Search results

Igor Alexeev in his essay is making an attempt to provide a new explanatory paradigm for the interpretation of historical meaning of current political transformation in the Middle East and North Africa. Arguing that current revolutionary processes reflect a crisis of modern "three-world system" of global economical and political relations, author tries to discover authentic political logic basing on achievements of traditional Muslim socio-political thought, e.g. social and political theories of Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Khaldun. From this perspective Alexeev argues that collapse on modern nation-state system which provided a "secondary modernization" model of development, if it takes place, will led to a double alternative of either a moderate Salafi-style Islamic "democracy" of neo-traditional patrimonial autocracy based on "neo-feudal" system of patronage alliances and revival of pre-modern social structures based on newly established 'asabiyya and ideological da'wa. ; В своем эссе Игорь Алексеев делает попытку дать новую объяснительную парадигму для интерпретации исторического значения политических изменений, происходящих на Ближнем Востоке и в Северной Африке. Автор полагает, что наблюдаемые в настоящее время революционные процессы отражают кризис современной системы «трех миров» глобальных экономических и политических отношений, и пытается вскрыть внутреннюю, исконно арабскую политическую логику, основанную на достижениях традиционной мусульманской социально-политической мысли, таких как социальные и политические теории Ибн Таймийи и Ибн Халдуна. Основываясь на этом положении, Алексеев утверждает, что, если действительно случится коллапс современной системы национальных государств, в рамках которых сложилась «вторичная модернизационная» модель развития, то он приведет либо к умеренно-салафитской исламской «демократии», либо к нео-традиционалистскому патерналистскому автократическому режиму, в основе которого лежит возрождение досовременных социальных образований, опирающихся на недавно укоренившуюся 'асабиййа и идеологическую да'ва.

The article demonstrates the cognitive value of the postclassical legal theories underlying the phenomenological and hermeneutic methodology of postmodern philosophy. The ways of overcoming the relativism of postmodernism, which raises the right to the top of the pyramid, based on the foundations of Russian society, forming the context of meaning-making carried out during the constitutionalization of criminal proceedings, are outlined. The article reveals the value component of the methodology of conflict resolution used by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, based on the postclassical jurisprudence. The author argues that it is impossible to resolve these conflicts through traditional legal and dogmatic methods of law enforcement used by ordinary courts. Constitutionalization is presented as a process for the transformation of natural law into a positive law, carried out in two stages: at the first, a certain right is elevated to the rank of a constitutional norm; at the second, this right is deployed in sectoral legislation. It is concluded that the constitutionalization carried out by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is nothing more than a way of resolving normative conflicts, during which the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation interprets both the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the norms of laws, bringing them into a state of mutual non-contradiction.

Aus sowjetischer Sicht

Aus sowjetischer Sicht

Aus sowjetischer Sicht

Aus sowjetischer Sicht

Aus sowjetischer Sicht

Aus sowjetischer Sicht

The article reveals the impotence of classical legal theories to explain the inconsistency of the practice of applying laws. The legal dogma is subjected to the phenomenological analysis. Moreover, its inability to overcome the conventions of pure jurism is shown. From the position of postclassical jurisprudence, the theory of natural law is criticized. The necessity of refusing to contrast natural and positive law is substantiated. The communicative concept of law, its cognitive value and role in ensuring a uniform application of laws are considered. The criticism of integrative legal theories is evaluated from the perspective of the functionality of law in the form of resolving social conflicts. The approach that reduces legal theory to a method of resolving conflicts is called into question. The negative influence of the dichotomy of positive and natural law is argued, both on the uniform application of laws and on the rule of law in general. From the point of view of the functionality of law, the correlation of its material and procedural branches is revealed. As a result, a hypothesis is formulated that the main direction of the development of legal science is the creation of integrative law that can combine various legal concepts, which will allow us to build a rigid legal dogma based on unified methodological foundations and remove contradictions between legal theories in resolving social conflicts

The article is devoted to the comparative legal analysis of normative general and specialized legal acts, which indirectly or directly fix the constitutional and legal status of the lower level of public order protection bodies - the municipal police. The relevance of this study is explained by the attribution of local self-government bodies to the number of subjects of public order protection in the Russian Federation through the establishment of the municipal police, after the adoption of a specialized law on the municipal police. The comparative legal study made it possible to highlight the existing models of normative consolidation of the municipal police constitutional and legal status in accordance with the form of state structure.

The objective of the article is to find optimal ways to develop the judicial interpretation of legal norms as a form of application (explanation) by courts of norms of current legislation. Justice is one of the most important security functions of the judicial power system in Russia and, according to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, is exercised in civil, administrative, criminal, and constitutional court proceedings. The inevitability of the existence of the judicial lawmaking institution implies the necessity to adjust the understanding of the principle of the separation of powers so that the lawmaking function is distributed among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of power. The leading method of studying the problem is deductive, which allows studying the legal nature of the judicial interpretation of legal norms. The article concludes that the existence of discretion in the legal system is conditioned by several objective factors. These factors include the objective impossibility of regulation by the general norm of all individual legal relations; the existence of evaluative concepts, dispositive, and peremptory legal norms containing relatively certain or alternative sanctions; the existence of open legal lists, gaps in the law, and collisions of legislation. The thesis is argued that it is impossible to level out by subjective preferences one of such objective phenomena of legal regulation as legitimacy and law enforcement discretion. At the same time, legitimacy is a phenomenon of a higher order. In a sustainable democratic legal system, law enforcement discretion can function only in terms of legitimacy.