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.18500/1994-2540-2022-22-4-449-455.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Introduction. The Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 in several articles provides for the right of the state to restrict the rights and freedoms of man and citizen in order to achieve certain goals. Part 3 of Article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation establishes the general conditions for the restriction of all rights and freedoms of the individual. However, this constitutional norm does not give an answer to the question of whether there are rights and freedoms of an individual that cannot be limited. Theoretical analysis. Part 3 of Article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation is a kind of “general part” of the institution of restrictions on the rights and freedoms of the individual; and in this “general part” there are no exceptions in the form of unrestricted rights and freedoms. In the scientific literature, they often refer to part 3 of article 56 when they state the existence of unrestricted rights and freedoms. In our opinion, Article 56 is of a special nature - it establishes the foundations of the state of emergency, including the rules for restricting rights and freedoms in a state of emergency. However, unlimited rights and freedoms of the individual exist – their list was formed by the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Empirical analysis. Since 1995, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in more than 40 decisions, as well as in definitions, has substantiated the presence of certain unrestricted human rights and freedoms in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The possibility of singling out this group of rights and freedoms is explained mainly by the fact that these human rights and freedoms cannot conflict with the constitutional goals of restricting rights and freedoms. Results. It is concluded that the legal positions formed by the Constitutional Court of Russia regarding the existence of unrestricted human rights and freedoms have practical consequences, primarily for the federal legislator, since they establish the framework for his / her law-making activities. These positions are the basis for developing federal laws and the basis for correcting existing federal laws. They can also be criteria for determining the constitutionality of federal laws in the exercise of preliminary or subsequent constitutional review.
49
Aleksandrova, M. A. « Application of Legal Stances of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation ». Actual Problems of Russian Law, no 7 (1 juillet 2018) : 43–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2018.92.7.043-049.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is devoted to the difficulties the law enforcers face with when enforcing legal determinations of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. This problem is particularly actualized in cases when fallacies can be found in the definitions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and they contradict formal and legal interpretation of the challenged rules of law given by the courts when making decisions: denying to accept a petition for consideration, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in its legal stance, in fact, sets out the answer on the merits of the petition. At the same time, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is not bound by its own legal determinations, which entails the existence of decisions with different legal stances on the same subject matter in the Constitutional Court jurisprudence. The author considers the examples taken from criminal procedural law and penal law. The article provides for the ways of overcoming the problem of non-enforcement of legal determinations of the RF Constitutional Court and its decisions as a whole.
50
Bol'shakova, Valentina Mikhailovna. « Genesis of establishment and development of the judicial system of the Russian Federation in the late XX – early XXI centuries : institutional and normative characteristics ». Право и политика, no 3 (mars 2021) : 26–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0706.2021.3.35190.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The subject of this research is the evolution of the structure of judicial system of the Russian Federation in the late XX – early XXI centuries. Description is given to the changes undergone by the Russian judicial system after dissolution of the Soviet Union. The author follows the dynamics of the normative legal changes that regulate judicial proceedings, as well as reveals the institutional framework of the modern structure of judicial system of the Russian Federation. The article illustrates the institutional and normative changes within the structure of judicial system of the Russian Federation in the late XX – early XXI centuries based on application of the comparative-legal and systemic methods of research. The novelty and the main conclusions lie in the following: it is established that the Russian Federation has issued the normative legal acts that contribute to the strengthening and unification of the Russian judicial system, uniformity of social guarantees and compensations set for judges. Currently, the judicial system of the Russian Federation is founded on the principle of combining administrative-territorial and district organization. It is determined that the judicial system of the Russian Federation consists of 1) the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation; 2) the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation; 3) federal courts of general jurisdiction; 4) arbitration courts; 5) magistrates’ courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. It is noted that since January 1, 2023, the Constitutional (statutory) courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation will be abolished.