Suchergebnisse

The current article attempts to denote the relationship between the regulatory purpose of politics and law, which form coherent power as a dialectical unity of political power interested in the legal legitimation of its status and legal power, appealing to the power represented by the state, on the one hand, and their denial of each other as the embodiment of the paradigms of efficiency (politics) and legitimation (law), on the other hand. To meet that aim, general scientific (dialectical, comparative, historical-genetic, structural-functional), and also specific scientific (specific-sociological, formal-logical, historical-legal, comparative jurisprudence) methods are taken into consideration. Given the results of the study, the efficiency paradigm is determined by the factor of result, and the legitimation paradigm is determined by the factor of process. The interaction of these paradigms gives rise to an antinomic contradiction, which is an attributive characteristic of the political and legal regulation of social processes.

This article is dedicated to the analysis of a preponderant institution of Civil Society in Russia such as the Bar Association, consequently, its role in the implementation of the state function of providing qualified legal assistance is examined. In addition, it ad-dresses the criminal defense mechanism of the Russian legal profession. To achieve the objective of the study, several general scientific techniques, and methods of scientific knowledge (analysis, synthesis, deduction, induction, systemic-structural, formal-logical approaches) and specific scientific methods were launched: historical-legal, formal-legal, comparative-legal, and interpretative are employed. Based on the results obtained, it can be concluded that the legal profession, being an institution of civil society, remains vul-nerable in the legal sense in its interaction with law enforcement agencies. At the same time, by illegally interfering in promotion, public officials go unpunished. There is still no criminal liability for unlawful interference in the activities of a lawyer. It therefore proposes to introduce specific amendments to the criminal legislation governing this matter of general interest.

The authors note that the principle of ideological pluralism is among the characteristics of the foundations of the constitutional order. This principle is a specific feature of the constitutions of states in a democratic transformation. It excludes the confirmation of an obligatory (state) ideology in legislation of a democratic state. However, there are countries that choose a slightly different ideological path, reinforcing the domination of a single state ideology on religious or other grounds or establishing a direct ban on the existence of any ideology in constitutional acts. Different approaches to the definition and content of the notions "ideology", "ideological reference points" in different countries are analyzed, taking into account the peculiarities and differences of legal systems.