The article deals with the analysis of social justice as a universal value that determines the evaluation of social practices in all the spheres of social life. But the study of such an evaluation of society in the sphere of interethnic relations is faced with a number of theoretical problems. The authors show that when evaluating interethnic relations in accordance with the criterion of social justice, due to the ambiguous interpretation of their meaning, it is necessary to rely on an interdisciplinary approach. An important area of this analysis is the correlation of the theoretical understanding of ethnicity and the practice of state building in the context of the cultural diversity of the population. Two strategies for achieving social justice in the sphere of interethnic relations are shown: the building of the SU ethno-nations and the building of the RF nation with securing civil rights in the sphere of the implementation of ethno-cultural identity and providing conditions for the development of ethno-cultural diversity.
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 analyzes the idea of justice in Western political philosophy. Drawing on his earlier publications, the author traces the history of the concept of justice in the "great ideologies" (liberalism, conservatism, and Marxism), and also examines in detail the main approaches to the understanding of justice in modern political theory. The author's task is not only to analyze certain attitudes to the problem of justice, but also to find the most satisfactory conception. As such, the conception of "functional capabilities" proposed by contemporary researchers Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum is mentioned first of all. ; Статья посвящена анализу идеи справедливости в западной политической философии эпохи модерна. Автор, отталкиваясь от своих более ранних публикаций, прослеживает историю концепции справедливости в «великих идеологиях» (либерализм, консерватизм, марксизм), а также достаточно подробно рассматривает основные подходы к пониманию справедливости в современной политической теории. Задача автора — не только анализ тех или иных позиций в отношении проблемы справедливости, но и поиск наиболее удовлетворительной ее концепции. В качестве таковой названа прежде всего концепция «функциональных возможностей» современных исследователей Амартии Сена и Марты Нуссбаум.
Рассмотрены проблемы социальной ответственности и социальной справедливости в международном бизнесе. Сделан акцент на использовании опыта стран с развитой экономикой по данным проблемам в экономике Украины. ; The problems of social responsibility and social justice in the international business are considered. The emphasis is placed on using the experience of developed economies according to the problems in the Ukrainian economy.
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.
