Suchergebnisse

In the article, some features of legal technique of the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation On the improving regulation of certain issues of the organization and functioning of public authorities are observed. The author of the article pays attention to the difficulties of the legal understanding of some new provisions of the Constitution of Russia. In this context, the author concludes, that such constitutional provisions can be clarified by formation of legal positions by the Constitutional Court of Russia and by the adoption of amendments to the current legislation. Besides, in the article attention is paid to the need of rethinking of certain being formed legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Russia in the context of changing powers of public authorities. It is marked, that the forming of legal certainty regime is an urgent guarantee of the warning of the constitutional conflicts. ; В статье рассматриваются особенности юридической техники Закона Российской Федерации о поправке к Конституции Российской Федерации О совершенствовании регулирования отдельных вопросов организации и функционирования публичной власти. Обращается внимание на сложности правопонимания отдельных обновленных положений Конституции Российской Федерации. В этой связи автор приходит к выводу, что соответствующие формулы могут быть уточнены, в том числе посредством формирования правовых позиций Конституционного Суда Российской Федерации, а также посредством развития конституционных положений в действующем законодательстве. Кроме того, в статье обращается внимание на необходимость переосмысления отдельных ранее сформированных правовых позиций органа конституционной юстиции в связи с изменением баланса полномочий органов публичной власти в рамках системы сдержек и противовесов. Отмечается, что формирование режима правовой определенности является важной гарантией предупреждения конституционных конфликтов.

The article is devoted to the first session of the 13th National People's Congress held on March 5-20, 2018 in Beijing and to the important personnel and legislative decisions adopted at it. The issues of political transformations in the context of changing the Constitution of the PRC and the relationship between the CPC and the Chinese State are considered. Special attention is paid to personnel appointments and amendments to the Constitution of the PRC, the PRC law "On control". A detailed analysis of the amendments to the basic law of the country, introducing in the text the name of Xi Jinping and the concept of "socialism with Chinese characteristics in the new era", the abolition of the term limitation for the post of the PRC Chairman, and the constitutional and legal consolidation of the monitoring committee status in the system of state authorities is presented. ; Статья посвящена прошедшей 5-20 марта 2018 г. в Пекине 1-й сессии Всекитайского собрания народных представителей 13-го созыва и принятым на ней важным кадровым и законодательным решениям. Рассматриваются вопросы политических преобразований в контексте изменения Конституции КНР и взаимоотношения КПК и китайского государства. Особое внимание уделено кадровым назначениям и принятым на сессии поправкам в Конституцию КНР, Закону КНР «О контроле». Подробно анализируются поправки в Основной закон страны, предусматривающие внесение в его текст фамилии Си Цзиньпина и идеи о «социализме с китайской спецификой новой эпохи», отмену ограничения срока пребывания на посту Председателя КНР, а также конституционно-правовое закрепление статуса контрольных комитетов в системе органов государственной власти.

Выявляются и раскрываются особенности развития публично-властных отношений в сфере местного самоуправления в постсоветской России. Отмечается, что в начале 1990-х гг. был взят курс на европейский опыт формирования и функционирования института местного самоуправления, показываются причины такого выбора. Однако в дальнейшем оказалось, что такой подход не соответствует российским традициям и реалиям, в результате он был существенным образом изменен и нашел логическое закрепление в конституционных поправках – 2020, предусматривающих большую степень огосударствления местного самоуправления. Обосновывается авторская позиция о перспективах института местного самоуправления в России. ; The features of the development of public-power relations in the field of local self-government in post-Soviet Russia are identified and revealed. It is noted that in the early 1990s a course was taken on the European experience of the formation and functioning of the institution of local self-government, the reasons for this choice are shown. However, later it turned out that this approach did not correspond to Russian traditions and realities; as a result, it was significantly changed and found a logical consolidation in the 2020 constitutional amendments, which provide for a greater degree of nationalization of local self-government. The author's position on the prospects of the institution of local self-government in Russia is substantiated.

The constitutional reforms in Russia are amongst the most significant news for Russia's partners in international relations. The configuration of international law and Russian domestic legal order falls within the scope of the constitutional changes of 2020, and there is no chance that this change will be abandoned by the legislator. This particular amendment was not actively commented on during the nationwide discussion on the constitutional reform; it drew mostly experts' attention. The article alleges that the constitutional amendment restricting the applicability of international case law in Russia is both a transient response to the instant political tension around Russia, and a formalization of the positivistic trend well established in domestic judicial practice. The positivistic trend is part of the process shaping Russia's own approach to international law. The prospective amendment concerning international case law in the Constitution of the Russian Federation will not hinder the rules expressly stated in the treaties of the EAEU. However, the resolutions of the EAEU's structures and institutions, including the case law of the Court of the EAEU, are likely to be scrutinized in a defensive way by Russian Constitutional court in situations extraordinary for the Russian State, ensuring their conformity with the unquestionable and unconditional supremacy of the Russian Constitution.

The subject of research is social relations concerning the constitutional transformation of the State Council of the Russian Federation into the format of a constitutional state body, it's tasks and functions in the unified system of public power. The aim of the research is to confirm or disprove hypothesis that the Russian State Council is a constitutional state body that ensures the coordinated functioning and interaction of authorities in the unified system of public power.The methodological basis of the research includes historical, comparative legal, formal legal methods, legal modeling and forecasting. The research is based on existing and historical legal acts, materials of judicial practice, as well as on the works of leading national lawyers.The main results, scope of application. The authors substantiate concept of the constitutional status of the Russian State Council as a completely new constitutional state body, formed on the basis of modern national principles of state building, taking into account the existing constitutional practice. Main task of the State Council is exercising the constitutional powers of the Russian President to ensure the coordinated functioning and interaction of public authorities, the definition of the main directions of national and foreign policy of the state. The article provides a critical analysis of the goals, tasks, functions of the Russian State Council, the decisions it makes, as a result of which a number of conflicts in the regulation of its constitutional-legal status are revealed. Some proposals to improve legislation and law enforcement practice aimed at solving of the discovered contradictions are made. Current constitutional of the State Council is a result of the constitutional amendments of 2020 in the Russian Constitution and innovations in the Federal Law on the State Council of the Russian Federation. The authors substantiate the idea that the consolidation of a new constitutional position of the State Council can be considered as a process of forming a completely new state body, designed to ensure the coordinated functioning and interaction of bodies included in the unified public system. A comparative legal analysis of the constitutional legislation on State Councils in foreign countries showed that despite the same name the status and functions of these state institutions differ greatly in different countries, therefore any comparative study of them will be unreliable.Conclusions. The Russian State Council has competence, functions of a state power character, take decisions signed by the President of the Russian Federation and therefore have a generally binding character. So it has the characteristics of a public authority. The Russian State Council is a new constitutional and legal structure - a constitutional state body created in order to implement the constitutional powers of the Russian President to ensure the coordinated functioning and interaction of other bodies (that are part of the unified system of public authority) and to determine the main directions of domestic and foreign policy of the state. ; Cформулирована авторская концепция конституционно-правового статуса Государственного Совета РФ как совершенно нового конституционного государственного органа, образованного на основе современных отечественных принципов государственного строительства с учетом сложившейся конституционной практики и в целях реализации конституционных полномочий Президента РФ по обеспечению согласованного функционирования и взаимодействия органов, входящих в единую систему публичной власти, определению основных направлений внутренней и внешней политики государства. Проведен критический анализ целей, задач, функций Государственного Совета РФ, принимаемых им решений, в результате которого выявлен ряд коллизий в регулировании его конституционно-правового статуса, высказаны предложения по совершенствованию законодательства и правоприменительной практики, направленные на устранение выявленных противоречий.

The subject of the article is the content of the constitutional amendment of 2020 on the need to ensure the protection of historical truth.The purpose of the research is confirmation or confutation of the hypothesis that protection of historical truth should not be provided by measures of constitutional and legal regulation, since this would conflict with other constitutional principles.The methodology of research includes analysis of academic researches concerning the essence of historical truth, interpretation of Russian Constitution.The main results, scope of application. The author proves that "historical truth" in the constitutional and legal sense is the goal of an objectively and conscientiously minded researcher, guaranteed in a free democratic society by the constitutional right to freedom of thought, scientific creativity and expression. Goal-setting in cognition is a matter of mental activity that is difficult for the democratic control of the state and law. From a normative point of view the moral aspect exists here only (the search for historical truth is a virtue, its distortion is a vice). Constitutional democracy is based on the will and needs of today's generation of people. The past, of course, has a certain significance, but it cannot be considered decisive. An excessive preoccupation with traditions and the historical past is fraught with stagnation, stagnation or even degradation of the state mechanism. Constitutional regulation of historical truth leads to unnecessary sacralization of the history of the state, which is profoundly alien to the true legal essence of the constitutional system of a modern democratic society and the objectivity of historical and legal science. State-legal influence in this area is difficult and entails risks of legally binding ideology, which is prohibited by the first chapter of the "Fundamentals of the constitutional order" of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (part 2 of article 13) and the current acts of the Russian Constitutional Court.Conclusions. The legal obligation to "ensure the protection of historical truth" deserves a critical assessment, since it is difficult to combine with the constitutional rights to freedom of scientific creativity, freedom of thought and speech, the principle of ideological diversity and the democratic nature of the Russian state. The right of citizens to their own position on historical issues and search for their "historical truth" followed from the constitutional regulation before the constitutional amendments of 2020 and continues to operate today due to the immutability of chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. ; Исследуется содержание конституционной поправки от 2020 г. о необходимости обеспечения защиты исторической правды. Автор доказывает, что «историческая правда» в конституционно-правовом значении - это цель объективно и добросовестно настроенного исследователя, гарантируемая в свободном демократическом обществе конституционным правом на свободу мысли, научного творчества и выражения мнения. Отмечается, что целеполагание в познании - вопрос мыслительной деятельности, с трудом поддающийся демократическому контролю государства и права; с нормативной точки зрения здесь, в лучшем случае, просматривается нравственный аспект (поиск исторической правды есть добродетель, ее искажение - порок). Государственно-правовое воздействие в этой сфере затруднительно и влечет за собой риски появления юридически обязательной идеологии, что запрещено главой первой «Основы конституционного строя» Конституции РФ (ч. 2 ст. 13) и действующими актами Конституционного Суда РФ.

Nowelizacja ustawy o Trybunale Konstytucyjnym uchwalona 22 grudnia 2015 r. budzi liczne wątpliwości krajowych i zagranicznych ośrodków naukowych, medialnych i politycznych. Obawy wywołuje zwłaszcza to, że nie mieści się ona w granicach określonych w art. 197 Konstytucji RP. Wbrew pozorom wykracza bowiem poza sprawy organizacyjne i proceduralne. Przepisy narzucające zasadę orzekania w 13-osobowym składzie, w kolejności wyznaczanej datami wpływu spraw oraz brak vacatio legis uniemożliwiają w praktyce normalną działalność orzeczniczą Trybunału Konstytucyjnego. W szczególności blokują możliwość zbadania w rozsądnym terminie konstytucyjności ustawy z 22 grudnia 2015 r., co z kolei rodzi niebezpieczeństwo powstania absurdalnych sytuacji prawnych. Może to oznaczać ingerencję w kompetencje orzecznicze Trybunału Konstytucyjnego zagwarantowane w art. 188 Konstytucji RP. Do niego też powinno należeć ostateczne rozstrzygnięcie wszystkich dylematów związanych z wymienioną wyżej ustawą. ; The Amendment to the Act on the Constitutional Tribunal passed on 22 December 2015 has raised serious doubts in Polish and foreign academic and political institutions and the media. Of particular concern is the fact that the amendment does not correspond to the limitations of Article 197 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Contrary to appearances the amendment exceeds organisational and procedural questions. The amendment imposing a rule that 13 judges must rule on cases in the chronological order of their submission and the lack of vacatio legis makes it impossible for the Constitutional Tribunal to continue in practice its normal judicial function. In particular it makes it impossible for the Constitutional Tribunal to decide on the constitutional legality of the Amendment of 22 December 2015 within a reasonable time scale which in itself could result in dangerous and absurd legal situations. This could be tantamount to an interference in the judicial competences of the Constitutional Tribunal guaranteed by Article 188 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. It is the Constitutional Tribunal itself that should rule on all dilemmas concerning this amendment.

The article tries to bring to the light the role of symbolism in the organized human life, in general, and the contemporary societies with the accelerating changes almost in all social structures, in particular. The rational of symbolism in changing socio-political and legal environment creates complexity of the issue, which has been studied in the article, taking into account the methodology of complex system theory. The interconnectivity and interdependency of law, morality and politics create the picture of synergy of different social norms with each other in changing environment. Their positive synergy is able to create a perception of the 'ethical state' – the focal point of equilibrium expressed in the attractor of future admired development. In the legal perspective, the symbol of that attractor appears to be the constitution as the society's and the nation's symbol of coexistence based on the values of mutual past, necessary present and admired future. It is substantiated that the Constitution is the phenomenon, representing a concrete constitutional idea and constitutional identity, and should be the one to be considered as such in a lot of people's minds if we intend to have a proper constitutional system and values. Hence, the Constitution is not just a document with a highest legal force, but also a symbol of a concrete constitutional system, and from this viewpoint the Basic Law has a symbolic significance. The authors substantiate that the mentioned significance of the Constitution makes it clear that constitutional policy in any state should be established and implemented in a manner, obviously demonstrating an attitude towards the Constitution, in the frames of which it is considered as a symbol of a concrete constitutional system. The most important circumstance in this context is to never transform the Constitution (directly or indirectly) from a symbol to an instrument in the hands of both the people and the state power and the whole constitutional policy of the state should be based on the discussed essential idea. Moreover, according to the authors the Constitution should not be subject to amendment parallel to every change of political situation of the state or formation of a new political majority merely conditioned by the mentioned changes. The Constitution has a fundamental role from the aspect of regulating social relations, has symbolic significance and can't be used just as a tool for solving ongoing political problems.

The article analyzes the amendments to article 71 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation that came into force in 2020, in the part which they affect information- al relations. Special attention is paid to the introduction of new informational terms, such as "information technology" and "digital data", into the constitutional text. Possible ways of implementing these amendments in the Russian informational legislation, as well as their conceptual influence on the development of informational law, are investigated. Along with general cognition methods (analysis and synthesis), special cognition methods (legal interpretation and normative search), problem-oriented approach and cognition methods of other fields of knowledge (in particular, philology and computer science) were used. There is a continuing contradiction between the constitutional text and the law on information, which leads to the need to adjust the thesaurus of the latter. The fundamental importance of the constitutional novel about ensuring the security of the individual, society and the state within the use of information technologies and using of digital data is noted. These novels become a start point for the implementation of the concept of personal digital sovereignty in Russian legislation, strengthening the guarantees of respect for the constitutional rights and freedoms of the individual in cyberspace. The ways of development of informational legislation out- lined in the article require a thorough scientific discussion with the involvement of specialists of information technologies and information security. The proposed changes in the informational legislation can later serve as a basis for the development of a codified act in the field of informational law. ; В статье анализируются вступившие в силу в 2020 году поправки к ст. 71 Конституции Российской Федерации, в той части, в которой они затрагивают информационные правоотношения. Особое внимание уделяется введению в текст Основного Закона новых информационно- правовых терминов, таких как «информационные технологии» и «цифровые данные». Исследуются возможные пути имплементации этих поправок в российское информационное законодательство, а также их концептуальное влияние на развитие российского информационного права. Наряду с общенаучными методами познания (анализ и синтез), использовались специальные методы познания (метод юридического толкования и метод нормативного поиска), проблемно ориентированный подход и методы познания из других областей научного знания (в частности, филологии и информатики). Констатировано сохраняющееся противоречие между текстом основного Закона и рамочным законом об информации, следствием чего является необходимость корректировки тезауруса последнего. Отмечена принципиальная важность конституционной новеллы об обеспечении безопасности личности, общества и государства при применении информационных технологий, обороте цифровых данных. Данная новелла становится отправной точкой для реализации в российском законодательстве концепции цифрового суверенитета личности, дальнейшего укрепления гарантий соблюдения конституционных прав и свобод личности в киберпространстве. Намеченные в статье пути развития информационного законодательства требуют обстоятельной научной дискуссии с привлечением специалистов в сфере информационных технологий и информационной безопасности. Предложенные изменения в информационном законодательстве в дальнейшем могут послужить основой для разработки кодифицированного акта в сфере информационного законодательства.

The subject. The article is devoted to constitutional conflict about distrust to the Government of the Russian Federation and constitutional norms that regulated such conflict and were changed during the constitutional reform in 2020. The author analyzes such transformation in legal regulation and try to find causes for this changes. And also the author provides a constitutional-conflict diagnostic of new constitutional norms to identify conflictogens.Purposes of the paper are to find a legal reasons for transformation of constitutional norms about distrust to the Russian Government and to prevent an appearance in future long term of serious constitutional conflict by finding its conflictogens.The methodology of the study includes a new methodology of a constitutional legal science – constitutional-conflict diagnostic. The constitutional-conflict diagnostic is a system of consistently applied scientific methods, legal principles and presumptions aimed at obtaining information about the constitutional conflict and the constitutional-legal methods of its prevention and resolution. The constitutional-conflict diagnostic includes group of methods: dialectical and systemic methods, as well as structural and functional method; a group of private-scientific methods (historical, methods of formal logic: analysis, comparison). The formal-legal, comparative legal methods and a method of modeling of legal consequences are also used.The main results and scope of their application. The constitutional reform of 2020 year complicated the procedure for resolving the constitutional conflict of trust to the government and introduced a subject-status misbalance in part 4 of Article 117 of the Russian Constitution, expressed in the unmotivated and unjustified possibility of the president to had no activities for resolving such conflict.Legal modeling of the simultaneous implementation of the provisions of parts 3 and 4 of Article 117 of the Russian Constitution revealed the possibility of alternating procedures for expressing trust and denying in confidence to the government, which was absent before the constitutional reform.From a formal legal point of view and a conflictological approach, the amendments to Part 4 of Article 117 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation cannot be explained, and they are a certain «opportunistic maneuver» to the Russian Parliament. ; Рассматривается конституционная трансформация процедур выражения недоверия Правительству РФ и отказа ему в доверии со стороны Государственной Думы, которая была осуществлена в ходе конституционной реформы 2020 г. Анализируются причины и предпосылки соответствующих конституционных поправок, а также проводится их конституционно-конфликтная диагностика на предмет выявления конфликтогенов.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: Assessment of the possible impact of the amendment of the Act on Regional Accounting Chambers on the extent of autonomy of local government units.THE RESEARCH PROBLEM AND METHODS: Independence is one of the most important features of self-government. The solutions adopted in the draft amendment to the Act on Regional Accounting Chambers (RACs) concerning the extension of the scope of control over territorial self-government units (TSGUs), as well as the way of appointing the presidents of the RACs induce the hypothesis of creating potential conditions for the unregulated interference of government administration in the activities of local governments. Equally important is the symbolic significance of such an initiative. The analysis used the institutional and comparative method, the study was primarily concerned with a bill amending the law on regional accounting chambers and documents created during the consultations and project agreements.THE PROCESS OF ARGUMENTATION: The article describes the current legal regulations governing the supervision and control of regional accounting chambers over TSGUs, and these were set against the proposed changes in legal and political terms. The possible effects of the changes were indicated. The analysis also referred to the opinions of the subjects involved in the agreement and consultation process. RESEARCH RESULTS: The analysis confirmed that the proposed changes are very likely to create unauthorized access to the constitutional principle of the autonomy of territorial self-government units that may create the possibility of indirect interference in their activities. In the political dimension, the prepared draft amendment creates an impression of the government's tightening of control and supervision over TSGUs.CONCLUSIONS, INNOVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The legislative bill submitted in the Sejm requires further changes. The withdrawal of the drafter from the extension of the scope of RACs control during the consultations needs to be seen as inadequate. The proposed way of appointing presidents of regional accounting chambers is still a serious concern. ; CEL NAUKOWY: Ocena możliwego wpływu nowelizacji ustawy o regionalnych izbach obrachunkowych na zakres samodzielności jednostek samorządu terytorialnego.PROBLEM I METODY BADAWCZE: Samodzielność jest jedną z najważniejszych cech samorządności. Przyjęte w projekcie nowelizacji ustawy o regionalnych izbach obrachunkowych (RIO) rozwiązania, dotyczące rozszerzenia przedmiotowego zakresu kontroli nad jednostkami samorządu terytorialnego (JST), jak również sposobu powoływania prezesów RIO, skłaniają do postawienia hipotezy o stworzeniu potencjalnych warunków dla nieuprawnionej ingerencji administracji rządowej w działalność samorządów. Nie mniej ważne jest również symboliczne znacznie takiej inicjatywy. W analizie wykorzystano metodę instytucjonalno-prawną i porównawczą, badaniu poddano przede wszystkim projekt ustawy o zmianie ustawy o regionalnych izbach obrachunkowych oraz dokumenty powstałe w toku konsultacji i uzgodnień projektu.PROCES WYWODU: W artykule scharakteryzowano obowiązujące regulacje prawne dotyczące nadzoru i kontroli regionalnych izb obrachunkowych nad JST, a na tym tle dokonano analizy proponowanych zmian w wymiarze prawnym oraz politycznym. Wskazano ich możliwe skutki. W toku analizy odwołano się również do opinii podmiotów uczestniczących w procesie uzgodnień i konsultacji.WYNIKI ANALIZY NAUKOWEJ: Przeprowadzona analiza potwierdziła, że zaproponowane zmiany stwarzają nieuprawnione w myśl konstytucyjnej zasady samodzielności JST rozwiązania, które mogą stworzyć możliwość pośredniego ingerowania w ich działalność. W wymiarze politycznym przygotowany projekt nowelizacji stwarza wrażenie zaostrzenia kontroli i nadzoru rządu nad JST.WNIOSKI, INNOWACJE, REKOMENDACJE: Złożony w Sejmie projekt ustawy wymaga dalszych zmian. Za niewystarczające należy uznać wycofanie się projektodawcy w toku konsultacji z przedmiotowego rozszerzenia zakresu kontroli RIO. Poważne zastrzeżenia budzi nadal proponowany sposób powoływania prezesów regionalnych izb obrachunkowych.

The subject. The article analyzes seven stages of the evolution of the constitutional legal status of the first federal territory in history the District of Columbia, USA. In the course of this analysis, the author formulates the constitutional legal risks of the existence of federal territories in the state. From the standpoint of identifying constitutional legal risks, an amendment to Article 67 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation on the possibility of the formation of federal territories on the territory of Russia is also analyzed.The purpose of the paper is to identify constitutional legal risks in terms of the existence of federal territories using the example of the centuries-old struggle of the District of Columbia for autonomy.The methodology of the study includes general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, description) and legal methods. In addition to this, historical method was also applicable.The main results and scope of their application. The author realized, that a certain constitutional risk exists when the federal territory is established as a special public-law entity, because the evolutionary process of the constitutional-legal status of the first federal territory, that was established in constitutional law – the District of Columbia in the United States of America, demonstrated such risk. The author describes seven different stages of the evolutionary process of the DC's constitutional legal status in its pass to autonomy and full political rights: (1) 1800–1870; (2) 1871 – June of 1874; (3) 20 of June 1874 – 1967; (4) 1967–1973; (5) 1973–1983; (6) September of 1983 – 2016; (7) since 2016 until now.According to these periods, since 1801, DC residents, bound by all obligations of American citizenship, want to be equal to the rest of America's citizens. The United States is the only democratic country in the world today that denies the right to vote for a representative of the capital in the Congress. The Statehood of Washington, DC will correct a long-standing historical injustice that is unique in its nature among all capitals in the world. The author also proposes to consider as a constitutional risk the possibility of negative consequences (legal damage) for the subjects of constitutional law due to the contention of constitutional values.In addition to this, the author concluded, that there is a risk that the Council of the Federal Territory "Sirius" will lose its representative character due to the absence of the established dependence of the number of elected Council members on the number of voters, as happened in the District of Columbia, where a fixed number of Council members (13) is also established, which cannot be changed by the district and which does not depend on the population living in its territory. It is also necessary to take into account the constitutional risk of the federal territory striving for autonomy within the federation, especially in the case of the formation of a local community on its territory. ; Анализируются семь этапов эволюции конституционно-правового статуса первой в истории федеральной территории – округа Колумбия, США. В ходе анализа формулируются конституционно-правовые риски, связанные с существованием федеральных территорий в государстве. С позиции выявления конституционно-правовых рисков также рассматривается поправка к ст. 67 Конституции РФ о возможности образования федеральных территорий в России, а также Федеральный закон от 22 декабря 2020 г. № 437-ФЗ «О федеральной территории "Сириус"». Делается вывод, что существует риск утраты представительного характера Советом федеральной территории «Сириус» в связи с отсутствием установленной зависимости количества избираемых членов Совета от численности избирателей. Также существует конституционно-правовой риск в виде стремления федеральной территории к автономии в составе федерации, особенно в случае образования местного сообщества на его территории.

Abstract. Today, one of the most important, most difficult tasks in Russia is the development, improvement of real, practical
constitutionalism. For its successful solution, of great importance is the study, taking into account the historical experience of our
country in this area. And it is precisely in this that the relevance of the presented article lies, which is devoted to the analysis of the first
domestic constitutional projects that appeared in the second half of the 18th century, the consolidation, regulation of the institutions
of constitutionalism in them, their possibility of using, of course, with appropriate amendments in modern conditions. Note that these
issues have been and remain in the focus of attention of foreign scientists, for example, D.L. Ransel, S.N. Wittaker, C.S. Lenard, M. Raev,
S. Bartolissi.
The author's approach to the very concept of "constitutionalism" as a multilateral phenomenon associated with the real presence
of the constitution is presented; practical constitutionalism; theoretical constitutionalism. The characteristic of constitutional drafts,
the provisions contained in them, concerning constitutionalism of representatives of various kinds of currents of political and legal thought
of the second half of the 18th century, and especially the nobility, enlightenment, and popular movement, is given. Based on the analysis,
it is concluded that, first of all, in the Russian constitutional projects of that time, three most important institutes of constitutionalism
are fixed – representation, and in this regard, representative democracy, parliamentarism; self management; separation of powers. Their
contents are disclosed. Note that all these three institutions are present in modern Russia. But the question of their improvement, real
effective functioning remains in demand. First of all, three fundamental research methods were used in the work: dogmatic; historical
and legal; comparative legal. The article is of interest to government officials, students, university professors, researchers, all those who
are interested in issues of constitutional law of the Russian Federation, the domestic history of the state and law.