Целью настоящего исследования является выявление причин, по которым делегаты IX-го Всероссийского съезда судей (декабрь 2016 г.) не продолжили линию развития отечественного правосудия, провозглашенную Постановлением VIII-го Всероссийского съезда судей № 1 от 19 декабря 2012 г. «О состоянии судебной системы Российской Федерации и основных направлениях ее развития». В ходе проведенного исследования автором были выявлены две основные причины произошедшего. В качестве одной из них называется отсутствие в России самостоятельного государственно-властного органа, разрабатывающего стратегию развития механизма судебной власти, обеспечивающего ее реализацию. Второй, более значимой причиной автор считает недостаточную научно-правовую проработку самого понятия справедливости в механизме правосудия. ; The purpose of this study is to identify the reasons why the delegates of the IX All-Russian Congress of Judges (December 2016) did not continue the line of development of the domestic justice proclaimed by the Decree of the previous congress (VIII All-Russian Congress of Judges no 1, December 19, 2012 – «On the State of the Judicial System of the Russian Federation and the Main Directions of Its Development»). At that time, the delegates of the congress noted, «the need to develop a state project of strategic reforms of the organizational and legal mechanism of domestic justice, whose ultimate goal would be to build a fair court that meets the aspirations of the Russian society, is becoming an ever more pressing need.» They also named the method for solving this problem. In the course of the study, the author has identified two main reasons for the highest body of the country's judicial community not to continue the line for strategic modernization of the justice mechanism and the development of the state fair trial project. Among such reasons, the author names the absence of a separate, independent state-power body in Russia, which would propose a strategy for the development of the judicial power mechanism to ensure its implementation and to be responsible for the case's success. Such an authority is not, nor can be, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, nor any other state body, or any body of the judicial community. Yet such state-power (and constitutional) bodies can be found worldwide, including the CIS member states. This is a reason of the organizational quality – simply for the absence of such named body, we have no one to act as a commissioner for the development of this state project. The second, a more significant reason, is of scientific and legal properties, which the author considers to be the insufficient scientific and legal research on the very concept of justice in the legal system. Aristotle singled out the problem of assessing judicial activity from the position of justice many years ago, and many scientists have turned to it since then. Yet nowadays judges are not guided by scientifically grounded signs of justice, but by their own intuition. The absence of a state power body personifying the judiciary in the country, as well as the inadequacy of the scientific and legal elaboration of the category of justice in the legal system, served as a basis for delegates of the IX All-Russian Congress of Judges to delicately bypass the decision of the delegates of the previous congress, who had considered it necessary to draft a state project for a fair Court. At the same time, it should be noted that objectively, by and large, the general situation in the mechanism of the domestic justice is clearly not so deplorable as the adherents of the Russia's flawedness argue; this mechanism is much better today than it was just ten years ago. Yet the general attitude of the Russian society to the mechanism of domestic justice is not as positive as it should be. Thus, the task set by the delegates of the VIII All-Russian Congress of Judges remains there. It will not resolve itself but it must be solved. In the opinion of the author, the problem is in the first place of scientific nature, rather than organizational, legislative, etc. Therefore, there is the need for the Program for the development of the State Project «Fair Trial», the draft itself is in its form close to the four-volume edition of the legislative acts, which completed the development of the documents for the Judicial Reform in Russia in 1864. Fundamentally, it is the nature of each of the three components of the justice mechanism – Judicial, arbitral and judicial-statutory – which needs to implement the appropriate clear benchmarks of justice.
The subject. The article is devoted to the investigation of the main direct object and the circle of victims are subjected of harm by criminal acts stipulated by pts. 1, 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.The purpose of the paper is to identify does the art. 294 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation meets the other provisions of criminal procedure legislation.The methodology of research includes methods of complex analysis, synthesis, as well as formal-logical, comparative legal and formal-legal methods.Results and scope of application. The content of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not comply with the provisions of the criminal procedure law. The discrep-ancy lies in terms of the range of participants in criminal proceedings and the functions performed by them, as well as the actual content and correlation of such stages of criminal proceedings as the initiation of criminal proceedings and preliminary investigation. In addi-tion, the current state of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not take into account the ever-widening differentiation of criminal proceedings.The circle of victims listed in pt. 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be supplemented by such participants in the criminal process as a criminal investi-gator, the head of the investigative body, the head of the inquiry department, the head of the body of inquiry. At the same time, the author supports the position that the criminal-legal protection of the said persons should cover not only their activities at the stage of preliminary investigation, but also of the entire pre-trial proceedings as a whole.The circle of criminal acts provided for in art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Fed-eration, should also be specified with an indication of encroachment in the form of kidnapping, destruction or damage to such a crime as materials of criminal, civil and other cases, as well as material evidence.Conclusions. The content of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not comply with the provisions of the criminal procedure law. The author formulates the conclusion that the circle of victims listed in pt. 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code should be broadened and joins the position that the criminal-legal protection of these persons should cover not only their activities at the stage of preliminary investigation, but also of the entire pre-trial proceedings as a whole. ; Исследуются основной непосредственный объект и круг лиц, которым может быть причинен вред преступными деяниями, предусмотренными ч. 1, 2 ст. 294 УК РФ. Де-лается вывод, что содержание ст. 294 УК РФ не соответствует положениям уголовно-процессуального законодательства, а круг потерпевших, перечисленных в ч. 2 ст. 294 УК РФ, должен быть расширен – тем самым подтверждается позиция, что уголовно-правовая охрана указанных лиц должна охватывать не только их деятельность на ста-дии предварительного расследования, но и всего досудебного производства в целом.
The article analyzes the features of the modern system of organization of state power. The author substantiates the position that the domestic model of the state and territorial structure and the system of organization of the supreme bodies of state power result from reflecting of certain features of the legal nature of the Russian state administration, which is characterized by a monocratic style. The essence of Russian monocracy is manifested in the concentration of competence in one center, the complexity of manifestation of opposition forces in the political and legal field, the dominance of executive and administrative authorities in the system of public administration, the lack of a mechanism for the implementation of legal responsibility, primarily constitutional and legal, for the results of its activities. The modern problems of the organization of higher bodies of state power, as well as the further development of the domestic model of federalism, including both the improvement of the state and territorial structure and the modernization of federal relations, require their scientific comprehension and identification of ways and their optimization, taking into account the prospects for the formation of a right-wing state in Russia.In this regard, it is concluded that there is a need for a constitutional limitation of Russian monocracy in state administration in order to avoid excessive authoritarianism and centrism in state administration, the creation of certain sorts of conditions and circumstances that hamper the further monocraticization of state administration that is enshrined in the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.DOI 10.14258/izvasu(2017)6-04 ; Анализируются особенности современной системы организации государственной власти.Обосновывается позиция, что отечественная модель государственно-территориального устройства и система организации высших органов государственной власти являются результатом отражения некоторых особенностей юридической природы российского государственного управления, для которого характерен монократический стиль. Сущность российского монократизма проявляется в концентрации компетенционных полномочий в одном центре, сложности проявления в политико-правовом поле оппозиционных сил, доминировании исполнительно-распорядительных органов власти в системе публичного управления, отсутствии механизма реализации юридической ответственности, прежде всего конституционно-правовой, за результаты своей деятельности.Современные проблемы организации высших органов государственной власти, а также вопросы дальнейшего развития отечественной модели федерализма, включая как совершенствование государственно-территориального устройства, так и модернизацию федеративных отношений, требуют научного осмысления и определения путей их оптимизации с учетом перспектив становления правового государства в России.В связи с этим делается вывод о необходимости конституционного ограничения российского монократизма в государственном управлении во избежание излишнего авторитаризма и центризма в государственном управлении, создания определенного рода условий и обстоятельств, препятствующих дальнейшей монократизации государственного управления, нашедшего закрепление в положениях Конституции Российской Федерации.DOI 10.14258/izvasu(2017)6-04
The article discusses the philosophical concept of restorative justice , which the 70- ies of XX century, defines the direction of the juvenile justice system in Russia and foreign countries. The authors represent the philosophical foundations of the concept of restorative justice, show their manifestation in the criminal legislation of the countries near and far abroad. ; В статье рассматривается философская концепция восстановительного правосудия, которая с 70-х годов XX века определяет направления развития ювенальной юстиции России и зарубежных странах. Авторы статьи излагают философские основания концепции восстановительного правосудия, показывают их проявления в уголовно-процессуальном законодательстве стран дальнего и ближнего зарубежья.
It is generally believed that the subject of any investigation should be a problem the solution of which removes an apparent or actual contradiction. But the very idea of social management as a mechanism for conflict cooperation involves solid contradictions and problems. Every solution generates new problems. With this approach, the subject of the public administration theory is scientific substantiation of the process of achieving the optimal government control by improving the organization of such activities. The author notes that, in addition to philosophical and ideological principles the methodology of administrative law includes general and special research methods that apply to other law sciences. Moreover, each science is to shape their own methodological basis relying on the general theory of knowledge. With regard for specific targets and objects of research, different sciences have a common goal - to provide society with new evidence-based structured knowledge. It is concluded that the integrated use of different methods and approaches contributes to the establishment and generalization of specific features of the legal institution and solving problems of its legal regulation at the federal and regional levels. ; Считается, что предметом любого исследования должна являться проблема, решение которой снимает кажущееся или действительное противоречие. Но в самой идее социального управления как механизме конфликтного сотрудничества заложены сплошные противоречия и проблемы. Решение одних порождает новые. При таком подходе предметом теории государственного администрирования является проблема научного обоснования процесса достижения оптимального государственного управления путем совершенствования организации такой деятельности. Обращаясь к заявленной проблематике, автор отмечает, что, кроме философской и мировоззренческой основы, методология административного права включает общие и частнонаучные методы исследования, что применимо и к другим юридическим наукам. При этом каждая наука призвана формировать свои методологические основы, опираясь на общую теорию познания; с учетом специфических целей и объекта исследования разные науки имеют общую цель - предоставление обществу нового системно выстроенного доказательного знания. В результате автор резюмирует, что комплексное применение различных методов и подходов способствует установлению и обобщению особенностей правового института, решению проблем его правового регулирования на общефедеральном и региональном уровнях.
Customs has a significant potential to protect the public against the proliferation ofpirate and fake goods, as it is the first barrier in front of them. The damage that theseproducts cause to the economy in general and the risk for consumers determine the ultimateresponsibility of the Customs authorities to prevent them. The purpose of this study is to track down and present: the historical development ofthe Customs administration; electronization of the Customs administration and Customsservices; advantages and disadvantages of electronic Customs services in facilitating tradewith goods which ensure the safety of goods and security of European citizens afterBulgaria's accession to the Community. The scientific methods used in the paper were as follows: characterization forexperience and observation, source criticism, deduction. Priority for the Bulgarian customs administration after the accession of Bulgaria tothe European Union is uniform application of European customs legislation, procedures andtools for customs control of the EU in different areas of customs law. Consequently, thefollowing actions are performed: optimizing the structure and composition of the customsadministration; electronization of customs administration; new electronic systems areintroduced, facilitating the processing, control and commercial operations of the flows ofgoods; Customs perform new tasks and responsibilities, on the one hand related to securingrevenues not only for the state budget but also for the European Union budget and on theother hand protecting the interests of the Community and its citizens from violations andsupply of contraband and fake goods. Customs gained paramount importance for theprotection of the EU - its financial interests and those of the Member States and itsprotection from unfair and illegal trade while supporting legitimate economic activity andits competitiveness. Together with the other law enforcement agencies, customsadministrations ensure the security and the safety of EU economic operators, citizens andthe environment in the EU. ; Таможенная служба имеет значительный потенциал для защиты населенияот распространения пиратских копий и поддельных товаров, поскольку она являетсяосновным препятствием для такого рода деятельности. Ущерб, который такиетовары причиняют экономике в целом, и существующие риски для потребителейопределяют ответственность таможенных органов за их предотвращение. Цель данного исследования – изучить и представить: историческое развитиетаможенной службы; процесс электронизации таможенной администрации итаможенных органов; преимущества и недостатки электронных таможенных услугв содействии торговле товарами для обеспечения безопасности товаров иевропейских граждан после присоединения Болгарии к Европейскому союзу. При написании статьи использовались следующие научные методы:наблюдение, практический опыт, анализ источников, дедукция. Приоритетом для болгарской таможенной службы после присоединенияБолгарии к Европейскому союзу является унифицированное применение европейскоготаможенного законодательства, процедур и инструментов таможенного контроля,принятых странами Европейского союза в различных областях таможенного права.Соответственно, осуществляются следующие действия: оптимизация структуры иличного состава таможенной службы; электронизация таможенной службы;введение новых электронных систем, облегчающих обработку, контроль икоммерческие операции с потоками товаров; таможенная служба выполняет новыезадачи и функции, с одной стороны, связанные с обеспечением доходов не только длягосударственного бюджета, но и для бюджета Европейского союза, а с другойстороны, с защитой интересов Европейского союза и его граждан от нарушений иввоза контрабандных и поддельных товаров. Таможенная служба приобрелапервостепенное значение для защиты финансовых интересов Европейского союза иинтересов его государств-членов, а также для защиты от несправедливой инезаконной торговли, одновременно поддерживая законную экономическуюдеятельность и ее конкурентоспособность. Вместе с другими правоохранительнымиорганами таможенные администрации обеспечивают безопасность экономическихоператоров Европейского союза, его граждан и окружающей среды.
Modern sociology places dignity and justice at the center of social debate. In estatebased societies only the aristocrats possessed the right to dignity and honor. The article analyzes these concepts as elements of the general structure of meaning underlying the institutions of modern societies. However, the progress of society conducive to their entry into the state of modernity the right to dignity kept extending towards an ever greater number of citizens. Dignity became an element of the policy of equality that tended to override the line of distinction charted by estates or other social subjects. In the early years of equalization policy, the struggle of dignity and equality assumed the form of recognition of the so-called natural rights of man, that constituted the essence of human condition. The idea of natural rights led to a debate and later to policy measures that resulted in the modern concept of citizenship. The latter asserted the right of every human being to dignity, equality before law and freedom to engage in productive, entrepreneurial activity without interference from other actors of political or economic life. The idea of equality, embedded in citizenship, came to be expressed in the policy of inclusion that overcame social prejudice and consequently in policies that extended political recognition to ever wider social groups. In the 20th century the egalitarian policy led to a wider scope of social rights that were regarded as a necessary condition of social justice and human independence. At present the principles of dignity and justice are implemented in social policy as acquired "capabilities" — a sum of life forces and means that allow citizens to uphold their citizenship regardless of the conditions in which they find themselves. Inclusion turns into the main vector of social policy, setting out to endow citizens with equal rights and resources that are necessary for their implementation.
The article presents the results of research on the effectiveness of scientometric indicators use in science management in Russia (on the example of economic science in 2005-2018). The investigation rests on empirical base of publications indexed in the Russian science index. The author argues that the use of bibliometric indicators (in the form they appeared in government documents between 2009 and 2018) encourages the publication activity rather than actual scientific results. The paper offers the method to evaluate the effectiveness of a scientific paper differentiating the ways and effects of dissemination of scientific ideas in a scientific community. The method helped identify a significant increase in the overall number and the share of articles which do not influence further development of science (i.e. ineffective papers). The drop in the number of effective papers is accompanied by a significant cost rise, which also means a drop in effectiveness (3.9 times according to the empirical data).
In connection to the process of the public administration reforms which take place in most of the European countries and also in connection to the "European administrative space", the issues of studying and mutually comparing administrative systems of various European countries, especially EU member countries, become more and more topical. They focus not only on purposeful and effective mutual use of experience in administrative systems improvements, but also on improving orientation in the already mentioned "European administrative space". There is nodue attention devoted so far to the systematic study of administrative systems of (other) European countries. Most of the publications which focus on this issue (mostly study books, study materials, or occassional articles) describe it only on a "descriptive" (mostly simplified) level. The cause of this lies in (apart from time and financial demands) significant complexity of the given issue, in terminological complications and in difficulties of getting adequate (essentially necessary) factography and in practically non-existing adequate methodology. Legal comparative jurisprudence and comparative studies of political systems might inspire onewhen developing the methodology. Even under the current situation, it would be efficient to pay more attention to the comparative studies of the structure of administrative systems, or to some selected areas of the public administration, for example to personnel systems in the public administration, financing public administration or administration of the public property. A thorough "stock -taking" of all the materials which have ever been published about this matter (even in different contexts) in our country orabroad might serve as a basis of these fragmented studies.
