scholarly journals Institutions of social control in the Russian Federation: subjectivity case

2021 ◽  
Vol 128 ◽  
pp. 04024
Author(s):  
Alexander Isacov ◽  
Alena Nikitina

The article examines the analysis of the institution of social control in the Russian Federation and its subjectivity. The relevance of the study is due to the conceptual diversity and lack of scientific consensus regarding the concept of “social control”. Also, this consensus is absent regarding other related concepts, which include “public control”, “civil control”, “people’s control” and others. To solve this problem, a group of domestic sources that define these concepts are analyzed. It also analyzes the legal acts regulating social control in Russia. The role of the Public Chamber and the analysis of current scientific approaches to its consideration are considered in a separate block. In conclusion, it is concluded that there is a fundamental contradiction between expert assessments and the current legislative framework. This leads to the fact that civil initiatives in the field of social control can only be implemented in the forms proposed by the state.

Author(s):  
Lidiya Nudnyenko

The compliance of decisions and actions of the executive branch with federal legislation should be facilitated by parliamentary control, among the forms of which are parliamentary and parliamentary requests. The purpose of this study is to analyze the practice of parliamentary and parliamentary inquiries by examining publicly available materials, using functional, statistical, systemic methods of knowledge. The analysis of the available materials made it possible to conclude on a small number of parliamentary requests, which limits the representative and controlling functions of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, reduces the possibilities for the full realization of the role of the Parliament of the Russian Federation in the political process enshrined in the Constitution. Gaps in information on parliamentary requests open up opportunities for parliamentarians to use this tool for lobbying purposes. The article suggested that the total number of parliamentary and parliamentary requests could increase in 2020-2021 due to preparations for elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the topic of deputy and parliamentary requests, updated by the forthcoming parliamentary elections, will remain. Qualitative information about deputy requests will be available to the public, as before, only on the initiative of the deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation and a member of the Federation Council of the Russian Federation through the media.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 88-93
Author(s):  
K.N. Golikov ◽  

The subject of this article is the problems of the nature, essence and purpose of prosecutorial activity. The purpose of the article is to study and justify the role of the human rights function in prosecutorial activities in the concept of a modern legal state. At the heart of prosecutorial activity is the implementation of the main function of the Prosecutor’s office – its rights and freedoms, their protection. This means that any type (branch) of Prosecutor's supervision is permeated with human rights content in relation to a citizen, society, or the state. This is confirmed by the fact that the Federal law “On the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation” establishes an independent type of Prosecutor's supervision-supervision over the observance of human and civil rights and freedoms. It is argued that the legislation enshrines the human rights activities of the Prosecutor's office as its most important function. It is proposed to add this to the Law “On the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation”.


Author(s):  
Victoria Solomonova

В данной статье рассматривается сущность противодействия экстремизму, как основополагающая роль государственной безопасности Российской Федерации, методы и действия направленные на пресечение распространения экстремистской деятельности на территории Российской Федерации, а также за ее пределами.This article examines the essence of countering extremism as a fundamental role of the state security of the Russian Federation, methods and actions aimed at suppressing the spread of extremist activities on the territory of the Russian Federation, as well as beyond its borders.


2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-83
Author(s):  
Andrey Fursov

Currently, public hearings are one of the most widespread forms of deliberative municipal democracy in Russia. This high level of demand, combined with critique of legal regulations and the practices for bringing this system to reality – justified, in the meantime, by its development (for example, by the Agency for Strategic Initiatives and the Public Chambers of the Russian Federation) of proposals for the correction of corresponding elements of the legal code – make both the study of Russian experiences in this sphere and comparative studies of legal regulations and practical usage of public hearings in Russia and abroad extremely relevant. This article is an attempt to make a contribution to this field of scientific study. If the appearance of public hearings in Russia as an institution of Russian municipal law is connected with the passing of the Federal Law of 6 October 2003 No.131-FZ, “On the general organisational principles of local government in the Russian Federation,” then in the United States, this institution has existed since the beginning of the 20th century, with mass adoption beginning in the 1960s. In this time, the United States has accumulated significant practical experience in the use of public hearings and their legal formulation. Both countries are large federal states, with their own regional specifics and diversity, the presence of three levels of public authority and different principles of federalism, which cause differences in the legal regulation of municipal public hearings. For this reason, this article undertakes a comparative legal analysis of Russian and American experiences of legal regulation and practical use of public hearings, on the example of several major municipalities – the cities of Novosibirsk, Nizhny Novgorod, Voronezh and New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. A comparison of laws influencing the public hearing processes in these cities is advisable, given the colossal growth in the role of city centers in the industrial and post-industrial eras. Cities in particular are the primary centers for economic growth, the spread of innovations, progressive public policy and the living environment for the majority of both Russian and American citizens. The cities under research are one of the largest municipalities in the two countries by population, and on such a scale, the problem of involving residents in solving local issues is especially acute. In this context, improving traditional institutions of public participation is a timely challenge for the legislator, and the experiences of these cities are worth describing. The unique Russian context for legal regulations of public hearings involves the combination of overarching federal law and specific municipal decrees that regulate the hearing process. There are usually two municipal acts regulating public hearings on general issues of the city district (charter, budget, etc.) and separately on urban planning. In the United States, the primary regulation of public hearings is assigned to the state and municipality level, with a whole series of corresponding laws and statutes; meanwhile, methodological recommendations play a specific role in the organisation of hearings, which are issued by the state department of a given state. It is proposed that regulating the corresponding relationships at the federal subject level will permit a combination of the best practices of legal administration with local nuances, thereby reinforcing the guarantee of the realization of civil rights to self-government. There are other features in the process of organizing and conducting public hearings in the United States, which, as shown in the article, can be perceived by Russian lawmakers as well in order to create an updated construct of public discussions at the local level.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 21-23
Author(s):  
Aleksey L. Bredikhin ◽  
◽  
Evgeniy D. Protsenko ◽  

In this article, the authors analyze the amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, adopted in 2020, with a view to their influence on the state of Russian sovereignty and note that the topic of sovereignty is central to these amendments. Researchers conclude that the amendments constitute, first and foremost, the strengthening of the sovereignty of the Russian Federation, the autonomy of state jurisdiction, and the increasing status and role of Russia in the world political system.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Cherepenina ◽  
A. L. Dmitriev

The activity of state statistics throughout the revolutionary period of 1917 is uncharted territory in the history of Russian statistics. Using documents from the State Archive of the Russian Federation, the authors examined for the first time the last year of the Central Statistical Committee. Unlike other state structures of the previous government, it was not dissolved after the events of October 1917 and continued to operate after the Soviet government moved to Moscow. The article contains information on the first «Soviet» Head of the Central Statistical Committee of the Commissariat of Internal Affairs V.A. Algasov and outlines the work of Professor M.A. Sirinov, who was offered a position of the Head of the Central Statistical Committee by the People’s Commissar of Internal Affairs G.I. Petrovsky. Archive records helped establish the fact that both the authorities of the Central Statistical Committee and some statisticians came up with an idea of founding a new statistical service based on the Central Statistical Committee and gubernia (provincial) statistics. The authors revealed the role of V.V. Stepanov in relocating the Library of the Central Statistical Committee to Moscow. The article describes the clash of opinions that preceded the establishment of the Soviet state statistics, to be specific the inauguration of the RSFSR Central Statistical Board, which was envisaged to be an independent body, not subordinate to any agency, to ensure the independence of the country’s statistical service. 


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ksenia Minakova

The article analyzes methods of ensuring the migrants rights by the public authorities of the Russian Federation, the individual elements of the migration policy of the Russian Federation relating to the activities of public authorities. It considers the activities in the field of protection of the migrants rights by such authorities as the Russian President's Office for Constitutional Rights of Citizens, the Presidential Council for Civil Society and Human Rights, the Council for Interethnic Relations, General Directorate for Migration, Chief Directorate for Migration Issues of Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, their normative documents, that regulate their activities. It examines separately the activities of the RF Government in the field of protection of the migrants rights, as well as judicial authorities; it identifies the special role of the RF Constitutional Court in the field of ensuring the rights of migrants, refugees, the internally displaced and stateless persons. It underlines the role of authority bodies of the RF entities in ensuring the migrants rights in terms of Irkursk Oblast. The article offers to differentiate strictly the role of each authority body in the field of migrants rights protection, as well as to pay specific attention to regulation of activities of the FR entities authority bodies in this direction.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Z.Y. Belyakova ◽  
◽  
I.A. Makeeva ◽  
N.V. Stratonova ◽  
N.S. Pryanichnikova ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 (3) ◽  
pp. 202-210
Author(s):  
Екатерина Стрижакова ◽  
Ekaterina Strizhakova ◽  
Дмитрий Стрижаков ◽  
Dmitriy Strizhakov

The analysis of the structure of industrial production in Russia, the level of profitability by type of activity, an analysis of R & D expenses, as well as trends in the development of industrial production and its prospects are given . To identify and support the key role of the state in regu-lating influence on the Russian economy as a whole, and on the development of industrial poten-tial of the country. Formed the main directions of development and implementation of industrial policy in the Russian Federation.


2003 ◽  
Vol 05 (03) ◽  
pp. 321-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Kovalev ◽  
Johann Koeppel

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) system in the Russian Federation has an extensive set of rules, the main ones are the Assessment of the Environmental Impact (OVOS) of a project and the State Environmental Review (SER). The SER is designed as an investigation of both a project and of its OVOS by an independent expert commission, which is appointed by the federal and regional environmental bodies. The decision of the commission is binding. In addition, a Public Environmental Review (PER) can be conducted by NGOs and recognised by the state. A mandatory component of the EIA in Russia is public participation. The process of public participation is regulated by Russian legislation (for example the Land Code, the OVOS guidelines and autonomous regional laws) and can take various forms. All these opportunities are established on paper; in reality, they are not always taken into account. There are a number of case studies used to observe the extent to which the public has an impact on environmental decision-making. Selected cases include examples in which the public was passive, in which it undertook limited activities, and in which participation was strong and projects were improved or stopped.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document