The role of constitutional policy in the formation of a democratic society and the rule of law in the conditions of the Russian legal system

Eduard Eremyan; Eduard Galitsky; Ruslan Chermit

doi:10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1244

Authors

Eduard Eremyan The Contemporary History Fund
Eduard Galitsky Рeoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)
Ruslan Chermit Рeoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1244

Keywords:

legal systems, constitutional provisions, constitutional review, social development, constitutional values

Abstract

The study purpose is to estimate the direct relationship of constitutional provisions and other sources of constitutional law with the rule of law concept, law and democracy effectiveness, to compare and determine the priorities of Russia’s constitutional values. Through a comparative legal method, issues related to the constitutional provisions interpretation and legal system characteristics at specific stages of its development in Russia and foreign countries are examined. The results of this study reveal the essence of the genesis and evolution of sources of Russian constitutional law and are of practical importance for subjects of the formation of state policy in the field of constitutional law.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Views 1590
Downloads:
PDF_11_6S_Eremyan_et_al_OSLS 196
XML_11_6S_Eremyan_et_al_OSLS 570

Author Biographies

Eduard Eremyan, The Contemporary History Fund

Eduard Eremyan is affiliated at the Contemporary History Fund (Moscow, Russian Federation). He is a Candidate of Legal Sciences. He is specialized in policy and constitutional law, legal systems and rules. Contact details: The Contemporary History Fund, 12 Presnenskaya Embankment, Moscow, 123112, Russian Federation. Email: ed.eremyan@rambler.ru

Eduard Galitsky, Рeoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Eduard Galitsky is affiliated at the Department of Constitutional Law and Constitutional Proceedings of the Рeoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University) (Moscow, Russian Federation). He is an Assistant. He is an expert in law, legislation, legislation systems and legal education. Contact details: Department of Constitutional Law and Constitutional Proceedings, Рeoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), 6 Miklukho-Maklaya St, Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation; e-mail: galitsky999@rambler.ru

Ruslan Chermit, Рeoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Ruslan Chermit is affiliated at the Department of Constitutional Law and Constitutional Proceedings of the Рeoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University) (Moscow, Russian Federation). He is a Postgraduate Student. His research interests include legal education, society formation, democratic societies etc. Contact details: Department of Constitutional Law and Constitutional Proceedings, Рeoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), 6 Miklukho-Maklaya St, Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation; e-mail: chermitr@rambler.ru

References

Alexy, R., 2003. Constitutional rights, balancing, and rationality. Ratio Juris, 16(2), 131–140.

Arban, E., 2015. Re-centralizing subsidiarity: interpretations by the Italian Constitutional Court. Regional & Federal Studies, 25(2), 129–144.

Avakyan, S.A., 2018. Problems of direct operation and application of the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993. Constitutional and municipal law, 12, 18–26.

Barannikov, V.P., and Matronina, L.F., 2004. Dinamika religioznosti v informatsionnom obschestve [Dynamics of religiousness in an information society]. Sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya [Sociological Studies], 9, 102–107.

Blauberger, M., and Schmidt, S.K., 2017. The European Court of Justice and its political impact. West European Politics [online], 40(4), 907–918. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2017.1281652 [Access 5 November 2021].

Blick, A., 2016. The merits of a written constitution. Judicial Review, 21(1), 49–52.

Bondar, N.S., 2011. Sudebnyy konstitutsionalizm v Rossii v svete konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya [Judicial constitutionalism in Russia in the light of constitutional justice]. Moscow: Norma, Infra-M.

Bondar, N.S., and Dzhagaryan, A., 2016. Direct effect of the Constitution: generation and constitutional justice guarantee. Comparative Constitutional Review, 3, 52–78.

Boxill, B.R., 2019. Dignity, Slavery, and the Thirteenth Amendment. In: B.R. Boxill, The Constitution of Rights [online]. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 102–117. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501737213-007 [Access 5 November 2021].

Brand-Ballard, J., 2010. Limits of Legality: The Ethics of Lawless Judging. New York: Oxford University Press.

Brinks, D.M., and Blass, A., 2017. Rethinking judicial empowerment: the new foundations of constitutional justice. International Journal of Constitutional Law [online], 15(2), 296–331. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mox045 [Access 5 November 2021].

Brown, N.J., and Waller, J.G., 2016. Constitutional courts and political uncertainty: constitutional ruptures and the rule of judges. International Journal of Constitutional Law [online], 14(4), 817–850. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mow060 [Access 5 November 2021].

CIVICUS, 2021. CIVICUS Monitor tracking civil space [online]. Johannesburg/Geneva/New York: CIVICUS. Available from: https://monitor.civicus.org [Access 10 May 2019].

Corwin, E.S., (with H.W. Chase and C.R. Ducat, eds.), 2008. The constitution and what it means today. 14th ed. Princeton University Press.

Cross, F.B., and Lindquist, S.A., 2006. The scientific study of judicial activism. Minnesota Law Review [online], 91, 1752–1781. Available from: https://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/CrossandLindquist_Final.pdf [Access 5 November 2021].

Fabrikant, R., 2017. From Warren to Burger: race relations inside the court. Mitchell Hamline Law Review [online], 43(6), 1–9. Available from: https://open.mitchellhamline.edu/mhlr/vol43/iss6/1 [Access 5 November 2021].

Freedom House, 2021. Freedom World 2021 [online]. Available online: https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2019/map [Accessed 09 November 2021].

Hasbrouck, B., 2020. Abolishing Racist Policing with the Thirteenth Amendment. UCLA Law Review [online], 67, 1108–1113. Available from: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlufac/631/ [Access 5 November 2021].

Human Development Reports, 2020. Gender Inequality Index (GII) 2020 [online]. Available from: http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/GII [Access 9 November 2021].

Huscroft, G., and Miller, B.W., 2011. The Challenge of Originalism: Theories of Constitutional Interpretation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Katanian, K., 2008. Konstitutsionnyiy sud vsegda zanimalsya politikoy [The Constitutional Court has always been involved in politics]. The New Times [online], 16 June. Available from: https://newtimes.ru/articles/detail/4055/ [Access 12 October 2020].

Kmiec, K.D., 2004. The origin and current meanings of judicial activism. California Law Review [online], 92(5), 1441–1477. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.15779/Z38X71D [Access 5 November 2021].

Lauder, K.H., 2016. A critique of balancing and the principle of proportionality in constitutional law–a case for “impersonal rights”? Transnational Legal Theory [online], 7(2), 228–256. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2016.1176791 [Access 5 November 2021].

Liverovskii, A.A., 2018. Razvitie ponyatiynogo apparata konstitutsionnogo prava [The development of the constitutional law conceptual framework]. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Right. Journal of the Higher School of Economics] [online], 2, 229–247. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17323/2072-8166.2018.2.229.247 [Access 5 November 2021].

Malko, A.V., and Salomatina, A.Y., 2017. Strategiya razvitiya pravosudiya v usloviyah globalizatsii [Strategy of justice development amidst globalization]. Monograph. Moscow: RIOR: INFRA-M.

Mälksoo, L., 2021. International Law and the 2020 Amendments to the Russian Constitution. American Journal of International Law, 115(1), 78–93.

Morshchakova, T.G., 2017. O nekotoryih aktualnyih problemah konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya [On some actual problems of constitutional justice]. Comparative Constitutional Review, 3, 117–124.

Mulé, R., and Walzenbach, G., 2019. Introduction: two spaces of subsidiarity? Commonwealth & Comparative Politics [online], 57(2), 141–152. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/14662043.2019.1573991 [Access 5 November 2021].

Nersesyants, V.S., 2004. Problemyi obschey teorii prava i gosudarstva [Problems of general theory of law and state: textbook for universities]. Moscow: Norma.

Ostapovich, I.Y., 2019. Normativnost resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii: metodyi ee rozhdeniya, ob'ektivnyie i sub'ektivnyie granitsyi [Normativity of decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation: methods of its occurrence, objective and subjective boundaries]. Tomsk State University Journal, 31, 112–122.

Partlett, W., 2020. Russia's 2020 Constitutional Amendments: A Comparative Perspective. University of Melbourne Legal Studies Research Paper Series [online], no. 887. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3625390 [Access 12 October 2020].

Payne, S., 2018. The supreme court and the Miller case: More reasons why the UK needs a written constitution. The Round Table, 107(4), 441–450.

Ponomarenko, I., 2019. On the limits of proportionality. Review of Constitutional Studies [online], 24(2), 241. Available from: https://www.constitutionalstudies.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/03_Iryna-Ponomarenko-1.pdf [Access 5 November 2021].

Posner, R.A., 2003. Law, Pragmatism and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 328–331.

Reporters without Borders, 2018. 2018 World Press Freedom Index. RFS Reporters without Borders [online]. Paris: RSF. Available from: https://rsf.org/en/ranking [Access 12 October 2020].

Salikov, M.S., Libanova, S.E., and Ostapovich, I.Y., 2019. Konstitutsionno-kontrolnoe Normotvorchestvo V Kontekste Doktrinyi Zhivoy Konstitutsii [Constitutional review rule-making in the context of the living Constitution doctrine]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Tomsk State University Journal] [online], 440, 219–230. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17223/15617793/440/30 [Access 5 November 2021].

Sempill, J.A., 2018. What rendered ancient tyrants detestable: the rule of law and the constitution of corporate power. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 10, 219–253.

Tan, D., 2017. Walking the Tightrope between legality and legitimacy: taking rights balancing seriously. Singapore Academy of Law Journal [online], 29, 743. Available from: https://journalsonline.academypublishing.org.sg/Journals/Singapore-Academy-of-Law-Journal-Special-Issue/e-Archive/ctl/eFirstSALPDFJournalView/mid/513/ArticleId/1246/Citation/JournalsOnlinePDF [Access 5 November 2021].

Tremblay, L.B., 2014. An egalitarian defense of proportionality-based balancing. International Journal of Constitutional Law [online], 12(4), 864–890. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mou060 [Access 5 November 2021].

Tsindeliani, I., et al., 2021. Transformation of the legal mechanism of taxation as a factor of influence on strategic planning of budgetary policy: Russia case study. Journal of Transnational Management [online], 26(3). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/15475778.2021.1989565 [Access 5 November 2021].

Ura, J.D., and Flink, C.M., 2016. Experience counts: the chief justice, management tenure, and strategic behavior on the US Supreme Court. Research & Politics [online], 3(2), 1–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168016644464 [Access 5 November 2021].

Varlamova, N.V., 2008. Yuridicheskiy pozitivizm i prava cheloveka [Legal positivism and human rights]. Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost [Social sciences and modernity] [online], 1, 156–166. Available online: http://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/2010/11/26/1214821832/Varlamova.pdf [Access 12 October 2020].

Vengerov, A.B., 2000. Teoriya gosudarstva i prava: izdanie trete [Theory of state and law: third edition]. Moscow: Yurisprudentsiya.

Vinogradova, E.V., and Patyulin, G.S., 2020. Popravki 2020 goda v Konstitutsiyu Rossiyskoy Federatsii. K voprosu o roli konstitutsionnogo suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii v zaschite prav i svobod cheloveka i grazhdanina [2020 amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. On the question of the role of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the protection of human and civil rights and freedoms]. Obrazovanie I Pravo [Education and Law] [online], 2, 24–28. Available from: https://doi.org/10.24411/2076-1503-2020-00063 [Access 5 November 2021].

Wang, E., 2018. The 13th Amendment Exclusion Leads to Modern Day Slavery. Juris [online], 30 October. Available from: https://dukeundergraduatelawmagazine.org/2018/10/30/the-13th-amendment-exclusion-leads-to-modern-day-slavery/ [Access 12 October 2020].

World Health Organization, 2020. Life expectancy and Healthy life expectancy, data by country [online]. Data set, last updated 4 December. Available from: https://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.688?lang=en [Access 9 November 2021].

World Justice Project, 2021. Rule of law index [online]. Available online: https://worldjusticeproject.org/sites/default/files/documents/WJP-INDEX-21.pdf [Access 9 November 2021].

Zorkin, V.D., 2018. Sut' prava [Essence of law]. Voprosy filosofii [Philosophy questions] [online], 5(59), 1–11. Available online: http://crimescience.ru/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/%D0%96%D1%83%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB-%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%83%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%83%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%8F-%E2%84%96559-%D0%B7%D0%B0-2017.pdf [Access 9 November 2021].