Practice of consideration of cases on protection of rights and freedoms of the citizens by the bodies of constitutional justice of the Russian Federation

Тип работы:
Государство и право

Узнать стоимость новой

Детальная информация о работе

Выдержка из работы

Practice of consideration of cases on protection of rights and freedoms of the citizens by the bodies of constitutional justice of the Russian Federation

December 10 is International day of human rights. In 2008 we celebrated the «jubilee date», sixty years ago the General Assembly of UNO passed the General Declaration of human rights. At present it is recognized practically by all countries though it has recommendation nature. Since day of adoption of the declaration in 1948, in the Constitutions of the majority of countries there are worded positions, reproducing basic principles and our Constitution of 1993 is not exception.

In March 2006 the General Assembly of UNO passed the resolution about institution of the new Council on human rights. It will signify the new stage in activity of the UNO. Its resolutions recognize that development, peace, safety and human rights remain the bases of the system of the UNO. The new Council will regularly gather in the current year and will be able to respond efficiently to exceeding situations in the field of human rights. The Council is going to conduct reviews on countries in the field of human rights. It will be guided by the principles of versatility, impartiality, objectivity and not selectivity. The adopted resolution specifies the importance of refusal from «double standards and politization».

President of the Russian Federation D.A. Medvedev in his message to the Federal Assembly stated that «adoption in 1993 of the Main Law, which proclaimed the supreme value of the person, his life, his rights and property, has become the unprecedented event in the history of the Russian nation» [1].

Taking part in the scientific and practical conference on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation D.A. Medvedev has once again reminded «that in accordance with the Constitution exactly rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen determine the sense and contents of the state activity"[2].

In his report at the VII All-Russian Convention of judges he said that «here, at convention, you will discuss the most different questions, which have the direct attitude to the life of millions of people, protection of their rights, freedoms, interest, personal value and property. The fact is that exactly in court there are decided fates of millions of people. And to considerable degree in court there is formed attitude of the people to the state: there is estimated the ability of the state to protect interests of the citizens, to apply the force of the law and restore f justice. In this sense the court, can be the most authoritative power. In a few days we shall celebrate the 15-th anniversary of the Russian Constitution. It has stipulated the basic principles of the functioning of the judicial system. Moreover many from these principle have the direct attitude to everyday work, to juridical quality of the judicial system: it is ensuring of rights and freedoms of citizens by means of justices, guarantee of judicial protection for each person, presumption of innocence of inculpated, protection of rights of the aggrieved from crimes, abuses by power and a number of other principles, which directly result from the Constitution» [3].

It is well known, that the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation occupies the special place in the mechanism of realization and protection of the constitutional rights of the citizens not only due to formal prescriptions and norms of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, but also by virtue of objective need, dictated by the democratic development of our state, by the logic of the political reforms conducted in the country. Estimating the role of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the legal system of maintenance and protection of rights of the citizens, its significance at realization of judicial protection of the citizens in general and in constitutional legal proceedings, deputy-chairman of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in retired, doctor of Jurisprudence, professor T.G. Morshchakova [4] states that the competence of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on protection of rights of the citizens is realized nearly in all judicial procedures: at realization of abstract checking of laws; settlement of disputes about competence between federal and regional bodies of state authorities; at realization of the concrete checking of laws on complaints of the citizens or their associations, as well as at requests of courts concerning constitutionality of laws, subjected to application in the process of consideration of civil, administrative and criminal cases. But, in our opinion, the main role of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, is in rendering the direct influence upon adduction in correspondence of the working legislation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, hereunder, harmonizing and stimulating renovation of the statutory legal base of the Russian justice for the purpose of making necessary conditions for observance and protection of the whole complex of the constitutional rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen.

The role of the constitutional (authorized) courts of the subjects of the RF is in rendering the influence upon adduction in correspondence of the legislation of the subjects of the RF and statutory legal acts of the bodies of local self management to the Constitution (Charter) of the subject of the RF and decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.

M.V. Baglay taking part in the solemn meeting on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation which took place on November 2001 in the city of Moscow stated: «For the period of 10 years the Court considered over 3 thousand applications, adopted about two hundred resolutions, a thousand of definitions on complaints of the citizens, directed to protection of their constitutional rights and freedoms. It means that there have been protected rights of thousands of the citizens. Since the Constitutional Court, judges not only people, but laws, as well, which spread over the entire territory of the Russian Federation and on all the citizens of the Russian Federation or its subject.

So, the Court has taken over 30 resolutions, by which has confirmed and hereunder has increased many of the democratic guarantees of rights of the citizens in criminal processes, avoiding herewith all hidden obstacles at realization of the most important constitutional right — the right to remedy to justice The Court has firmly asserted the right of the citizens on private property and free business activity, seeing in this bases of development of market economy in the country. Protecting labor and social rights, the Court came from the constitutional position and social nature of our state" [5].

According to item «b» Part 1 Article 72 of the Constitution of the RF, the subjects of the Federation are authorized to take norms, protecting rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen. However the subjects of the Federations are deprived of the right to regulate independently cases in connection with encroachment on the main rights, since this question, according to item «c» Article 71 of the Constitution of the RF, is referred to exclusive competence of the Federation.

Protection of rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen forms the joint subject of the constitutional and legislative that is statutory-legal regulation. In conditions of federative structure of Russia, dualism of public authority’s formation and protection of rights and freedoms is realized at two levels of state authorities: by the Federation, and by its subjects.

In the opinion of V.A. Kryazhkov [6], competence of the constitutional (authorized) courts forms out of several elements: one of them is authorities, according to which constitutional (authorized) courts at complaints on violation of constitutional rights and freedoms of the citizens and at requests of courts verify constitutionality of acts, applied or subjected to application in the concrete case, including: laws and other statutory acts of the subjects of the Federations (Adygeya, Kabardin-Balkar, Marie El, Northern Osetiya-Alaniya); laws of the subject of the Federations (Dagestan, Northern Osetiya-Alaniya, Udmurtiya, Khakasiya, Sakha (Yakutiya); laws of statutory acts of bodies of state authorities and bodies of local self management (Buryatiya, Komi).

According to M.A. Mityukov, A.M. Barnashov [7], there has already formed the determined practice of consideration by the constitutional (authorized) courts of cases about the verification of constitutionality of laws on complaints of the citizens and at requests of courts. From 1994 till 1998 the constitutional courts of Bashkortostan, Buryatiya, Dagestan, Kareliya, Komi, Sakha (Yakutiya), and Authorized Court of Sverdlovsk region considered more than thirty cases of this category. Nearly half of the decisions, taken by the constitutional authorized court, contain conclusions about unconstitutionality of the appealed laws and other statutory acts of the subjects of the Russian Federation, by which there were violated electoral, labor rights of the citizens, rights to private property, social maintenance, taxation and others, guaranteed by the Constitution of the RF and constitutions (charters) of the subjects of the RF.

From the examples brought below we can see how efficient is the role of the constitutional (authorized) courts in protection of rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen at consideration of the cases on complaints and requests of courts.

For instance, the Constitutional Court of the Republic Kareliya considered the request of Petrozavodsk town public court, in which applied to verify constitutionality of Parts 2, 3 Article 34 making the decision on the case, the Constitutional Court of the Republic Kareliya came to the conclusion that Part 3 Article 34 of the Law of the republic «About safety of labor» and does not correspond to the Constitution of the Republic Kareliya and is not subjected to application since it contains the condition of the purpose of the lump allowance «after determination of degree of the blame of the employer and the damaged», by which there are b violated the constitutional principles of equality of the citizens before the law. Petrozavodsk town court was recommended at making decision on claim on I.I. Grigorovich to proceed from positions of the Resolutions of the Constitutional Court" [8].

In the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Republic Buryatiya from October 10, 2000 on the case about the verification of the correspondence to the Constitution of the Republic Buryatiya of Paragraphs 4 and 5 Article 1, Part 2 Article 3, Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Article 4 of the Law of the Republic Buryatiya «About religion activity on the territory of the Republic Buryatiya», there have been applied the European norms — standards. So, Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 of the given statutory-legal act, stipulating the order of registration, issue of permissions and certificates on realization of missionary activity, were recognized by the Constitutional Court not corresponding to the Constitution of the republic, since they contradicted Article 9 of the European Convention about protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, to the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Constitution of the republic, according to which each person is guaranteed the freedom of worship, freedom of belief, including the right to confess individually or with other any religion or to confess no religion, freedom to choose, have and spread religious and other beliefs and act in accordance with them. From the contents of the specified article it results that missionary activity is the right of each person in any religious organization [9].

The activity of the Constitutional Court of the Republic Komi on consideration of cases on complaints and requests of courts shows, how varied statutory acts are, and verification of whose constitutionality is possible by the Law «About the Constitutional Court of the Republic Komi». Since 1995 the Court has considered and made final judgments on 14 individual and group complaints of the citizens and requests of courts, on which there has been verified constitutionality of laws of the Republic, of statutory orders and instructions of the head of the Republic, the resolution of Goskomarhstroy of the Republic, the decision of the Council of the city of Vorkuta, the resolution of the head of administration of Syktyvdinsk district.

It is necessary to note that unlike courts of general jurisdiction, courts of arbitration the constitutional (charter) courts do not examine actual circumstances of the case, but settle the questions of the law. They examine positions of the statutory acts of the subjects of their correspondence to constitution (charter) of the subjects of the Russian Federation.

The Constitutional (authorized) courts, certainly, intensify the judicial power, and it can be confidently stated that citizens and legal persons with creation of these courts have got additional guarantee in protection of their own rights. It is confirmed by considered cases on protection of rights of the citizens in the subjects of the RF from 2004 till 2008, where the constitutional (authorized) courts exist.

For example, for the period of five years, since the event of formation (since the year 2000), the Constitutional Court of the Republic Tatarstan [10] has considered 15 applications of the state bodies. More than half of them were directed by commissions (committees) and groups of deputies State Council. The Constitutional Court has received more than 300 applications from the citizens of the republic and their associations. All this testifies to the necessity of existence of the body of the constitutional justice, and the confirmation of the increasing confidence to it on the part of the society.

On results of consideration of applications the Constitutional court has passed 34 final decisions, including 16 resolutions and 18 definitions. The 6 resolutions directly concerned the interpretation of the Constitution of the Republic Tatarstan. We should note that 27 decisions made on complaints on violation of the constitutional rights and freedoms of the citizens and their associations that forms 80% in the total state of final decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Republic Tatarstan. It means that there have been protected not only separate citizens, whose legal rights were restricted, but thousands of the citizens. Realization of these directions of activity has been reflected in the number of decisions of the courts, concerning rights of the citizens to social maintenance, choice of residence, granting of guarantees and privileges installed by the law.

During the years 2005, 2006 and the first half-year of 2007 the Constitutional Court of the Republic Kareliya [11] has considered 11 cases on applications of the citizens about the verification of constitutionality of different statutory legal acts of the republican bodies of state authorities and local self management on granting the citizens of the republics of different measures of social support. On these cases of the Constitutional Court of the Republic Kareliya has made 7 resolutions and 4 positive definitions.

The authorized court of the Kaliningrad region is recently created, and from 2003 till 2007 about 70% of applications, received in court, are applications from the citizens and their associations [12].

The authorized court of St Petersburg on the complaint of the citizen N.V. Zlokazova, N.A. Kitsak, V.N. Pavlenko, has recognized positions of Paragraph Two item 4 Article 3 of the Law of St Petersburg from March 15, 2006 No. 100−15 «About specialized housing fund of St Petersburg «not corresponding to Charter of St Petersburg, to positions of its item 1 Article 3, since order of granting vein premises on the conditions on agreement of the social hiring does not exclude the possibility of conclusion the agreements of the social hiring with persons, temporarily residing in hostels, besides, they allowed the possibility of conclusion agreements of the social hiring of vein premises with the citizens, registered in hostels, independently on the fact and time of their registration as needing for vein premises, hereunder there entered different from general, objectively not justified order of granting vein premises on conditions of agreement of social hiring. It did not provide the citizens, registered as needing for vein premises, realization of the guaranteed by the Charter of St Petersburg right to dwelling with observance of the principle of equality.

In January 2006 the Authorized Court of the Sverdlovsk region considered the case on application of the labor veteran D. on correspondence to the Charter of the Sverdlovsk region of Paragraph 1 Article 11 of the Regional law «About social support of veterans in the Sverdlovsk region». The Court has indicated that on charter legal sense, revealed on the court, labor veterans who obtained the right on measures of social support since January 1, 2005, can be not deprived of this right in connection with the following entry of changes in the law. Making the given decision, the court was guided by the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.

The Constitutional Court of the Republic Buryatiya on complaint of the citizen V.P. Davydov recognized not corresponding to the Constitution of the Republic Buryatiya and to the Resolutions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation a number of positions of the resolution of the Government of the Republic Buryatiya from March 19, 2007 No. 79 «About entry of changes in the resolution of the Government of the Republic Buryatiya «About granting measures of social support on payment of vein and communal services on separate categories of the citizens in the form of money payments», providing changes in terms and order of granting measures of social support of the citizens. These changes have brought to reduction of measures of social support of veterans.

Taking into account special importance of protection of rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen in our country on the account of experience of the European countries and decisions of the European Court on human rights on June 8, 2007 in the city of Kazan in the Parliamentary centre of the Republic Tatarstan [13] there took place the meeting of the Consulting Council of chairmen of the constitutional (authorized) court of the subjects of the Russian Federation «European standards in practice of constitutional justice in the Russian Federation». The meeting was conducted by the Chairman of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation V.D. Zorkin.

For the purpose of improvement of activity of the bodies of constitutional justice in the Russian Federation on application of European standards on protection of rights and freedoms and ensuring the uniform application by courts of the specified positions the consulting council of the chairmen of the constitutional (authorized) courts of the subjects of the Russian Federation has worked out recommendations about the necessity at realization of the constitutional justice to be guided by positions of the European convention on protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms on the account of practice of the European court on human rights, as well as other legal acts of bodies of the Council of Europe.

The civil society appears as a result of isolation of the state from social structures; isolations of it as relatively independent sphere of public life and at the same time isolation from state of some public relations (the law for all; the right to property; legislative recognizing of equality of people, as allocation of them with rights and duties is the main feature and basis of the civil society). The category «civil society» has become the subject of study in XVII — XIХ centuries. and was in detail considered in Gegel «Philosophy of law «. The civil society is the relation of persons through the system of needs and division of labor, justice (legal fundamentals and law and order), external order (police and corporation). In philosophy of law legal essence of the civil society is equality of the people as subject of the law, their legal freedom, intellectual legal property, impeccability of agreements, protection of rights from their infringement, ruled legislation, authoritative court (Gegel considered modern to him bourgeois society the civil society) [1]. It was undoubtly, breakout in development of public sciences.

The study of the civil society was also made by sociology, politology, theory of state and law, theory of constitutionalism and other public sciences. The notion «civil society» has got its recognition only in modern time. — Why? First of all, because it was torn away from the main mass of the people (in ancient times, in the Muddle ages privileges of the class and state authorities were realized on their behalf). Accordingly there existed the following states: class, despotic, slave-owning, feudal, monarchist, republican, and theocratic and others.

The coincidence of the organizing structures of the society and state was recognized by existence at that historical time of different patterns of property and division of labor, when (according to K. Marks and F. Engels) due to liberation of private property «the state has gained the right of independent existence close to the civil society and outside it…» [2].

This, strictly, conditioned the possibility of the separate study of the problems of the society and state, appearance and development of sciences, examining structures of the society and state as independent phenomena.

The notion «civil society» is often used, strictly, in correlation with the notion «state» [3].

The Professor of Bonn University says that: «the state exists in the type that withstands the society».

Isolation of the state from society and isolation of the society from the state is expressed in differences of the structures, principles of organization and legal regulation.

The fact is that the state is the organization, rules by the united centre (the vertical system): hierarchy of state bodies and officials, connected with the uniform discipline. This system is kept on account of the society (taxes, collections). The constant and the major purpose of the state, its justification and legitimacy are the protection of the society and management of it.

Unlike the state the civil society is the system of varied relations of the citizens, their associations, alliances, collective relations. These relations are based on equality and personal initiative. The purpose of the citizens and their associations is varied and changes depending on their interests.

The difference of structures of the civil society and state provides different ways of legal regulation of private and public relations, and therefore imprints the system of the law.

1. State bodies and positions are created by the state

Life and activity of the civil society is not conditioned by the law, its formation can be regulated by the law, but appear organizations on goodwill of their participants

2. The citizens have legal ability (to do all what is not forbidden in different spheres)

State bodies and officials, are allocated with competence (which determines narrow parameters of their activity, conditioned by their purpose, subject)

3. Rights of the citizens are guaranteed possibilities to use any good, which they realize or do not realize at their own discretion and desire

Officials and state bodies are allocated with authorities, which they must use at realization of their own functions, for decision of problems, facing them

4. Relations between the citizens, their associations (and inwardly these associations) are based on agreements, contracts, equality, freedom, co-ordination, horizontal relations of equal persons

Officials, o bodies of state management are connected by subordination — that is vertical relations

5. Citizens are allowed to do what is not forbidden by the law

Officials are allowed to do what is determined by their competence or is specified in the corresponding prescription

6. In relations between private persons or associations, which are regulated by the private law, the law installs the rules only for the future

In the public law the law can have return the force if the state perfects the legal position of the persons, the law softens punishment or in general does l not recognize illegal actions

The Isolation of the civil society from the state has brought to a number of state legal effects, which have conditioned these particularities of the modern state, distinguishing it from the state caste-class epoch. In modern time the Constitution, in which there are stipulated the fundamental rights and freedoms of a person, is considered as agreement on division of authorities between the society and the state. If for the European constitutionalism as political theory it is inherent extremely vague interpretation of the constitution as «the fundamental law of any society» and realization of ideas of restriction by the society of authorities of the state [4], the evolution of constitutionalism has brought sharp narrowing of this notion. And we can see that today it gains the contractual nature and recognizes actually the constitution as the agreement on distribution of authorities between the society and the state. The idea of «public agreement» has gained spreading in XVII-XVIII centuries. What was this idea based on? First of all, on realization by the state of positions of the universal equality of people and categories of private law, which have special significance for relations in the civil society?

The development of the constitutional legislation includes not only fixing of rights and freedoms of the members of the civil society, but also in granting the citizens with facilities of influence on the state power. Strictly formation of the civil society has given the possibility to comprehend theoretically the problem of political estranging and created the premises for its overcoming.

In structure of bodies of the state of modern time there appear constant, general-national representative institutions of the parliamentary type, allocated with the right of installation of taxes and collections, as well as adoption of the most important statutory-legal acts (laws).

Origin and development of the representative democracy is the phenomenon, inherent to the epoch of the civil society. The representative institutions have always realized the legislative function on behalf of the people (nation).

The encroachment of the representative bodies (institutions) on participation in the state power (on behalf of the society) in a number of countries has brought to the revolutions (misunderstandings), and this has conditioned the origin of the ideas of the distribution of authorities for the purpose of ensuring rights and freedoms of the members of the society.

At the same time there has appeared the notion «the legal state and «legality» as political and legal idea, directed against «despotism», against «the police state».

It is well known that the important factors of the civil society are freedom of personal initiative, independence of the people in reception of facilities of existence.

Certainly, such freedom sharply formed the contrast to class-caste limitations of the sort and type of occupations (there was the fear to forfeit all). For instance, Kant confirmed that freedom is revealed, when «each person searches for his happiness on that way, which he thinks correct if only it does not limit freedom of the others» [5]. Developing this thought, the philosopher has noted that management, which is based on the principle of praising the people, is similar to the father, who deifies his own children (management parental, under which all are related as to minor, who unable to differentiate what is useful for them, and what is harmful, have to remain passive, expecting from the head of the state advice what to do to be happy, and wait alms from him). Such ruling is the despotism (any freedom is destroyed, and there no rights exist).

These thoughts of Kant exactly and fully express the essence of the legal state.

The essence of the legal state is in how it:

a) provides law and order;

b) provides freedom and equality of the members of the society;

c) guarantees the correlation of the right and state in the civil society, which is based on legality of actions of the state, its bodies and officials.

In this context we should specify G. Hayek: «The essence of the legal state is not in the fact that everything is regulated by the law, but in the fact that the state structure of enforcement is applied only according to the law so that facilities of its application could be in good time foreseen» [6]. The similar notion of legality has been motivated by some domestic scientists.

Legality has been defined as the mode of existence of state authorities, as the principle of activity of the state structure.

For instance N.G. Aleksandrov confirmed that an offense, made by the citizen, does not strengthen legality (the offender is punished, measure of the punishment is determined by the law and right) [7].

Law and order as a result of realization of legality is violated under inefficient activity of law-enforcement bodies or punishment for violation of the laws on the part of officials, bodies, assigned with imperious authorities. Legality is, certainly violated with adoption of «illegal laws» (the laws, which contradict the constitution).

Such understanding of legality by the soviet scientists caused disputes (they said that legality is «uniform», «general» and is reduced only to law-abiding, all must behave within the framework of the law).

The nature of the civil society corresponds to the principle of legality as the severe correspondence of the law of activity of the state and its bodies.

Why is it necessary to interpret legality?

First, only at such understanding there appears the problem of legality of the laws, which are issued by the higher bodies of state authorities in understanding of their correspondence to universal and legalized rights and freedoms of the citizens (even in the societies, in which serfdom rights were legitimized, the privileges of clergy and nobility were canceled) that is any law was obligatory. In the civil society the law is not only the rule, installed by the sovereign power (the people), but is the norm, issued in accordance with the constitutional principles of the society and the state, which take into account rights and freedoms of the members of the society and are based on legal equality and autonomy of the free people.

Secondly, only such notion of legality forth on the first plan the problems of protection of officials interfering life and activity of the members of the civil society, originates the initiative at gaining the facilities of existence, to determine freely their own relations with other people and their associations, which live in a stable and safe country, where there rules the law, created by the state and equal for all.

J. Lokk emphasized: «Freedom of the people in conditions of existence of the system of management means to live in correspondence with the constant law, general for all and installed by the legislative power, created by this society» [8].

Thirdly, only under such approach to the notion of legality the citizen in the event of violation of his rights pertains on one legal level with the state and its officials at consideration and settlement of the dispute about violated rights. According to Gegel «The member of the civil society has the right to search for protection in court and is obliged to stand in court solely through the right, which he defends». Certainly, in the epoch of feudalism outstanding persons ignored such principles, as court was nothing for them. In these situation realities of life contradicted declarations, which determined the place of such institute as the power.

In modern time the person who manages is obliged in private questions to recognize the power of court on himself. In free states he, as a rule, will lose the own processes (Gegel) [9].

During eighteen years there have been published many works about the legal state. Some authors write about distant past, others confirm that it never existed and can never exist (G. Kelzen, expressed the opinion that, any state is legal since it is formed by law).

It is well known, that for lawyers the right itself is subject of cognition. In this context they search for the answer to the question: what is it the legal state? And for this purpose they give such thesis:

— the ideal type of ruling (which is confirmed by the philosophers of the law);

— the programmed condition, which can not be completely realized (but provides wide scale functioning);

— the idea for entailment of which the titanic efforts are necessary.

The state can not become to 100% legal (there always exists unconscious official, incomprehensive text of the article of the law). Besides, we think, the state declares it legal, but does not try to become legal. As the significant part of bureaucracy ignores thesis of the law about the legal state; and the bearers of the sovereign power do not want to realize thoughts of jurists scientist «about the law as the clever policy of the power» and that «one norm changes for the authorities of the thousands of the individual requirements».

In some measure the state should be constructed so as it could become legal. In this is the essence of the division of authorities into branches, and organizations of the system checks and balances in organization of bodies of state authorities, is the guarantee of legal activity of any one of them. The structure of different states, which is based on the principle of division of the powers, is the subject of the constitutional law.

If to speak about correlation of the law and state, state bodies, the main thing in division of the powers is the creation of the state structure, which could safely prevent the legal system of the civil society.

The debates on reforming the perspectives of improvement of the society still go on. They speak on changes of the number of the subjects of the federation; the status of the state; extension of competencies of the Constitutional Court; improvement of electoral system (all this influences the form of the state).

However, the essence of the legal state though it is connected with its form and is even conditioned by it (since division of the power is an important feature of the legal state), is not reduced only to it. The legal state is not only the structure, but the way of organization of the state, the condition of the state power, the power, and power of the law for all without exception. This is, according to the figurative expression, -is «the dream that the laws should rule, instead of persons».

At present it is the social condition and the number of political guarantees.

«The person — the right — the civil society — the state» — is not only the logic of the subject of the study, but the logic of the law.

If the constitutional (that is the major) duty of the state is in determination and ensuring rights and freedoms of a person (Article 3 of the Constitution of Ukraine), then why at determination of the legal state it is necessary to take for base not legal status of the person in the state, but accumulation of features of such state? None of them is exhausting: the fact is that the structure of the state, division of the powers is not self-purpose, but only the facility of ensuring of the freedom in the civil society.

Formation of the legal state is not the disposable act. Even if it is proclaimed and created it will forfeit its sense in several years if the legislation (gradually) will come in discord with itself and with the fundamentals of the constitutional order, requirements of legality, actions of all state bodies and officials (in the course of time loses its strictness and absoluteness, and the justice is realized not according to the law, but from event to event).

The legal state will delete itself if to the process of conservation and existence of law, law and order and legality there did not attach the sovereign power, state bodies, mass media, political and other associations, citizens, whose rights are violated.

Today in some developed states there appear the serious danger of violation of the legal status and condition of legality which already happened at the beginning of the XI century.

Why? The reasons are in the vertical development of the legislation (including the delegated); broad lobbing of doubtful bills, considering their correspondence to the interest of the society, rights and duties of the citizens; growth of administrative staff; the simplified form of justice (confession of the blame in criminal process); appearance of incomprehensible on social-legal results materially-legal institutes (for instance, insurance of legal liability).

We need extremely thoughtful attitude to the problem of legality and development of the legal state.

Now these problems are solely actual for our society. In Article 1 of the Constitution of Ukraine it is proclaimed: «Ukraine is the sovereign, independent, democratic -social, legal state» [10]. This, certainly, is the great achievement in the constitutional development of Ukraine, which provides division of the power; recognition and guarantees of rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen. There has been proclaimed the necessity of creation of institutes of democratic justice. Thereby, there have been pawned the constitutional bases of the civil society, legal state, and therefore there is the possibility for wide scale legislative reforms.

The realization of the practical subordination of the state is a quite difficult task.

Relations of the state and law depend on many factors and components.

Decision of problems of legality and state discipline in Ukraine is thought over by the politicians, mass media, the President, all, who are not indifferent to the fate of the native land. According to the world experience the main danger to rights and l freedoms of a person and democracy as a whole comes from executive power (certainly, the legislative power, passing the laws, also joins it).

However, the main factor in dangering rights and freedoms of a person is the executive power.

Actual in the correlation of the law and the state in the civil society still remains subordination of the state to the law and law and order, including rights and freedoms of the members of the society, their associations, steady realization of guarantees of legality of activity of the state bodies and officials, improvement of the justice, functioning of other law-enforcement bodies.

In connection with socialization of the right in the progress of development of the civil society it also becomes actual the problem of creation and improvement of state social services, called to guarantee the realization of the «second generation «of the rights of a person and a citizen (social rights). Creating the conditions, which provide the worthy life and free development of the person, the constitutional duty of the state, recognized in many developed countries, in which the state is not only legal, but also social. It is normal that ensuring the social rights must be an effective system of material guarantees.

On the border of XX-XXI centuries there has become actual the new problem — the necessity of entering the universal principles and norms of the international law in the legal systems in the newly formed states, the possibility of interference of UNO and other international organizations in legal disputes, conflicts, deciding of which earlier referred to domestic affairs of the given countries.

In accordance with the wordings, placed in the constitutions of some countries (Italy, Japan) the refusal of the right to conduct by the state of the war as the sovereign right of the nations means the restriction of the state sovereignty. But sovereignty as the independence of the state power from any other power -either exists or not. Unlimitedness is impossible to be limited.

The state is absolute in its borders (to its citizens, being abroad). The expression of this absolute power is the possibility to create, reconstruct, and change the legal system.

It is necessary to note that the number of circumstances, influencing the law, comprise interstate relations, international situation as a whole. And even in those epochs, when the right of war and peace was considered the feature of the sovereign state, and the rights and freedoms were not always recognized, there was forbidden the trade slave, and afterwards slavery, piracy, and all states recognized the mode of free sea.

In the course of development of civilization, the general culture of mankind, extension of international relationship there was forbidden race discrimination, chemical, bacteriological and other types of weapons, threat of force and its application in international relations etc.

The realization of obliging or forbidding norms and principles of the international law means not more, than self-restriction of the state power, and it, requires the corresponding guarantees. Today all these guarantees are given to UNO and other international organizations.

In the same way there are settled legal disputes, conflicts, and there are taken decisions, which are solely domestic affairs.

The state is absolute within the framework of its borders. The expression of its absoluteness is the possibility to create and change its own legal system. And the list of circumstances influencing the law we should pertain the international relations (international situation as a whole).

The literature

legislation institution resolution

1. Послание Президента Российской Федерации Федеральному Собранию. Москва. 2008 С. 21.

2. http: //www. kremlin. ru/text/appears/2008/12/210 020. shtml

3. Послание Президента Российской Федерации Федеральному Собранию. Москва. 2008 С. 23.

4. Морщакова Т. Г. Судебная защита основных прав граждан в общем и конституционном судопроизводстве: соотношение и особенности // Судебный контроль и права человека. Материалы Российско-Британского семинара. — Москва, 12−13 сентября. 1994 г., 1996.

5. Выступление Председателя Конституционного Суда Российской Федерации Баглая М. В. «Слово о конституционном правосудии в России» // Конституционное правосудие, № 4. (14) 2001−1. (15)2002, С. 15−23.

6. Кряжков В. А. // Конституционное право субъектов Российской Федерации. — М., 2002. — С. 504, 506.

7. Митюков М. А., Барнашов А. М. // Очерки конституционного правосудия. Сравнительно-правовое исследование законодательства и судебной практики. Томск, 1999. изд-во Томского университета. С. 329−334.

8. Собрание законодательства Республики Карелия. — 1996. — № 1.

9. Постановление Конституционного Суда Республики Бурятия от 10. 10. 2000 г. по делу о проверке соответствия Конституции Республики Бурятия абзацев 4 и 5 статьи 1, части 2 статьи 3, частей 1,2,3,4,5,6 статьи 4 Закона Республики Бурятия «О религиозной деятельности на территории Республики Бурятия» // Собрание законодательства Республики Бурятия. — № 14. — 2000 г.

10. Вестник Конституционного Суда Республики Карелия. — № 1 (6). 2007. — С. 56.

11. Вестник Конституционного Суда Республики Карелия. № 2 (7). 2007. — С. 35.

12. Городилов А. А., Корнюшенков Г. В., Кузяев Ю. А., Куликов А. В. //Становление и развитие уставной юстиции: проблемы и опыт Калининградской области. Калининград. 2008. изд-во Российского государственного университета им. Иммануила Канта. С. 21.

13. Переплеснина Е. М. О работе консультативного Совета председателей конституционных и уставных судов субъектов Российской Федерации // Вестник Конституционного Суда Республики Карелия. — № 2(7). — 2007. — С. 22−25.

Показать Свернуть
Заполнить форму текущей работой