Suchergebnisse

The purpose of article is to analyze the evolution of legal regulation of higher education in Russia since the beginning up to the beginning of reform in modern conditions.Characteristics of the problem field. Higher education is studied in various aspects (sociological, cultural, historical, economic). An independent institute of educational law is distinguished in the legal science. Serious transformations of higher education in the Russian Federation have actualized the need for understanding the domestic experience of legal regu-lation. The state policy in the sphere of higher education and the evolution of educational legislation are studied in historical and legal studies.The methodology. The narrative method is the method of description. It is necessary for the reconstruction of past events and phenomena. The narrative method is supplemented by a chronological method. The formal legal method is applied to the interpretation of norms. The sociological method establishes the links between state policy, regulatory legal regulations and the social result achieved. The comparative method is used fragmentarily.Results. Higher education is a relatively new social institution. In the European tradition it took shape during the Middle Ages. The completed model was formed in the XIX century in Germany.The Russian Empire used the German model. Higher education was regulated by the state. The main regulations governing educational relations at the university were the General Charters. These Charters reflected the autonomy of universities.Three stages are identified in the legal and regulatory framework of higher education in the Soviet period: 1917 – the first floor 1930s; second floor 1930s – the first floor 1950s; second floor 1950s – 1980s.At the first stage the state regulated only politically and ideologically important educational relations. Many questions were not regulated centrally. In the 1930s the state impact on higher education was growing. The consignments are included in norm-setting activities. The established norms changed little until the end of the Soviet period. In the 1960s the liberalization of educational legislation began, which continued until the end of the Soviet period.Conclusions. Higher education as a special social Institute took shape in the medieval period. The German model, tested in the early nineteenth century with the establishment of the University in Berlin, had a huge influence on the genesis of modern higher education. ; С использованием нарративного, формально-юридического и социологического методов рассматривается эволюция правового регулирования высшего образования в России с момента возникновения. Характеризуются общие университетские уставы, действовавшие в дореволюционной России. Подробно рассмотрено регулирование высшего образования в советской России, приведена периодизация нормативно-правового обеспечения высшего образования в советский период. Обозначены общие тенденции правового регулирования высшей школы в Российской Федерации.

УДК 34The article highlights the main stages in the development of local government and self-gov-ernment in Russia. It shows the specifics of each stage. The formation of the Russian state was accompanied by the synthesis of the princely power and the community self-government. The genesis autocracy was accompanied by a struggle with the self-government institutions. The creation of rural and urban self-government in the second half of the XIX century was accom-panied by a debate on the social and public origin of these institutions.The Soviet state was based on the unity of the Soviet system. It concluded the discrete de-velopment of local self-government in Russia. There is no historical strong tradition of local government in this system.Objective of the article is to identify and characterize the main stages of development of local government and self-government in Russia. Show the discrete nature of the develop-ment of local self-government in Russia.The formation of the Russian state was accompanied by the synthesis of princely power and community self-government. Genesis autocracy was accompanied by a struggle with self-government institutions. The absence of territorial self-government in Russia was offset by the presence of social class municipality for a long time. Caste traditions tradition had a negative impact after the establishment of rural and urban self-government in the second half of the XIX century.During the preparation of the reforms and their implementation were discussions of the rela-tionship between the state and the community began in management. As a result, there is the inclusion of local authorities in the sphere of active state regulation. The desire of the county public to the political activity was suppressed by autocracy. The Provisional Government at-tempt to rely on the local self-government to create new authorities ended in failure.The Soviet state was based on a single management system. Certain powers was delegated at the local level. The local authorities have been transferred some resources to implement it. So the system of local budgets was build. The most successful period of the local govern-ment activity accounts for 1920s. The city and district are considered as the territorial foundation of local government. Scientific field formed that studies the feature of local govern-ment in the Soviet conditions.In the 1930s, there is centralization of government. The development of the city is subject to problems of industrialization and development of the rural areas is subject to problems of collectivization. The state policy does not consider the interests of local communities.The liberalization of the political regime in the late 1950s has led to a revival of the idea of decentralization. But decentralization of government is considered solely as an economic rather than a social and political problem. This understanding persisted until the end of the Soviet period.The lack of stable historical tradition of local government negatively affects the municipal development of the Russian Federation. ; УДК 34В статье выделяются основные этапы развития местного управления и самоуправления в России. Показана специфика каждого этапа: формирование российского государства сопровождалось синтезом княжеской власти и общинного самоуправления; генезис самодержавия сопровождался борьбой с институтами самоуправления; создание земского и городского самоуправления во второй половине XIX в. сопровождалось дискуссиями о социальной и государственной природе этих учреждений; советское государство строилось на единстве системы cоветов.Сделан вывод о дискретном развитии местного самоуправления в России и отсутствии исторической устойчивой традиции деятельности органов местного самоуправления.

The subject of the article is the application of the concept of the form of state in the Soviet historical and legal science.The purpose of the research is to confirm or disprove the hypothesis that the understanding of the form of the state in the Soviet history of law was not discrete, it changed under the influence of political transformations and had a significant impact on the modern theory of the state.The methodology. The method of periodization was used to highlight the Soviet period of historical and legal science, the chronological method was used to determine the upper and lower boundaries of the Soviet period. The narrative method made it possible to describe the historiographic process. The historical-comparative method was required to compare individual concepts.Results, scope of application. The concept of the form of the state that was used in the historical and legal science of the Soviet period has been determined. The form of the state in Soviet science included two elements initially: the form of government and the form of statehood. The third element has been added since the 1960s – the political regime. The institutionalization of the history of state and law as a science took place by the end of the 1940s. While historians of the old school were working, the main topics included the early stages of the development of the state. Then after the change of generations the priority place was taken by the problems of the Soviet state. By the end of the Soviet period a more harmonious allocation of topics had developed. In Soviet historical and legal science the form of the state of the pre-revolutionary and Soviet periods was considered separately. The form of government of the Russian state in the pre-revolutionary period was defined as a monarchy. Several types of monarchy were distinguished: early feudal, estate-representative, absolute. The republican form of government was recognized for the Soviet state. Its class and social essence changed with the development of socialism. Organizational forms changed accordingly. When studying the polity, the main attention was paid to the federation. Its complex origin was noted, because the Russian Federation (RSFSR) was part of the federation of the USSR. The Soviet federations were built according to the nationalterritorial principle. The issue of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation remained debatable. Most researchers considered the RSFSR a state with autonomous entities. The development of the territory of the state as a whole has hardly been studied. Major administrative-territorial reforms carried out in the 1920s-1930s were considered in isolation from national-territorial construction. Generalized works on the territorial development of the state appeared only at the end of the Soviet period. Issues of the political regime of the feudal and bourgeois state were addressed in the study of direct democracy in the ancient Russian state, estate representative bodies, state power during the period of absolutism. Political liberalization was noted during the bourgeois reforms of the second half of the 19th – early 20th centuries. The democratic nature of the Soviet political regime was not questioned, therefore, the problems indicating trouble, crisis phenomena in the Soviet state were not identified.Conclusions. The understanding of elements of form of the state in the Soviet history of law was expanding. It changed in accordance with the changes in the Soviet governance. The main approaches to understanding the form of the state are accepted by contemporary Russian science. ; Показано, как форма государства изучалась в истории права советского периода. Установлено, что первоначально в советской науке в форму государства включали два элемента: форму правления и форму государственного устройства; с 1960-х гг. добавился третий элемент – политический режим. Констатируется различие в подходах к рассмотрению в советской историко-правовой науке формы государства в дореволюционный и советский периоды. Фиксируется, что при изучении государственного устройства основное внимание уделялось федерации, отмечалась ее сложная природа; велись споры о субъектах, входивших в состав РСФСР; проблема политического режима отдельно не выделялась, но затрагивалась при изучении государственной власти и управления.