D. A. PASHENTSEV
leading research fellow of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, doctor of legal sciences, professor
34, Bolshaya Cheremushkinskaya st., Moscow, Russia, 117218
In modern conditions digitalization has an impact on all spheres of social relations, including lawmaking. The introduction of digital technologies is changing the process of law-making, as a result of which its traditional mechanisms are not effective enough. Russian legislative tradition as a historically established set of principles and mechanisms of legislative activity, which reflects the values of society faced with the challenge of digitalization, is undergoing major changes.
The purpose of the study is to analyze the impact of digitalization on the Russian legislative tradition and identify promising areas for its further development.
The diversity of the impact of digitalization on the social relations regulated by law implies the use of a wide range of scientific methods, both legal (formal-legal, historical-comparative) and sociological. A special role is played by the application of the methodology of anthropocentrism, with the help of which the role of the subject of legislative activity as a carrier of legislative tradition is studied.
The result of the study was justification of main directions of the impact of digitalization on the legislative tradition. Tendencies of development of law-making tradition are revealed: wide introduction in law-making process of the digital technologies capable not only to change the scheme of this process, but also to optimize system of the current legislation; more active use in law-making activity of legal forecasting and legal experiment that in general is atypical for domestic tradition, including, carried out with use of digital technologies; adding to the axiological component of legislative activity new, previously unknown values related to digital rights as a new generation of human rights; increasing influence of non-state structures, including network communities, on the process of law-making, starting from the stage of legislative initiative and ending with the process of discussion of adopted legislative acts and the results of application of the current legislation.
Keywords: digitalization, digital technologies, legislative tradition, legal tradition, subject of law.
Alekseeva I. Yu. Informatsionnye tekhnologii i filosofskoe znanie [Information technology and philosophical knowledge]. Aktualnye problemy filosofii nauki, 2007, pp. 162—172.
Bell D. The Coming of Post-Industrial Society. A Venture of Social Forcasting. New York, 1973.
Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie i zakon. Obzor [Public administration and law. Review]. Vsemirnyy bank. 2017. 42 p.
Khabrieva T. Y. Pravo pered vyzovami tsifrovoy realnosti [Law Facing the Challenges of Digital Reality]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2018, no. 9, pp. 5—16.
Khabrieva T. Y., Chernogor N. N. Pravo v usloviyakh tsifrovoy realnosti [The Law in the Conditions of Digital Reality]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2018, no. 1, pp. 85—102.
Leyst O. E. Sushchnost prava. Problemy teorii i filosofii prava [The essence of the law. Problems of theory and philosophy of law]. Moscow, 2008. 246 p.
Malikova N. R. Sotsialnoe izmerenie globalizatsii [The Social Dimention of Globalization]. Moscow, 2012. 294 p.
Nersesyants V. S. Filosofiya prava: libertarno-yuridicheskaya kontseptsiya [Philosophy of law: liberal legal concept]. Voprosy filosofii, 2002, no. 3, pp. 3—15.
Pashentsev D. A. Rossiyskaya zakonotvorcheskaya traditsiya: ontologiya protsessa [Russian Legislative Tradition: Ontology of the Process]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2018, no. 8, pp. 5—13.
Pozner R. Rubezhi teorii prava [Frontiers of Legal Theory]. Moscow, 2017. 480 p.
Sotsiokulturnaya antropologiya prava [Socio-cultural anthropology of law]. Ed. by N. A. Isaev, I. L. Chestnov. St. Petersburg, 2014. 902 p.
Stepin V. S. Teoreticheskoe znanie [Theoretical knowledge]. Moscow, 2000. 744 p.
Vlasenko N. A. Razumnost i opredelennost v pravovom regulirovanii [Reasonableness and certainty of the legal regulation]. Moscow, 2014. 157 p.
Zorkin V. D. Pravo v tsifrovom mire. Razmyshlenie na polyakh Peterburgskogo mezhdunarodnogo yuridicheskogo foruma [Law in the digital world. Reflection on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg international legal forum]. Available at: https://rg.ru/2018/05/29/zorkinzadacha-gosudarstva-priznavat-i-zashchishchat-cifrovye-prava-grazhdan.html.
S. V. MALYUGIN
associate professor of the Department of theory of state and law of the Ural State Law University, candidate of legal sciences
21, Komsomolskaya st., Yekaterinburg, Russia, 620137
The subjective scope of the article is aimed at an attempt to describe a widespread, but little studied phenomenon of the gist of the rule of law in the system of legal scientific knowledge by referring to legal dogma. The purpose of the article is to highlight the specific legal causes, the main characteristics and the concept of the category of meaning of the rule of law.
The philosophical methodological basis of research is the dialectical-materialistic method and philosophical attitude, which provides the possibility of an objective cognition of the essence of the subject of research by referring to its form. In the scientific article the following metascientific means of cognition were used: analysis and synthesis, abstraction, comparative method, method of ascent from abstract to concrete and from concrete to abstract, system-structural approach to the phenomenon under study. A formal legal method and a method of comparative jurisprudence represent a special legal methodology for research.
The main results of the article are the determinants, signs and concept of the meaning of the rule of law highlighted as a result of treatment in legal dogma. The article states that the phenomenon of the meaning of the rule of law is complex, ambiguous, with multiple factors of causality. By referring to the special legal literature and law enforcement practice in the study describes in detail the main characteristics of the meaning of the rule of law. The article contains specific recommendations related to identifying the meaning of the rule of law, which can be used in relation to various types of legal activity and serve as methodological foundations in analytical jurisprudence. The study concludes that the meaning of the rule of law is an externally determined through the carriers (sources) of legal information, established by the results of its interpretation, and a meaningful goal generally understood in the system of legal regulation in the field of one type of social relation expressed by the government.
Keywords: rule of law, gist of the rule of law, legal prescription, the meaning of law, the purpose of legal regulation, the idea of the rule of law, the appointment of a rule of law, the interpretation of law, legal qualifications.
Aleksandrov G. Aristotel. Filosofskie i sotsialno-politicheskie vzglyady [Aristotle: (Philosophical and Socio-Political Views)]. Moscow, 1940. 273 p.
Alekseev S. S. Teoriya gosudarstva i prava [Theory of State and Law]. Ed. by S. S. Alekseev. Moscow, 1998. 570 p.
Azarova Ye. G., Belyaeva O. A., Borzilo Ye. Yu. et al. Kommentariy praktiki rassmotreniya ekonomicheskikh sporov (sudebno-arbitrazhnoy praktiki) [Commentary on the practice of dealing with economic disputes (judicial arbitration practice)]. Ed. by V. F. Yakovlev. Moscow, 2017. Iss. 23. 184 p.
Bakardzhiev Ya. V. Yuridicheskaya politika gosudarstva: ponyatie, osnovnye kharakteristiki, faktory formirovaniya i napravleniya realizatsii [Legal policy of the state: the concept, basic characteristics, factors of formation and directions of implementation]. Cand. diss. Yekaterinburg, 2006. 217 p.
Barinov E. E., Ovchinnikov A. I. Tolkovanie prava v deyatelnosti Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii [The interpretation of the law in the activities of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation]. Rostov-on-Don, 2004. 208 p.
Bazhenova T. M. Istochniki prava i istochniki poznaniya prava [Sources of law and sources of knowledge of law]: obzor dokladov i soobshcheniy kruglogo stola (21—22 iyunya 2013 goda, UrGYuA, Yekaterinburg). Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, 2013, no. 5, pp. 56—62.
Bevzenko R. S., Zaynullin S. B., Kurskova O. N. et al. Nauchno-prakticheskiy kommentariy k Federalnomu zakonu “O treteyskikh sudakh v Rossiyskoy Federatsii” s obzorom sudebnoarbitrazhnoy praktiki (postateynyy) [Scientific and practical commentary to the Federal Law “On Arbitration Courts in the Russian Federation” with a review of judicial arbitration practice (article by article)]. Ed. by A. N. Lysenko, A. A. Khoroshev. Moscow, 2011. 376 p.
Cherdantsev A. F. Logiko-yazykovye fenomeny v yurisprudentsii [Logic-linguistic phenomena in jurisprudence]. Moscow, 2012. 320 p.
Cherdantsev A. F. Tolkovanie sovetskogo prava [Interpretation of Soviet law]. Moscow, 1979. 168 p.
Cherdantsev A. F. Tolkovanie prava i dogovora [Interpretation of law and contract]. Moscow, 2003. 381 p.
Demidova I. A. Kollizii v prave: teoreticheskiy aspekt [Collisions in law: theoretical aspect]. Vesnіk Grodzenskaga dzyarzhaўnaga ўnіversіteta іmya Yankі Kupaly. Seryya 4. Pravaznaўstva, pp. 12—18.
Engels F. Dialektika prirody [Dialectic of Nature]. In Marks K., Engels F. Sochineniya. Vol. 20. 359 p.
Gavrilova Yu. A. Pravoprimenitelnaya praktika: osobennosti smysloobrazovaniya [Law-Enforcement Practice: Specifics of Meaning-Making]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2018, no. 5, pp. 46—55.
Gegel G. V. Entsiklopediya filosofskikh nauk [Encyclopedia of Philosophy]. Vol. 1. 1861. 406 c.
Ivanovskiy V. V. Voprosy gosudarstvovedeniya, sotsiologii i politiki [Questions of state studies, sociology and politics]. Kazan, 1889. 400 p.
Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Criticism of pure reason]. St. Petersburg, 1867. 715 p.
Khabrieva T. Y., Lazarev V. V., Gabov A. V. et al. Sudebnaya praktika v sovremennoy pravovoy sisteme Rossii [Judicial practice in the modern legal system of Russia]. Ed. by T. Y. Khabrieva, V. V. Lazarev. Moscow, 2017. 432 p.
Khafizov D. Kh. Ponyatie pravointerpretatsionnoy deyatelnosti i ee znachenie [Legal Interpretative Activity and Problems of Its Improvement]. NovaUm.Ru, 2018, no. 11, pp. 8—14.
Khodukin D. V. Funktsionalnaya rol yuridicheskikh predpisaniy v mekhanizme pravovogo regulirovaniya obshchestvennykh otnosheniy [Functional role of legal instructions in mechanism of legal regulation of public relations]. Gosudarstvennaya vlast i mestnoe samoupravlenie, 2017, no. 10, pp. 59—64.
Kont O. Kurs polozhitelnoy filosofii [The course of positive philosophy]. Vol. 2. Part 2. 1900. 176 p.
Korkunov N. M. Ocherk teorii administrativnoy yustitsii [Sketch of the theory of administrative justice]. St. Petersburg, 1898. 218 p.
Kuchin M. V. Yuridicheskaya priroda pravovoy normy: integrativnyy podkhod [Legal Nature of a Legal Norm: Integrative Approach]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2017, no. 12, pp. 31—42.
Lazarev V. V. Pravopolozheniya: ponyatie, proiskhozhdenie i rol v mekhanizme yuridicheskogo vozdeystviya [Legal provisions: concept, origin and role in the mechanism of legal influence]. Pravovedenie, 1976, no. 6, pp. 7—15.
Livshits R. Z. Teoriya prava [Theory of law]. Moscow, 2001. 224 p.
Lunacharskiy A. V. Spinoza. 1905.
Malinova I. P. Yuridicheskaya germenevtika i pravoponimanie [Legal hermeneutics and legal thinking]. Yekaterinburg, 1999. 100 p.
Marks K., Engels F., Lenin V. I. O dialekticheskom i istoricheskom materializme [About dialectical and historical materialism]. Moscow, 1984. 636 p.
Matuzov N. I., Malko A. V. Teoriya gosudarstva i prava [Theory of State and Law]. Moscow, 2002. 776 p.
Ozhegov S. I. Slovar russkogo yazyka [Russian dictionary]. Ed. by L. I. Skvortsov. Moscow, 2012.
Petrova Ye. A. Osnovnye podkhody k strukture normy prava v razlichnykh pravovykh traditsiyakh [The main approaches to the structure of the rule of law in different legal traditions]. Lex Russica, 2015, no. 1, pp. 84—95.
Pigolkin A. S. et al. Teoriya gosudarstva i prava [Theory of State and Law]. Ed. by A. S. Pigolkin. Moscow, 2005. 613 p.
Polyakov A. V. Kommunikativnaya kontseptsiya prava: problemy genezisa i teoretikopravovogo obosnovaniya [The communicative concept of law (genesis and theoretical and legal justification)]. Dr. diss. St. Petersburg, 2002. 94 p.
Polyakov A. V. Obshchaya teoriya prava [General theory of law]. St. Petersburg, 2001. 642 p.
Polyakov A. V. Peterburgskaya shkola filosofii prava i zadachi sovremennogo pravovedeniya [Petersburg School of Philosophy of Law and the Tasks of Modern Jurisprudence]. Pravovedenie, 2000, no. 2, pp. 4—23.
Presnyakov M. V. Konstitutsionnaya aksiologiya: k voprosu o sushchnosti konstitutsionnykh tsennostey [Constitutional axiology: to the question of the essence of constitutional values]. Sovremennoe pravo, 2009, no. 10, pp. 13—17.
Problemy teorii gosudarstva i prava [Problems of Theory of State and Law]. Ed. by M. N. Marchenko. Moscow, 1999. 504 p.
Pshidatok V. Ye. Transformatsiya pravosoznaniya i pravovykh tsennostey v usloviyakh stanovleniya demokratii i grazhdanskogo obshchestva v sovremennoy Rossii [Transformation of legal consciousness and legal values in the conditions of the formation of democracy and civil society in modern Russia]. Cand. diss. Rostov-on-Don, 2007. 30 p.
Puchkov O. A. Sudebnye interpretatsionnye akty v rossiyskom prave: yuridikogermenevticheskiy aspekt [Judicial interpretation acts in Russian law: the legal and hermeneutic aspect]. Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, 2017, no. 6, pp. 34—39.
Riker P. Konflikt interpretatsiy. Ocherki o germenevtike [Conflict of interpretations. Essays on hermeneutics.]. Moscow, 2008. 695 p.
Romanova Ye. A. Pravovaya kommunikatsiya: obshcheteoreticheskiy analiz [Legal communication: general theoretical analysis]. Cand. diss. thesis. Saratov, 2011. 22 p.
Saenko S. I. Metodologicheskiy plyuralizm kak osnova poznaniya sushchnosti i soderzhaniya norm administrativnogo prava [Methodological pluralism as the basis of knowledge of the essence and content of administrative law]. Administrativnoe pravo i protsess, 2013, no. 7, pp. 75—77.
Shopengauer A. Svoboda voli i nravstvennost [Free Will and Morality]. Ed. by A. A. Guseynov, A. P. Skripnik. Moscow, 1992. 448 p.
Solovev O. G. Pravotvorcheskie priemy konstruirovaniya ugolovno-pravovykh norm: ponyatie, vidy, znachenie [Lawmaking techniques of constructing criminal law: the concept, types, meaning]. Aktualnye voprosy borby s prestupleniyami, 2015, no. 1, pp. 7—9.
Somikov K. A. Pravovoy vybor i realizatsiya prava [Legal choice and exercise of the right]. Cand. diss. Yekaterinburg, 2011. 28 p.
Sorokin V. D. Problemy administrativnogo protsessa [Administrative issues]. Moscow, 1968. 144 p.
Spenser G. Osnovaniya etiki [Foundations of ethics]. St. Petersburg, 1899. Vol. 2.
Sudebnaya praktika kak istochnik prava. Moscow, 1997.
Sudebnaya praktika v sovetskoy pravovoy sisteme [Judicial practice in the Soviet legal system]. Ed. by S. N. Bratus. Moscow, 1975. 328 p.
Taeva N. Ye. Nekotorye problemy vyyavleniya konstitutsionno-pravovogo smysla norm Konstitutsionnym Sudom RF [Some problems of detection of the constitutional-law meaning of norms by the Constitutional Court of the RF]. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipalnoe pravo, 2014, no. 12, pp. 24—28.
Teoriya gosudarstva i prava [Theory of State and Law]. Ed. by V. K. Babaev. Moscow, 2003. 592 p.
Teplyashin I. V., Fastovich G. G. Effektivnost mekhanizma pravovogo regulirovaniya: analiz podkhodov [Efficiency of legal regulation mechanism: analysis of approaches]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii, 2011, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 26—30.
Terekhov Ye. M. Analiz tselevoy sostavlyayushchey pravointerpretatsionnoy deyatelnosti [The analysis of the target component of law interpretative activities]. Pravovaya paradigma, 2017, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 52—56.
Trubetskoy S. N. Metafizika v Drevney Gretsii [Metaphysics in Ancient Greece]. Moscow, 1890. 522 p.
Tvoreniya velekomudrogo Platona [Creations of the wise Plato]. Vol. 2. 1899. 399 p.
Vasilev N. S. Voprosy gosudarstvovedeniya [Questions of public affairs]. Kazan, 1906. 116 p.
Vaskovskiy Ye. V. Rukovodstvo k tolkovaniyu i primeneniyu zakonov [Guide to the interpretation and application of laws]. Moscow, 1913. 152 p.
Vaskovskiy Ye. V. Tsivilisticheskaya metodologiya. Uchenie o tolkovanii i primenenii grazhdanskikh zakonov [Civilistic methodology. Teaching on the interpretation and application of civil laws]. Moscow, 2002. 508 p.
Vershinina S. I. O normakh protsessualnogo prava, ikh strukture i soderzhanii [On Norms of procedural law, their structure and content]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa, 2017, no. 3, pp. 34—50.
Vlasenko N. A. Neopredelennost v prave: priroda i formy vyrazheniya [Legal Uncertainty: Nature and Forms of Expression]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2013, no. 2, pp. 32—44.
Zhidkov O. A. Verkhovnyy sud SShA: pravo i politika [US Supreme Court: Law and Politics]. Moscow, 1985. 221 p.
Zorkin V. D. Tsennostnyy podkhod v konstitutsionnom regulirovanii prav i svobod [Value approach in the constitutional regulation of rights and freedoms]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2008, no. 12, pp. 3—14.
A. I. SMIRNOV
postgraduate student at the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation
34, Bolshaya Cheremushkinskaya st., Moscow, Russia, 117218
Modern science pays special attention to interdisciplinary issues, the solution of which requires the use of data from different sciences. Among these issues is the problem of research of legal consciousness, which is determined by the law. Although the legal consciousness is the subject of many scientific works of our time, the methodological apparatus for its study is not developed enough. This is especially true for historical issues of formation and development of legal consciousness of different nations.
The purpose of this study, therefore, is to determine the most effective methodological approaches to the study of justice in its historical aspect. To achieve this goal, it is necessary, firstly, to study the existing methods of studying the legal consciousness in principle, both on the material of generalizing theoretical works, and on the material of works devoted to the legal consciousness of specific eras and peoples; and secondly, to distinguish among these methods the most suitable for the study of the legal consciousness of the past years.
This kind of tasks is possible with the use of analytical and generalizing methods of research of materials of legal science. The use of such methods allows the author to draw conclusions about the most effective and accessible methods of studying the history of justice.
The priority is the approach, which uses all available data on the considered period of time. However, it is often possible to study only written legal and (in some cases) literary sources. The other side of the study involves a combination of the principle of historicism and the concept of continuity of justice. In addition, it is necessary to take into account the role of the individual in the preparation of legal documents and the need to distinguish between private and public legal consciousness.
Keywords: legal consciousness, methodology, history of legal consciousness.
Abdurakhmanova I. V. Teoretiko-metodologicheskie problemy pravosoznaniya v sovremennoy yuridicheskoy literature [Theoretico-methodological problems of legal conscience in contem-porary juridical literature]. Filosofiya prava, 2007, no. 3, pp. 29—32.
Alekseev A. P., Vasilev G. G. Kratkiy filosofskiy slovar [Short philosophical dictionary]. Moscow, 2008. 496 p.
Blandy S. Socio-Legal Approaches to Property Law Research. Property Law Review, 2014, no. 3.
Chernogor N. N., Pashentsev D. A. Pravovoy poryadok: doktrinalnye podkhody, metody I aktualnye napravleniya issledovaniya [The legal order: doctrinal approaches, methods and current directions of the research]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2017, no. 8, pp. 5—16.
Chernogor N. N., Zaloilo M. V., Ivanyuk O. A. Rol eticheskikh i nravstvennykh norm v obespechenii soblyudeniya zapretov, ogranicheniy i trebovaniy, ustanovlennykh v tselyakh protivodeystviya korruptsii [Role of ethical and moral rules with a view to ensuring the compliance of anti-corruption prohibitions, restrictions and requirements]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2017, no. 9, pp. 130—141.
Cowan D. Legal Consciousness: Some Observations. Modern Law Review, 2004, vol. 67, no. 6.
Davis D. R. Jr., Nemec J. Legal Consciousness in Medieval Indian Narratives. Law, Culture and the Humanities, 2016, vol. 12, iss. 1, pp. 106—131.
Ekloga. Vizantiyskiy zakonodatelnyy svod VIII veka [Eclogue. Byzantine legislative code of the VIII century]. Moscow, 1965.
Gagen S. Ya. Obydennoe pravosoznanie zhenshchin v pozdney Vizantii [Common legal consciousness of women in late Byzantium]. Istoriya gosudarstva i prava, 2010, no. 22, pp. 7—10.
Gagen S. Ya. Vizantiyskoe pravosoznanie IV—XV vv. [Byzantine legal consciousness IV—XV centuries]. Ed. by I. P. Medvedev. Moscow, 2012. 302 p.
Gulevich O. A. Struktura pravosoznaniya i povedenie v pravovoy sfere [The structure of legal conscience and the behavior in legal area]. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya, 2009, no. 5. Available at: http://psystudy.ru (accessed 30.07.2018).
Historishes Worterbuch der Philosophie. Hrsg. Jo. Ritter. Darmstadt, 1971.
Kennedy D. Toward a Historical Understanding of Legal Consciousness: The Case of Classical Legal Thought in America, 1850—1940. Research in Law and Sociology, 1980, vol. 3.
Khabrieva T. Y. Korruptsiya i pravoporyadok v fokuse sovremennoy yuridicheskoy doktriny [Corruption and Legal Order in the Focus of Modern Legal Doctrine]. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel’stva i sravnitel’nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2016, no. 4, pp. 5—13.
Khabrieva T. Y. Sovremennoe pravotvorchestvo i zadachi yuridicheskoy nauki [Contemporary law-making and the role of juridical science]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2015, no. 8, pp. 5—13.
Khorakiwala R. Legal Consciousness as Viewed through the Judicial Iconography of the Madras High Court. Asian Journal of Law and Society, 2018, no. 5.
Marchenya P. P. Massovoe pravosoznanie i pobeda bolshevizma v Rossii [Mass legal consciousness and the victory of Bolshevism in Russia]. Moscow, 2005. 206 p.
Migushchenko O. N. Preemstvennost v razvitii rossiyskogo pravosoznaniya [Continuity in the development of Russian legal consciousness]. Yuridicheskaya tekhnika, 2011, no. 5, pp. 319—327.
Musson A. Medieval Law in Context: The Growth of Legal Consciousness from Magna Carta to the Peasants’ Revolt. New York, 2001.
Pevtsova Ye. A. Pravovoe vospitanie: voprosy teorii i praktiki [Legal education: theory and practice]. Moscow, 2013. 296 p.
Pogrebnaya Yu. K. Metody nauchnogo poznaniya kategorii “pravosoznanie” [Methods of scientific knowledge of the category “legal consciousness”]. Yurisprudentsiya, 2011, no. 23, pp. 10—17.
Ratinov A. R. Struktura pravosoznaniya i nekotorye metody ego issledovaniya [Structure of legal consciousness and some methods of its research]. Metodologiya i metody sotsialnoy psikhologii. Moscow, 1981, pp. 201—214.
Ryabov Ye. A. Metodologiya issledovaniya pravovogo soznaniya [Methodology of legal consciousness research]. Istoricheskie, filosofskie, politicheskie i yuridicheskie nauki, kulturologiya i iskusstvovedenie. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, 2014, no. 10, part I, pp. 130—133.
Stukanov V. G. Teoretiko-metodologicheskie voprosy izucheniya pravosoznaniya [Theoretical and methodological issues of studying of legal consciousness]. Innovatsionnye obrazovatelnye tekhnologii, 2013, no. 1, pp. 30—34.
Syrykh V. M. Sotsiologiya prava [Sociology of law]. Moscow, 2012.
Tikhomirov Yu. A., Nanba S. B., Tsomartova F. V. Sotsialnaya kontseptsiya prava: novyy podkhod [Social Concept of Law: A New Approach]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2014, no. 8, pp. 32—37.
Zyryanov M. Yu. K voprosu o meste pravosoznaniya sredi drugikh form obshchestvennogo soznaniya [To the question of legal awareness among other forms of social awareness]. Vestnik Yuzhno-Uralskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Sotsialno-gumanitarnye nauki, 2009, no. 32, iss. 13, pp. 116—120.
E. V. TALAPINA
leading research fellow of the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences, doctor of legal sciences, doctor of law (France)
10, Znamenka st., Moscow, Russia, 119019
The article focuses on the evolution of human rights in the age of the Internet and expansion of digital technologies. Nowadays without the Internet it is difficult to carry out freedom of information that aggravates a problem of the Internet access as a fundamental human right. At the same time from the right to protection of personal data absolutely new rights are born such as the right to be forgotten and the right to digital death.
The author aims to find out the human rights system dependence on technological development wherefore sets a task to identify changes in the existing rights and to explain the emergence of new human rights. The author also solves a problem of forecasting of further ways of digital rights development.
In the digital era based on using of classical methods of a legal research and a comparative law method, the general tendencies of the human rights system development come to light. In the analysis of legislative texts and “soft law” acts methods of legal interpretation have helped to reveal problem points and nuances of approaches of different states and interstate organisations in this subject.
Overall, the author gives the idea of recognition of the category of digital rights which at further development of technologies are capable to transform the social relations in a good manner. In addition, there are three stages of human rights development on the Internet: 1) the Internet considers as a tool, as an element of the basic human rights (the Internet is woven into human rights and its implementation/ violation); 2) the Internet as reflection of the basic human rights (two modes of human rights – offline and online); 3) the Internet as a basis of human rights transformation (new rights arise, the existing ones change). Having discovered in the system of human rights the long-standing conflict between public and private law, the author draws a conclusion that the system of human rights 3.0 risks to inherit outstanding issues of the classical law. The technology is neutral but its application and effect depend on real socio-political processes.
Keywords: Internet, human rights, digitalisation, personal data, information.
Aranovskiy K. V., Knyazev S. D., Khokhlov Ye. B. O pravakh cheloveka i sotsialnykh pravakh [On human rights and social rights]. Sravnitelnoe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, 2012, no. 4, pp. 61—91.
Bernard A. A l’heure du changement d’ere: pour une ONU 3.0. Le systeme de protection des droits de l’homme des Nations Unies: present et avenir. Sous la dir. de O. De Frouville. Paris, 2018.
Cerf V. G. Internet Access Is Not a Human Right. The New York Times, 4 January 2012. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/opinion/internet-access-is-not-a-humanright.html.
CJUE, arret Digital Rights Ltd., 8 avril 2014. Revue trimestrielle des droits de l’homme, 2017, no. 111, 1 juillet.
Fontanelli F. The Court of Justice of the European Union and the Illusion of Balancing in Internet-Related Disputes. The Internet and Constitutional Law. The Protection of Fundamental Rights and Constitutional Adjudication in Europe. Ed. by O. Pollicino, G. Romeo. London; New York, 2016.
Khusnutdinov A. I. Pravo na dostup v Internet — novoe pravo cheloveka? [Is the right to access the Internet a new human right?]. Sravnitelnoe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, 2017, no. 4, pp. 109—123.
Levova I., Shuklin G., Vinnik D. Prava Internet-polzovateley: Rossiya i mir, teoriya i praktika [Rights of Internet users: Russia and world, theory and practice. Analytical report]. Moscow, 2013. 144 p.
Norodom A. T. Secret d’Etat et secret de l’individu en droit international public: la protection du droit au respect de la vie privee a l’ere numerique. NTIC, secret et droits fondamentaux. Sous la dir. de C. Blaizot-Hazard. Paris, 2017.
Shatilina A. S. Prava cheloveka v Internete: problema priznaniya prava na dostup k Internetu [Human rights on the Internet: problem of recognition of the right to Internet access]. Pretsedenty Yevropeyskogo suda po pravam cheloveka, 2018, no. 1, pp. 38—46.
Pailler L. Les reseaux sociaux sur internet et le droit au respect de la vie privee. Paris, 2012.
Tigroudja H. La creation d’une Cour mondiale des droits de l’homme est-elle contre victima? Libres propos introductifs. Le systeme de protection des droits de l’homme des Nations Unies: present et avenir. Ed. by O. De Frouville. Paris, 2018.
Voynikanis Ye. A. Pravo byt zabytym: pravovoe regulirovanie i ego teoreticheskoe osmyslenie [The right to be forgotten: actual regulation and its theoretical reflection]. Pravovedenie, 2016, no. 3, pp. 70—89.
Weaver R. Transparency, Privacy and the Snowden Affair. Transparency in the Open Government Era. Ed. by I. Bouhadana, W. Gilles, R. Weaver. Paris, 2015.
N. Yu. TOURISHCHEVA
secretary of the Election Commission of Krasnodar region, associate professor at the Department of constitutional and municipal law of the Kuban State University, candidate of legal sciences, associate professor
149, Stavropolskaya st., Krasnodar, Russia, 350040
The article is devoted to the analysis of the Federal legislation establishing requirements to the content of the ballot. The author comes to the conclusion that in the system of mandatory information materials brought to the attention of voters, the ballot is one of the most effective elements crowning the entire list of information materials that directly affect the choice of the voter. Information and campaigning are the foundations that, while maintaining a balance of freedom to receive information about candidates and parties participating in elections and objective information about them, should exclude manipulation of the consciousness of voters and contribute to the development of reasonable electoral ideas about the main participants of the electoral process. The information contained in the ballot shall be objectified by the mandatory characteristics of the candidate to be brought to the attention of the voter. The personified nature of the ballot as a document handed to each voter personally assigns to the Federal legislator the task of search and normative fixing of such substantial characteristics of the information reflected in the text of the ballot which most have to meet the interests of the conscious and responsible will of any average voter. The Federal legislator invests considerable information and legal potential in the content of the ballot. Along with information on the date of birth, place of residence and position, the ballot indicates which electoral association nominate a candidate, as well as information on his membership in a political party, the status of a candidate in a given political party, information on the presence of a criminal record. The desire at a certain stage of development of the modern domestic electoral system to promote the formation of parties as the main participants in the electoral process has led to certain imbalances in the structure of information about candidates brought to the attention of voters in the text of the ballot. In the total amount of information about the candidate is dominated by information about the party component of its activities.
The author comes to the conclusion that the complexity of the text of the Bulletin is a negative trend that negatively affects the formation of voter involvement in the process of implementation of conscious will, and makes proposals to optimize the content of the ballot as the final document of informational nature.
Keywords: informing, ballot paper, candidates, political parties, voting, absenteeism.
Dershowitz Alan M. Supreme Injustice: How the High Court Hijacked Election 2000. New York, 2001.
Election presidentielle 2017: les dates devoilees [candidats, sondages, resultat]. Available at: https://www.lemonde.fr/election-presidentielle-2017/article/2017/05/07/presidentielle-2017.
Neotvratimost ukazaniya. O sudimosti kandidata ne dadut zabyt ni emu, ni izbiratelyam [The inevitability of instructions. The criminal record of the candidate will not let him or the voters forget]. Available at: www.roiip.ru.
Vedeneev Yu. A., Zaytsev I. V., Korablin V. Ye., Lugovoy V. V., Tylkin V. V. Vybory v Gosudarstvennuyu Dumu Rossiyskoy imperii [Elections to the State Duma of the Russian Empire]. Ocherki po istorii vyborov i izbiratelnogo prava [Essays on the history of elections and electoral law]. Kaluga, 2002.
E. V. BOGDANOV
professor at the Department of civil law disciplines of the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, doctor of legal sciences, professor
36, Stremyannyy lane, Moscow, Russia, 117997
The current civil legislation stipulates the appearance or development of civil legal relationship with the necessity to obtain consent of subjects quoted in law in many cases. The discussion about the legal nature of such consent is continued in the civilized literature, but its results do not make the researchers satisfied. This circumstance approves the research continuation specificity requirement of the quoted civil and legal category.
The research goal is to determine legal nature and specificity of consent in various kinds of civil and legal relationship.
For the research tasks’ solution the general scientific (analysis, synthesis, generalization, etc.) and specific scientific (systematic and analytical, formalistic and logical, technical and judicial, comparative and legal, etc.) methods are used.
The conclusion that the consents in Russian civil law can be generally divided into two types (statutory consent and consent to making a deal) is proved in the article. The statutory consent includes the consent of a citizen to appoint them as an adoptive parent, guardian (trustee), testamentary executor (will executor), etc. The clause contests the possibility of using other person’s name during creative, business or other economic activity with consent to authorize person. Besides, the conclusion that the consent to make a deal cannot be qualified as a deal because it does not have the characteristics of a deal is proved.
Keywords: consent, deal, contract, intangible benefit, legal fact, civil turnover, legal representative, guardian, trustee.
Andreev V. K. Subektivnoe grazhdanskoe pravo i inye proyavleniya voli i interesa v deyatelnosti yuridicheskikh lits [Legal Civil Law and Other Manifestations of Will and Interest in the Activity of Legal Entities]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2018, no. 8, pp. 58—68.
Bogdanov D. Ye. Sdelki ob otvetstvennosti v grazhdanskom prave RF [The Responsibility Transactions in the Civil Law of the Russian Federation]. Moscow, 2007.
Bogdanov Ye. V. Problemy pravosubektnosti cheloveka [The Problems of Human Legal Identity]. Gosudarstvo i pravo, 2017, no. 1.
Fromm E. Begstvo ot svobody. Chelovek dlya sebya [Escape from Freedom. Man for Himself]. Minsk, 2000.
Fuko M. Slova i veshchi [The Order of Things]. Moscow, 1994.
Grishaev S. P. Chto novogo bylo vneseno v Grazhdanskiy kodeks RF? [What was new in the Civil Code of Russian Federation?] (access from SPS “ConsultantPlus”).
Khokhlov V. A. Obshchie polozheniya ob obyazatelstvakh [General Provisions on Obligations]. Moscow, 2015.
Krasavchikova L. O. Lichnye neimushchestvennye prava grazhdan [Personal Nonproperty Rights of the Citizens]. Grazhdanskoe pravo. Ed. by B. M. Gongalo. Vol. 1. Moscow, 2016.
Kuznetsova L. G., Shevchenko Ya. N. Grazhdansko-pravovoe polozhenie nesovershennoletnikh [The Civil Condition of the Minors.]. Moscow, 1968.
Maleina M. N. Ponyatie i vidy nematerialnykh blag kak obektov lichnykh neimushchestvennykh prav [The Idea and Types of Intangible Values as the Objects of Personal Nonproperty Rights]. Gosudarstvo i pravo, 2014, no. 7.
Meyer D. I. Russkoe grazhdanskoe pravo [Russian Civil Law]. Moscow, 2000.
Mikheeva L. Yu. Modernizatsiya instituta nematerialnykh blag: dostizheniya i perspektivy [Modernization of Institute of Intangible Values: Achievements and Perspectives]. Kodifikatsiya Rossiyskogo chastnogo prava 2015. Ed. by P. V. Krasheninnikov. Moscow, 2015.
Rossiyskoe grazhdanskoe pravo [Russian Civil Law]. Vol. 2: Obyazatelstvennoe pravo. Ed. by Ye. A. Sukhanov. 2nd ed. Moscow, 2011.
Tarasova A. Ye. Pravosubektnost grazhdan. Osobennosti pravosubektnosti nesovershennoletnikh, ikh proyavleniya v grazhdanskikh pravootnosheniyakh [Legal Capacity. Special Features of Legal Capacity of Minors and its Manifestations in the Civil Legal Relationships]. Moscow, 2008.
E. P. VOYTOVICH
head of the Department of civil law and procedure of the Siberian Institute of Management — Branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, candidate of legal sciences, associate professor
6, Nizhegorodskaya st., Novosibirsk, Russia, 630102
The idea of personocentrism, which is the basis and driving force of the modern society development, causes the formation of such a relations’ regulation model, that would ensure the necessary balance of the individual's autonomy and state intervention. Family Law refers to that area of regulation, in which party autonomy traditionally does not play a significant role due to the influence of public interest. Nevertheless, even here its importance has significantly increased in recent years. The rule on party autonomy, enshrined in the paragraph 2 of the Article 161 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, meets the modern level of public relations development and the international law standards. At the same time, its application in practice does not have a positive social and economic effect.
The purpose of the research: to ensure legal certainty in regulating the property relations of spouses complicated by a foreign element in the Russian Federation. Achievement of this goal is realized through the following tasks: to characterize the role and significance of party autonomy in regulating spouses’ property relationships, to identify issues of theory and practice in applying the rule of the Article 161 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, to formulate proposals for improving the norms of Russian legislation.
Main research methods: analysis of the norms of Russian and European legislation, doctrinal sources, law practice.
It is substantiated that in Private International Family Law party autonomy has not received a generalized characteristic. It is concluded that it is necessary to restrict the right of spouses to choose the law applicable to a marriage contract or an alimony agreement. Attention is drawn to the current version shortcomings of the paragraph 2 of the Article 161 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation. In order to fill the existing gaps it is proposed to supplement the Family Code of the Russian Federation with certain conflicting law rules.
Keywords: spouses, property relationships, party autonomy, restrictions on the choice of law, agreement of an applicable law.
Chernus N. Yu., Voytovich Ye. P., Voronina S. V. Osobennosti razdela otdelnykh vidov supruzheskogo imushchestva [Features of the Division of Certain Types of Marital Property]. Izvestiya Altayskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2017, no. 6, pp. 83—87.
Fedoseeva G. Yu. Brachno-semeynye otnosheniya kak obekt mezhdunarodnogo chastnogo prava Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Marital and family relations as an object of Private International Law of the Russian Federation]. Dr. diss. Moscow, 2007. 392 p.
Getman-Pavlova I. V., Kasatkina A. S. Problemy kollizionnogo regulirovaniya brachnosemeynykh otnosheniy v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave Rossii [Conflict of Law Regulation of Marital and Family Relations in International Private Law in Russia]. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, 2017, no. 3, pp. 92—110.
Jurcys P., Fenwick M. Party Autonomy in International Family Law: A Note from an Economic Perspective. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2127081.
Kordero Moss D. Avtonomiya voli v praktike mezhdunarodnogo kommercheskogo arbitrazha [Party autonomy in the practice of International Commercial Arbitration]. Cand. diss. Moscow, 1995. 148 p.
Malkin O. Yu. Avtonomiya voli vo vneshneekonomicheskikh sdelkakh [Party autonomy in foreign trade transactions]. Cand. diss. Moscow, 2005. 180 p.
Marysheva N. I. Semeynye otnosheniya s uchastiem inostrantsev: pravovoe regulirovanie v Rossii [Family relations with the participation of foreigners: legal regulation in Russia]. Moscow, 2007. 328 p.
Marysheva N. I., Muratova O. I. Brachnyy dogovor v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave: pravovoe regulirovanie v Rossii i YeS [Marriage Contract in Private International Law: Legal Regulation in Russia and in the EU]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2014, no. 6, pp. 101—111.
Simatova Ye. L. Rasshirenie printsipa avtonomii voli storon v brachno-semeynykh otnosheniyakh v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave [The Autonomy of Volition Extension in Matrimonial Relations in Private International Law]. Sovremennoe pravo, 2014, no. 12, pp. 75—81.
Tretyakov S. V. Yuridicheskaya priroda avtonomii voli v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave [The legal nature of the party autonomy in Private International Law]. Cand. diss. Moscow, 2003. 204 p.
Trigubovich N. V. Avtonomiya voli v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave [Party autonomy in Private International Law]. Cand. diss. Moscow, 1999. 161 p.
Wautelet P. R. Party Autonomy in International Family Relationships: A Research Agenda (January 19, 2015). DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2589980.
Yermolaeva T. A. Pravovoe regulirovanie lichnykh i imushchestvennykh pravootnosheniy suprugov, imeyushchikh razlichnoe grazhdanstvo [Legal regulation of personal and property legal relations of spouses with different citizenship]. Cand. diss. thesis. Volgograd, 2007. Available at: http://www.dissercat.com/content/pravovoe-regulirovanie-lichnykh-i-imushchestvennykhpravootnoshenii-suprugov-imeyushchikh-ra (accessed 28.07.2018).
Yermolaeva T. A. Pravovoe regulirovanie lichnykh neimushchestvennykh I imushchestvennykh otnosheniy suprugov, imeyushchikh razlichnoe grazhdanstvo [Legal regulation of personal and property legal relations of spouses with different citizenship]. Saratov, 2011. 176 p.
Yu. E. MONASTYRSKIY
lecturer, associate professor at the Department of civil law and procedure of the Sevastopol State University, candidate of legal sciences
33, Universitetskaya st., Sevastopol, Russia, 299053
This work deals with legal reasoning about nature of controlling persons’ liability generally regulated by corporate and bankruptcy legislation.
The Author sets as his objective to present arguments that the said institution cannot be governed by the Chapter of torts in Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The Chapter provides that the infliction of damage creates the obligation. This legal category is different from the notion of liability, whereas pecuniary claims are in question in both cases.
The scholar used scientific analysis, comparative research, speculation on the teleological aim of the relevant normative acts and subsidiary and corporate liability institutions.
The article contains conclusions as to recommendations to improve and amend the existing statutory regulation plus existence of confusion in judicial practice as a result of unsuccessful juridical technique involvement. The Author inferred that in the instance of failure to observe duties of bona fide activities of controlling persons with the purpose of the bankruptcy state avoidance and to preserve and multiply its property and to improve its market position as a result of subjective universal civil rights breach stated in the Article 15 of Civil Code on damages must be applied.
Keywords: controlling person, damages, bankruptcy.
Dolya G. Subsidiarnaya otvetstvennost topov kompanii za nalogi i nevyplatu zarabotnoy platy personalu [Subsidiary liability of company tops for taxes and non-payment of staff wages]. Trudovoe pravo, 2018, no. 6, pp. 19—28.
Gutnikov O. V. Deliktnaya otvetstvennost za narushenie otnositelnykh prav: perspektivy razvitiya v rossiyskom prave [Tort liability for violation of relative rights: prospects for development in the Russian law]. Zakon, 2017, no. 1, pp. 22—37.
Gutnikov O. V. Subsidiarnaya otvetstvennost v zakonodatelstve o yuridicheskikh litsakh: neobkhodimost reform [Subsidiary responsibility in the legislation on legal entities: the need for reform]. Advokat, 2016, no. 9, pp. 5—13.
Gutnikov O. V. Vozmeshchenie ubytkov v dele o bankrotstve: novye vidy otvetstvennosti ili neudachnoe ispolzovanie izvestnykh institutov? [Indemnification damages for bankruptcy: new types of liability or unsuccessful use of well-known institutions?]. Khozyaystvo i pravo, 2018, no. 1, pp. 18—30.
Gutnikov O. V. Yuridicheskaya otvetstvennost v korporativnykh otnosheniyakh [Legal responsibility in corporate relations]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava, 2014, no. 6, pp. 51—117.
Kamyshanskiy V. P., Tarasenko A. N. Nekotorye problemy instituta subsidiarnoy otvetstvennosti kontroliruyushchikh dolzhnika lits [Certain problems of the institution of subsidiary liability of persons controlling the debtor]. Grazhdanskoe pravo, 2016, no. 1, pp. 40—42.
Kolesnikova S. G. Primenenie norm o grazhdansko-pravovoy otvetstvennosti chlenov organov upravleniya i kontroliruyushchikh lits khozyaystvennykh organov [Application of rules on civil liability of members of governing bodies and controlling persons of economic bodies]. Arbitrazhnye spory, 2016, no. 1.
Kommentariy k Grazhdanskomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Commentary on the Civil Code of the Russian Federation]. Part 2. Ed. by A. P. Sergeev. Moscow, 2016. 384 p.
Lomakin D. V. Kontrol kak forma zavisimosti yuridicheskikh lits [Control as a form of dependence of legal entities]. Khozyaystvo i pravo, 2018, no. 2, pp. 3—20.
Lomakin D., Gentovt O. Otvetstvennost kontroliruyushchikh lits: pravovaya priroda I mekhanizm privlecheniya k ney [Responsibility of controlling persons: legal nature and mechanism of bringing to it]. Khozyaystvo i pravo, 2016, no. 1, pp. 12—39.
Lyubimova Ye. Ye. Subsidiarnaya otvetstvennost za nevozmozhnost polnogo pogasheniya trebovaniya [Subsidiary liability for the impossibility of full repayment of the claim]. Arbitrazhnye spory, 2018, no. 2, pp. 61—71.
Miftakhutdinov R. Plenum chetko skazal, chto subsidiarnaya otvetstvennost primenyaetsya v isklyuchitelnykh sluchayakh [Supreme court plenum clearly stated that secondary liability is an exceptional remedy]. Zakon, 2018, no. 7, pp. 6—19.
Novak D. V. Dobrosovestnost v korporativnom prave [Bona fides in corporate law]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava, 2017, no. 2, vol. 17, pp. 13—23.
Pokrovskiy I. A. Osnovnye problemy grazhdanskogo prava [The main problems of civil law]. Petrograd, 1917. 328 p.
Rozhkova M. A. Ob istochnike povyshennoy opasnosti [About the source of increased danger]. Vestnik Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii, 2002, no. 2, pp. 88—100.
Shataylyuk Ye. Regulirovanie otvetstvennosti benefitsiarov i rukovoditeley bankov za nezakonnyy vyvod aktivov [Regulation of liability of beneficiaries and managers of banks for the illegal withdrawal of assets]. Bankovskoe obozrenie. Prilozhenie “BankNadzor”, 2017, no. 1, pp. 106—109.
Shitkina I. S. Otvetstvennost fakticheski kontroliruyushchikh lits v korporativnom prave [Liability of de facto controlling persons under corporate legislation]. Zakon, 2018, no. 7, pp. 114—133.
Shitkina I. S. Otvetstvennost v korporativnykh pravootnosheniyakh [Responsibility in corporate legal relations]. Khozyaystvo i pravo, 2015, no. 6, pp. 14—40.
Shitkina I., Miftakhutdinov R., Chernyshov G. et al. Subsidiarnaya otvetstvennost kontroliruyushchikh lits: novye vozmozhnosti [Secondary liability: new opportunities]. Zakon, 2017, no. 8, pp. 18—33.
Slonevskaya A. Yu. Institut subsidiarnoy otvetstvennosti lits, kontroliruyushchikh dolzhnikabankrota [Institute of the subsidiary liability of persons supervising the bankrupt debtor]. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii, 2017, no. 1, pp. 103—115.
Sukhanov Ye. A. Sravnitelnoe korporativnoe pravo. [Comparative Corporate Law]. Moscow, 2014. 456 p.
Suvorov Ye. D. Subsidiarnaya otvetstvennost po obyazatelstvam dolzhnika v protsesse bankrotstva: voprosy pravoprimeneniya [Subsidiary liability for the debtor’s obligations in the bankruptcy process: enforcement issues]. Zakon, 2013, no. 12, pp. 148—155.
Tarasov I. T. Uchenie ob aktsionernykh kompaniyakh [Doctrine of joint-stock companies]. Ed. by V. S. Yem, N. V. Kozlova, S. M. Korneev et al. Moscow, 2000. 666 p.
Yegorov A. V., Usacheva K. A. Subsidiarnaya otvetstvennost za dovedenie do bankrotstva — neudachnyy ekvivalent zapadnoy doktriny snyatiya korporativnogo pokrova [Subsidiary responsibility for filing for bankruptcy is the unfortunate equivalent of the western doctrine of removing corporate cover]. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii, 2013, no. 6, pp. 6—61.
O. O. ZHURAVLEVA
leading research fellow of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, candidate of legal sciences
34, Bolshaya Cheremushkinskaya st., Moscow, Russia, 117218
The state`s usage of different interest coordination mechanisms is increasing. These coordination mechanisms are aimed to provide the maximum guarantees of right and legal interests of citizens and stateless people. The taxation sphere is a permanently conflict field. Changes in social structure could lead to differentiation and polarization of the different social groups’ interests. These changes have a significant impact on implementing the principle of equality in law.
The purpose of the study is to explore the impact of the legal framework for agreements in the tax sphere in the RF on the implementation of this principle. During the research several problems have been solved: the legal nature of agreement in tax sphere is identified, agreements are classified, analysis of the specifics of the principle implementation in their legal design is made and the determination of trends in their change is performed.
To achieve the goal the doctrinal approaches to the agreements qualification in the tax sphere, the legislation on taxes and fees of the RF, acts of law enforcement of the relevant norms are analyzed. The methods of interpretation, generalization, analysis and synthesis are used.
The analysis of the current regulation of tax agreements in the RF, as well as the practice of their application allow to identify certain types of agreements, especially the equality principle implementation in their conclusion, execution, dissolution, and their classification. The author made a conclusion about the fact existence effect in the Tax Code of the RF of the legal framework of agreements in the tax sphere on the tax equality principle implementation. The usage of such structures in the Russian tax and legal system indicates a shift in the emphasis from formal equality to actual equality, taking into account the differences in certain categories of taxpayers. Specific diversity of agreements is due to the need to implement the equality principle of their parties, taking into account specific legal statuses.
Keywords: tax, agreement in tax sphere, principles of tax law, the principle of equality, settlement agreement, investment tax credit, consolidated group of taxpayers, double taxation agreement.
Bratus S. N. Khozyaystvennyy dogovor kak grazhdansko-pravovaya forma raspredeleniya produktsii mezhdu gosudarstvennymi predpriyatiyami [The economic contract, as the civil law form of the distribution of products among state enterprises]. Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo, 1953, no. 2—3, pp. 74—88.
FNS sosredotochilas na dosudebnom uregulirovanii sporov po nalogam. Available at: https://iz.ru/733325/tatiana-gladyscheva/fns-sosredotochilas-na-dosudebnom-uregulirovatnii-sporovpo-nalogam.
Gritsenko V. V. Normativnyy dogovor v sisteme istochnikov sovremennogo rossiyskogo nalogovogo prava [Regulatory agreement in the system of sources of modern Russian tax law]. Nalogi, 2006, no. 1, pp. 25—30.
Ismailova L. Yu., Zhuravleva O. O. Finansovoe stimulirovanie vnedreniya NDT v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: problemy i perspektivy [Financial Stimulation of the Best Available Technologies in the Russian Federation: Issues and Prospects]. Finansovoe pravo, 2018, no. 4, pp. 15—19.
Khavanova I. A. Mnogoyazychnye dogovory v mezhdunarodnom nalogovom prave [Multilingual treaties in the international tax law]. Nalogi, 2015, no. 6, pp. 39—43.
Kucherov I. I. Teoriya nalogov i sborov (pravovye aspekty) [Theory of taxes and duties (legal aspects)]. Moscow, 2009. 473 p.
OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations 2017. OECD. Paris, 2017.
Parygina V. A. Rossiyskoe nalogovoe pravo. Problemy teorii i praktiki [Russian Tax Law. Problems of theory and practice]. Moscow, 2005. 336 p.
Rassmotrenie problem snizheniya nalogovoy bazy i perenosa pribyli. Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (Russian version). OECD. 2013.
Tiunov O. I. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i pravovye pozitsii Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF [International Law and Legal Positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2011, no. 10, pp. 82—96.
Vanistendael F. Legal Framework for Taxation. Tax Law Design and Drafting. Ed. by V. Thurnovyi. 1996, vol. 1.
Zhuravleva O. O. Soglasovanie interesov Avstriyskoy Respubliki i zemel, obshchin pri osushchestvlenii pravovogo regulirovaniya nalogooblozheniya [Alignment of interests of the Republic of Austria and its lands and communities in implementation of legal regulation of the taxation]. Nalogi, 2015, no. 6, pp. 23—27.
K. V. KARGIN
associate professor at the Department of civil law and procedure of the Faculty of law of the Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod, candidate of legal sciences, associate professor
4, Ashkhabadskaya st., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603115
The legislation on administrative offences is one of the most dynamically developing branches of the Russian legislation. The Code of administrative offences of the Russian Federation is constantly being amended, some of which are aimed at the correct application of its legal norms in practice. One of the means of legislative technique, which should improve the quality of this regulatory legal act, is a legal note. It is a structural element of a legal norms designed for its understanding. The analysis of the articles of the Code of administrative offences of the Russian Federation testifies to existence in them redundancy and defectiveness of legal notes. This article is devoted to their study.
The aim of the research consists in revealing redundancy and defectiveness of notes to articles of the Code of administrative offences of the Russian Federation and to propose recommendations for their elimination. This aim is achieved through the implementation of the following tasks: to study specific legal notes, to identify similar notes, to establish legal errors and conflicts in the notes, to develop proposals for their elimination.
The methodological basis of the research is logical, systemic, comparative legal, normative and other methods of cognition.
The paper provides a conclusion about redundancy and numerous defects of notes in the Code of administrative offences of the Russian Federation. The author has formulated the suggestions about making amendments to the articles of this regulatory legal act in order to increase its quality and efficacy within law-enforcement activities.
Keywords: legislative technique, legal norms, legal notes, redundancy, legal defects, regulatory legal act.
Baranov V. Moscow, Kondakov D. S. Primechaniya v rossiyskom prave: priroda, vidy, problemy realizatsii [Notes in Russian law: nature, types, problems of implementation]. Problemy yuridicheskoy tekhniki [Problems of legal technique]. Ed. by V. M. Baranov. Nizhniy Novgorod, 2000, pp. 338—402.
Boldyrev S. N. Primechanie kak priem yuridicheskoy tekhniki [Note as a way of legal technique]. Filosofiya prava, 2014, no. 6, pp. 24—26.
Chukhvichev D. V. Zakonodatelnaya tekhnika [Legislative technique]. Moscow, 2006. 239 p.
Kashanina T. V. Yuridicheskaya tekhnika [Legal technique]. Moscow, 2008. 560 p.
Kondakov D. S. Primechaniya v rossiyskom zakonodatelstve [Notes in Russian legislation]. Cand. diss. thesis. Nizhniy Novgorod, 2002. 27 p.
Panko K. K. Primechaniya kak netipichnoe sredstvo ugolovnogo normotvorchestva [Notes as an atypical means of criminal law-making]. Sovremennoe pravo, 2005, no. 11, pp. 66—70.
Remizov P. V., Salnikov A. A. Primechaniya v Kodekse Rossiyskoy Federatsii ob administrativnykh pravonarusheniyakh: sostoyanie, defekty, kritika [Notes in the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation: state, defects, criticism]. Materials of the X International scientific and practical conference, “Prospects of world science”. Vol. 3. Law. Sheffield, 2014, pp. 13—18.
Rubanova S. N. Primechaniya k statyam Ugolovnogo kodeksa Rossiyskoy Federatsii: ponyatie, znachenie i vidy [Notes to articles of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation: concept, importance and types]. Cand. diss. thesis. Krasnodar, 2011. 20 p.
V. I. MIKHAYLOV
chief research fellow of the Department of criminal and criminal procedure legislation, judicial system of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, doctor of legal sciences, professor, honored lawyer of the Russian Federation
34, Bolshaya Cheremushkinskaya st., Moscow, Russia, 117218
One of the theoretical foundations of bolshevism was the thesis – the death of law, including, of course, the death of legal provisions on the necessary defense and other situations of lawful infliction of harm (circumstances precluding crime of harm). At the same time, due to the increase in crime on the one hand, and the increase in cases of self-punishment of persons who committed petty theft of food products on the other hand, the Soviet state in the first years of its existence was objectively forced to have legal mechanisms to protect not only the interests of the Soviet state, but also the life and other interests of the individual.
In this regard, there is a need for scientific analysis of the criminal legal mechanisms of the first years of the Soviet state, ensuring the protection of some interests by causing harm to other interests also protected by law.
The purpose of the study is to reveal, taking into account the purpose of soviet criminal law, which is to protect the gains of the revolution, the content of the legal provisions on the necessary defense and other situations of lawful harm in the system with other institutions of criminal law. This goal is achieved by showing the grounds and limits of permissible harm to one interest in the protection of others contained in the Guiding principles for criminal law of the RSFSR of 1919 and the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922.
The solution of the task is provided on the basis of using a set of scientific research methods (dogmatic, formal-logical, comparative and historical), when the provisions on the necessary defense and other situations of lawful harm contained in the Guiding principles for criminal law of the RSFSR of 1919 and the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922 are considered in the system with other institutions of criminal law taking into account the class nature of the law in this period.
The author concludes that despite the thesis declared in theory on the death of law, the socialist state had an objective need for legislation, including determining the grounds and conditions of lawfully caused harm.
Keywords: Guiding principles for criminal law of the RSFSR of 1919, Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922, necessary defense, extreme necessity, performance of professional functions, situations of lawful harm (the circumstances excluding crime of action).
Cheltsov-Bebutov M. A. Prestupnost i nakazanie v istorii i sovetskom prave. Kharkov, 1925.
Dmitrenko A. P. Predely pravomernosti prava na neobkhodimuyu oboronu. Stavropol, 2000.
Estrin A. Analogiya. Yezhenedelnik sovetskoy yustitsii, 1922, no. 28.
Estrin A. Ugolovnyy kodeks i “Rukovodyashchie nachala po ugolovnomu pravu RSFSR”. Yezhenedelnik sovetskoy yustitsii, 1922, no. 23.
Estrin A. Ya. Sovetskoe ugolovnoe pravo. Obshchaya chast. Iss. 1. Moscow, 1935.
Istoriya sovetskogo ugolovnogo prava. Moscow, 1948.
Karpets I. I. Ugolovnoe pravo i etika. Moscow, 1985.
Koni A. F. O prave neobkhodimoy oborony. Moscow, 1866.
Konyakhin V. P. Teoreticheskie osnovy postroeniya Obshchey chasti rossiyskogo ugolovnogo prava. St. Petersburg, 2002.
Kozak V. N. Voprosy teorii i praktiki krayney neobkhodimosti. Saratov, 1981.
Krylenko N. V. Sud i pravo v SSSR. Moscow; Leningrad, 1930.
Kudryavtsev V. N., Trusov A. I. Politicheskaya yustitsiya v SSSR. St. Petersburg, 2000.
Kurs sovetskogo ugolovnogo prava. Vol. 2. Moscow, 1970.
Kurs ugolovnogo prava. Vol. 1. Moscow, 2002.
Kuzmin-Karavaev V. D. Voenno-ugolovnoe pravo. Chast Obshchaya. St. Petersburg, 1895.
Lokhvitskiy A. V. Kurs russkogo ugolovnogo prava. St. Petersburg, 1867.
Mikhaylov V. I. Institut pravomernogo vreda (obstoyatelstv, isklyuchayushchikh prestupnost deyaniya) v Ugolovnom ulozhenii 1903 goda. [Institute of Legitimate Harm (Criminal Defenses) in the Criminal Code of 1903]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2016, no. 5, pp. 65—72.
Mikhaylov V. I. Svod zakonov 1832 goda. i Ulozhenie o nakazaniyakh ugolovnykh I ispravitelnykh 1845 g.: obshchaya kharakteristika i situatsii pravomernogo vreda (obstoyatelstva, isklyuchayushchie prestupnost deyaniya). Istoriya gosudarstva i prava, 2010, no. 24.
Milyukov S. F., Nikulenko A. V. Prichinenie vreda pri zaderzhanii litsa, sovershivshego obshchestvenno opasnoe deyanie. St. Petersburg, 2015.
Neklyudov N. A. Obshchaya chast ugolovnogo prava (konspekt). St. Petersburg, 1875.
Piontkovskiy A. A. Sovetskoe ugolovnoe pravo. Obshchaya chast. Moscow; Leningrad, 1929.
Poznyshev S. V. Osnovnye nachala nauki ugolovnogo prava. Moscow, 1912.
Pustoroslev P. P. Russkoe ugolovnoe pravo. Yurev, 1912.
Rozin N. N. O krayney neobkhodimosti. St. Petersburg, 1899.
Sergeevskiy N. D. Russkoe ugolovnoe pravo. Iss. 2. St. Petersburg, 1883/1884.
Sergeevskiy N. D. Russkoe ugolovnoe pravo. Chast Obshchaya. St. Petersburg, 1904.
Shvekov G. V. Pervyy sovetskiy ugolovnyy kodeks. Moscow, 1970.
Shvekov G. V. Preemstvennost v prave. Moscow, 1983.
Slutskiy I. I. Neobkhodimaya oborona v sovetskom ugolovnom prave. Uchenye zapiski LGU, no. 129. Leningrad, 1951.
Sud i zhizn (ubiystvo iz sostradaniya). Yezhenedelnik sovetskoy yustitsii, 1922, no. 39—40.
Tagantsev N. S. Ugolovnoe ulozhenie 22 marta 1903 goda. S motivami, izvlecheniyami iz obyasnitelnoy zapiski redaktsionnoy komissii, predstavleniyami Ministerstva yustitsii v Gosudarstvennyy sovet i zhurnalov osobogo soveshchaniya, osobogo prisutstviya departamentov i obshchego sobraniya Gosudarstvennogo soveta. St. Petersburg, 1904.
Tyazhkova I. M. Voprosy razvitiya sistemy Obshchey chasti ugolovnogo zakona. Vestnik MGU. Seriya 11 “Pravo”, 1988, no. 2.
Vladimirov L. Ye. Uchebnik russkogo ugolovnogo prava. Obshchaya chast. Kharkov, 1889.
Yerypalov P. Volna samosudov. Yezhenedelnik Sovetskoy yustitsii, 1922, no. 24—25.
V. V. KHILYUTA
associate professor at the Department of criminal law, criminal procedure and criminalistics of the Yanka Kupala State University of Grodno, candidate of legal sciences, associate professor
22, Ozheshko st., Grodno, Belarus, 230000
The paper reveals the actual problem of differentiation of theft and appropriation of the found property, which is of importance for the current law enforcement practice. The features of theft and findings in the doctrine of criminal law are considered in detail. Much attention is paid to the analysis of the appropriation of found property, its characteristic features and elements. Based on extensive study of materials of Russian judicial and investigative practice, the main provisions of the criminal law science in relation to the objective features of theft and appropriation of someone else's property are considered. Theoretical and practical recommendations on the application of criminal law in resolving disputes concerning the qualification of crimes against property are proposed.
The aim of the work is to develop criteria for differentiating between theft and appropriation of found property. For this reason, the author identified objective signs of theft (it is not intended to give a detailed analysis of all the signs of theft, and attention was paid only to the method of action in the theft and its value), clarified the essential and substantive aspects of the "secrecy" of theft, and on this basis continued to search for optimal criteria for distinguishing theft and appropriation of the found property. The author argues for the position that there should be several such criteria (and they cannot be stereotyped) and proposes to identify them considering the civil understanding of the signs of discovery and their refraction in criminal law.
In the course of the study, the author proceeded from the assumption that the criteria being developed, being built based on formal logic, should be based on the traditional provisions of the doctrine of theft that have stood the test of criticism, but should not be divorced from the needs of practice and be a purely dogmatic construction. The research is based on the theoretical and instrumental, formaldogmatic, comparative legal and system-structural methods of cognition, allowing to consider the problem in a complex way.
Keywords: theft, appropriation, discovery, other people's property, property, property crimes.
Bezborodov D. A. Kvalifikatsiya prisvoeniya naydennogo ili sluchayno okazavshegosya u litsa imushchestva [Qualification of assignment of the found or accidentally appeared property]. Ugolovnaya politika i pravoprimenitelnaya praktika: sbornik statey po materialam III Vserossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. St. Petersburg, 2015, pp. 25—29.
Bochkarev S. A. Sobstvennost v ugolovnom prave [Property in criminal law]. Moscow, 2011. 216 p.
Brilliantov A. Khishchenie ili neosnovatelnoe obogashchenie? [Theft or superficial enrichment?]. Ugolovnoe pravo, 2016, no. 4, pp. 9—13.
Karpov K. N., Galyan S. V. Kvalifikatsiya nepravomernogo prisvoeniya naydennogo imushchestva [Qualification of illegal assignment of the found property]. Zakonodatelstvo I praktika, 2014, no. 1, pp. 46—49.
Khilyuta V. V. Formy khishcheniya v doktrine ugolovnogo prava [Theft forms in the doctrine of criminal law]. Moscow, 2014. 528 p.
Khilyuta V. V. Novyy podkhod v ponimanii sushchnostnykh priznakov krazhi [New approach in understanding of intrinsic signs of theft]. Biblioteka ugolovnogo prava i kriminologii, 2013, no. 4, pp. 54—62.
Khilyuta V. V. Ponyatie i priznaki khishcheniya v ugolovnom prave [Concept and signs of theft in criminal law]. Moscow, 2016. 624 p.
Khilyuta V. V. Prisvoenie poteryannykh i zabytykh veshchey [Assignment of the lost and forgotten things]. Ugolovnoe pravo, 2010, no. 1, pp. 45—48.
Khilyuta V. V. Zloupotreblenie doveriem — samostoyatelnaya forma khishcheniya [Breach of confidence as independent form of theft]. Voprosy pravovedeniya, 2011, no. 3, pp. 244—262.
Lopashenko N. A. Posyagatelstva na sobstvennost [Criminal infringement of property]. Moscow, 2012. 528 p.
Lukinov A. S., Malyavkin K. O. Krazha ili nakhodka — trudnosti i zabluzhdeniya [Theft or find — difficulties and delusions]. Zakonnost, 2017, no. 10, pp. 42—43.
Shulga A. V. Khishcheniya v usloviyakh razvitiya sovremennykh informatsionnykh tekhnologiy i rynka innovatsionnykh tovarov [Theft in the conditions of development of modern information technologies and the market of innovative goods]. Moscow, 2016. 272 p.
Sklyarov S. Krazha zabytogo imushchestva [Theft of the forgotten property]. Ugolovnoe pravo, 2017, no. 3, pp. 68—73.
Tokarchuk R. Ye. Problemy instituta khishcheniya v ugolovnom prave [Problems of institute of theft in criminal law]. Biblioteka kriminalista, 2016, no. 6, pp. 371—379.
Vasilev D., Vasilev S. Nakhodka ili krazha? [The found property or theft?]. Zakonnost, 2007, no. 9, pp. 32—34.
E. V. MIKHAYLOVA
acting head of the Department of civil procedural and business law of the Korolyov Samara National Research University, doctor of legal sciences
1, Akademik Pavlov st., Samara, Russia, 443011
The article raises the problem of determining the nature of the so-called "procedural agreements". Recently in the science of civil procedural law the tendency of expansion the civil construction “agreement” into the judicial sphere has increased. The norms of the current procedural legislation justify this tendency, since they contain several norms allowing to conclude various kinds of “agreements”, both in civil and arbitration proceedings, and in administrative litigation. Such gives the impression that in the sphere of justice enforcement some “deals” between the parties to legal conflicts are possible. Thus, based on the analysis of the current procedural legislation and the science of civil procedural law, it is necessary to clearly define the concept of “procedural agreements”, their legal nature and propose a criterion for their applicability in the administration of justice in civil cases.
The term “procedural agreement” does not currently have a single definition and is understood either as an agreement between the claimant and a defendant, or as an agreement on the settlement of a legal conflict (mediation agreement), or as an agreement between disputants and the court. Based on the analysis of the features of civil procedural legal relations and the legal status of their subjects, it is proved that agreements between the state court and the persons participating in the case are impossible. Acts that many authors describe as “procedural agreements” (settlement agreement, agreement to submit, arbitration agreement) are either purely civil law agreements (agreement to submit and arbitration agreements), or civil law agreements approved by the court and thus acquired the “public law effect” (settlement agreement). “Procedural agreements” understood as agreements on the circumstances of the case as well as settlement agreements can be concluded only in civil and arbitration proceedings. Since the subject of administrative proceedings is a public law conflict, no “agreements” between its subjects are allowed.
Keywords: agreement, civil legal proceedings, civil procedural legal relations, agreement to submit, arbitration agreement, settlement agreement, public legal relations, administrative legal proceedings.
Kurochkin S. A. Treteyskoe razbiratelstvo grazhdanskikh del v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: teoriya i praktika. Moscow, 2007.
Morozov M. E. Pravovaya priroda zakonodatelstva, reguliruyushchego treteyskoe sudoproizvodstvo. Novosibirsk, 2008.
Nauchno-prakticheskiy kommentariy k Grazhdanskomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Chasti 1, 2 GK RF. Ed. by T. Ye. Abova, A. Yu. Kabalkin. Moscow, 2012.
Pobedonostsev K. P. Kurs grazhdanskogo prava. Chast tretya: Dogovory i obyazatelstva. Moscow, 2003.
Shemeneva O. N. Rol protsessualnykh soglasheniy v grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve. Dr. diss. thesis. Voronezh, 2017.
Vaskovskiy Ye. V. Uchebnik grazhdanskogo protsessa. Ed. by V. A. Tomsinov. Moscow, 2003.
A. V. GRINENKO
professor at the Department of criminal law, criminal procedure and criminalistics of the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, doctor of legal sciences, professor, honored lawyer of the Russian Federation
76, Vernadskiy ave., Moscow, Russia, 119454
Along with the dominance of the public principle in the Russian criminal proceedings, there are manifestations of dispositive, including contractual, legal relations. Usually, exploring the optionality, domestic scientists processuality mean a situation when criminal cases of private accusation are instituted only on the complaint of the victim, reconciliation of the parties to cause the mandatory cessation of production, etc. At the same time, there are other aspects of contractual relations in criminal proceedings in the code of Criminal procedure of the Russian Federation, which are designed to ensure a certain flexibility of law enforcement and, therefore, more complete protection of the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of the individual.
The purpose of the research is to develop proposals to improve the current legislation and law enforcement practice in the part concerning the special procedure of the trial with the consent of the accused with the charge against him, at the conclusion of a pre-trial agreement on cooperation, as well as during the investigation in a shortened form.
The list of the methods used: the general scientific system method, logical methods (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction), methods of interpretation of law and law, etc.
As a result of the research, it is proposed to expand and specify the scope of contractual relations in criminal proceedings. In particular, the expediency to formalize agreements between the accused and officials of criminal proceedings in writing, to provide in the law the possibility of wider use of circumstances mitigating punishment.
Keywords: criminal proceeding, criminal case, crime, investigator, court, suspect, accused, victim.
Belavin A. A., Bochinin S. A. Problemy sokrashchennoy formy doznaniya [Problems of Abridged Form of Inquest]. Rossiyskiy sledovatel, 2016, no. 13, pp. 12—17.
Biryukova I. A., Kruglikov A. P. Rol prokurora v realizatsii printsipa publichnosti v ugolovnom protsesse Rossii [The Role of the Prosecutor in the Implementation of the Principle of Publicity in the Criminal Procedure of Russia]. Rossiyskaya yustitsiya, 2014, no. 10, pp. 34—37.
Miriev B. A. ogly. Realizatsiya printsipa publichnosti v stadii vozbuzhdeniya ugolovnogo dela [Implementation of the Principle of Publicity at the Stage of Initiation of the Criminal Case]. Rossiyskiy sledovatel, 2014, no. 8, pp. 16—19.
Sangadzhieva G. V. Dispozitivnost v ugolovnom protsesse [Discretion in the Criminal Process]. Obshchestvo i pravo, 2010, no. 2, pp. 232—235.
Stroganova T. Yu. Ponyatie i priznaki dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve [The Concept and Attributes of a Plea Agreement]. Rossiyskiy sudya, 2018, no. 7, pp. 28—32.
Tushev A. A., Tryaseykina Ye. S. Deystvie printsipa publichnosti pri proizvodstve po ugolovnym delam chastnogo obvineniya [Action of the Principle of Publicity in Criminal Proceedings of Private Prosecution]. Rossiyskaya yustitsiya, 2012, no. 1, pp. 32—34.
Vladykina T. A. Koordinatsiya publichnogo i chastnogo nachal v ugolovnom protsesse [Coordination of Public and Private Elements in Criminal Process]. Aktualnye problemy rossiyskogo prava, 2014, no. 2, pp. 267—273.
Zheltobryukhov S. P. Nuzhno li soglasie gosudarstvennogo obvinitelya i poterpevshego pri postanovlenii prigovora v osobom poryadke sudebnogo razbiratelstva? [Is the Consent of the Public Prosecutor and the Victim, when the Sentence in Special Judicial Proceedings?]. Rossiyskaya yustitsiya, 2017, no. 12, pp. 60—62.
O. V. MAKAROVA
leading research fellow of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, candidate of legal sciences
34, Bolshaya Cheremushkinskaya st., Moscow, Russia, 117218
The article is devoted to the improvement of criminal proceedings through the active integration of new information technologies into the criminal process. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of problems of introducing an electronic form of criminal case, which will not only reduce the document flow and ensure the safety of criminal case materials, but also improve the quality of the investigation, reduce the risks of possible falsification of evidence. At the same time, the terms of authorization of investigative actions will be reduced and the procedure for familiarizing the participants with the materials of the criminal case will be facilitated.
As a research task, the author tried to analyze and evaluate the factors that favor and hinder the successful implementation of the electronic form of the criminal case at the present stage.
The methodological basis of this study is a set of methods of scientific knowledge, among which the leading place is the dialectical method. The article uses General philosophical, General scientific and special legal methods of research. Special attention was paid to comparative and systematic methods of research.
It is concluded that the further modernization and improvement of criminal proceedings are closely related to the widespread use of modern information technologies that allow you to switch to the electronic form of the criminal case. The successful implementation of the idea of introducing electronic criminal proceedings will also require, first, the introduction of electronic document management at all stages of criminal proceedings. Secondly, the transition to mandatory recording using audio-video recording and other technical means of all procedural actions carried out by investigators (investigators). Third, the recognition of electronic information as an independent type of evidence, allowing to consider an electronic document as a kind of this evidence. Fourth, regulation of the procedure for the use of a qualified electronic signature, as well as the affixing of seals of investigative, expert, judicial and other bodies on electronic materials of a criminal case for their certification. Fifth, the support of the legislator and the Government of the Russian Federation.
Keywords: electronic criminal case, legal proceedings, criminal process, information technology, legislation, implementation, court, investigator.
Abdulvaliev A. F. Predposylki i perspektivy vnedreniya elektronnoy formy ugolovnogo dela v deyatelnost sudebnykh organov [Background and prospects of introduction of the electronic form of criminal proceedings in judiciary]. Pravo i politika, 2013, no. 1, pp. 58—65.
Avdonin K. V., Cherkasov V. S. Videokonferensvyaz v sledstvennykh deystviyakh: kak pravilno ispolzovat i chto pomenyat v UPK [Videoconferencing in investigative actions: how to use and what to change in the CCP]. Ugolovnyy protsess, 2018, no. 7, pp. 46—53.
Kachalova O. V., Tsvetkov Yu. A. Elektronnoe ugolovnoe delo — instrument modernizatsii ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva [Electronic Criminal Case as a Tool for Development of Criminal Proceedings]. Rossiyskoe pravosudie, 2015, no. 2, pp. 95—101.
Khaliullin A. I. Elektronnaya podpis v ugolovnom protsesse Rossii [Electronic signature in the criminal proceedings in Russia]. Aktualnye problemy rossiyskogo prava, 2014, no. 6.
Kravets Ye. G., Kaznachey I. V. et al. Rezultaty analiza proekta federalnogo zakona “O vnesenii dopolneniy v Ugolovno-protsessualnyy kodeks Rossiyskoy Federatsii (v chasti proizvodstva predvaritelnogo rassledovaniya s primeneniem sistem videokonferentssvyazi)” [Results of the analysis of the draft of the Federal law “About entering of additions into the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (regarding production of preliminary investigation with use of systems of videoconferencing)”]. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya, 2015, no. 2. 663 p.
Novikov S. A. Dopros s ispolzovaniem sistem videokonferentssvyazi: zavtrashniy den rossiyskogo predvaritelnogo rassledovaniya [Interrogation with the use of systems of videoconference communication: future of the Russian preliminary investigation]. Rossiyskiy sledovatel, 2014, no. 1, pp. 2—6.
Pastukhov P. S. K voprosu o sozdanii protsedury ispolzovaniya “elektronnykh dokazatelstv” v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [On the issue of creation of the procedure of use of “electronic evidence” in criminal judicial proceeding]. Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnaya yustitsiya, 2015, no. 2, pp. 5—8.
Pastukhov P. S. Modernizatsiya ugolovno-protsessualnogo dokazyvaniya v usloviyakh informatsionnogo obshchestva [Modernization of criminal procedural proof of truth in the information society]. Cand. diss. thesis. Moscow, 2015. 22 p.
Prokurory vyyavili 270 tysyach propavshikh ugolovnykh del. [Prosecutors revealed 270 thousand missing criminal cases]. Available at: https://rg.ru/2015/07/28/prokurori.html (accessed 15.04.2018).
Sokolov Yu. N. Dopustimost rassmotreniya materialov ugolovnogo dela v elektronnoy forme [Admissibility of Review of Criminal Case Files in the Electronic Format]. Informatsionnoe pravo, 2017, no. 1, pp. 28—33.
Tsokolova O. I., Bezrukov S. S., Kupriyanov Ye. I. Aktualnye problemy vosstanovleniya utrachennykh ugolovnykh del [Actual problems of restoration of lost criminal cases]. Rossiyskaya yustitsiya, 2018, no. 5, pp. 59—62.
Zuev S. V., Nikitin Ye. V. Informatsionnye tekhnologii v reshenii ugolovno-protsessualnykh problem [Information Technologies in Solving Criminal Procedure Problems]. Vserossiyskiy kriminologicheskiy zhurnal, 2017, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 587—595.
Yu. V. TRUNTSEVSKY
leading research fellow of the Department of methodology of combating corruption of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, doctor of legal sciences, professor
34, Bolshaya Cheremushkinskaya st., Moscow, Russia, 117218
Analysis of judicial practice on compliance with article 133 of the Federal Law of December 25, 2008 No. 273-FZ "On Combating Corruption" showed difficulties in forming uniform anti-corruption requirements for the organization, its obligation to take measures to eliminate violations of the law on combating corruption identified during the Prosecutor's audit. That is why it is proposed to continue the formation of a unified approach to ensuring work on prevention and combating corruption in organizations, which was initiated in the Guidelines of the Russian Ministry of Labor. In cases where the failure to prevent corruption in the organization has served as a circumstance contributing to the commission of the corruption crime, the courts should require such organization to develop and take specific measures aimed at eliminating the causes and conditions of the commission of this type of crime by an employee of this organization, as well as the creation/strengthening of corporate standards of rejection of corruption by officials with a high level of risk. Mention of the anti-corruption clause as a tool to establish the legal obligations of the parties to anti-corruption behavior in the performance of a single contract, it is proposed to include in the Federal Law No. 273-FZ, pointing out that the obligations of the parties arising from the contract on change or terminate civil rights and obligations, include the obligation not to participate in the commission of corruption offenses. In cases of detection of the facts of non-adoption by the organizations of measures for prevention of corruption, determination of the term for elimination of the revealed violations of the legislation in the considered sphere shall be performed by the principle of their real feasibility/impracticability.
Keywords: corruption, standards, prevention, organizations, judicial practice.
Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Anti-Corruption Compliance and Antitrust Law in Russia FCPA Update. A Global Anti-Corruption Newsletter, March 2015, vol. 6, no. 8.
Khabrieva T. Ya. Aktualnye problemy ukrepleniya pravoporyadka i protivodeystviya korruptsii v usloviyakh evraziyskoy integratsii [Corruption and Legal Order in The Focus of
Modern Legal Doctrine]. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel’stva i sravnitel’nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2016, no. 4, pp. 5—13.
Lomakina L. A. Distsiplinarnaya otvetstvennost rabotnikov gosudarstvennykh korporatsiy i gosudarstvennykh kompaniy za narushenie obyazannostey i nevypolnenie zapretov po rossiyskomu zakonodatelstvu kak mera protivodeystviya korruptsii [Disciplinary Responsibility of Employees of State Corporations, State Companies for Violation of Duties and Failure to Bans with the Restrictions in Russian Law as a Measure of Combating Corruption]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2016, no. 11, pp. 123—133.
Truntsevskiy Yu. V., Sevalnev V. V. Perspektivy mezhdunarodnogo sotrudnichestva Rossiyskoy Federatsii i Kitayskoy Narodnoy Respubliki v sfere protivodeystviya korruptsii [Prospects for International Anti-Corruption Cooperation of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China]. Mezhdunarodnoe publichnoe i chastnoe pravo, 2016, no. 6, pp. 30—34.
Tsirin A. M. Preduprezhdenie korruptsii: problemy i perspektivy [Prevention of Corruption: Problems and Perspectives]. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2016, no. 12, pp. 106—115.