scholarly journals Name of the Highest Official of the Republic: Legislation and Practice

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-95
Author(s):  
M M Kurmanov

The analysis of the Amendments to the Federal Law of 6 October 1999 «On General Principles for the Organization of Legislative (Representative) and Executive Bodies of State Power in the Subjects of the Russian Federation» is presented in connection with the restrictions in establishing the name of the post of the highest official of the subject of the RF.Recognizing the majority of amendments to the Federal Law, useful and deserving of support, we consider, however, certain provisions of this law are highly controversial and controversial.The drafts of federal laws introduced by deputies of the State Duma of the RF and received negative feedback fromthe Government of the RF and the legal department of the State Duma of the RF and rejected by the State Duma of the RF. The execution of the Federal Law in the Republic of Tatarstan is analyzed, taking into account the treaty on the delimitation of powers and powers between the bodies of state authority of the Russian Federation and the state authorities of the subject of the Russian Federation of June 26, 2007. The author suggests ways of solving this problem in the Republic of Tatarstan.

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”.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 142-148
Author(s):  
Nikolai Nikolaevich Karpov

The features characterizing the Prosecutor’s office as a subsystem of the state power of the Russian Federation, including its creation on the basis of the Federal law, regulation by the legislation of specific power functions and powers of Prosecutor’s office, independence and independence and others, and also historical aspects of functioning of the Russian Prosecutor’s office are investigated.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-140
Author(s):  
N. V. Vasilieva ◽  
S. V. Praskova ◽  
Yu. V. Pyatkovskaya

The subject of the study is the constitutional concept of federal territories in Russia. The purpose of the article is to confirm or disprove hypothesis that constitutional status of federal territories in Russia consists of system of elements and identify such elements. The authors use the method of formal legal interpretation of Russian Constitution, the methods of comparative constitutional law, complex analysis, systemic interpretation of Russian laws and drafts of laws. The main results of research, scope of application. When making an amendment to part 1 of Article 67 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the content of this innovation was not disclosed. Therefore the federal law on federal territories will be of decisive importance. The authors define the constitutional characteristics of the federal territories based on the literal content of the constitutional norm and the conclusion of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The federal territory is an element of the state territory that is not a subject of the federal structure and has a status different from the status of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. There are specific features of the organization of public power in federal territory. The authors’ vision of the content of each of the elements of the federal territories is presented. It is noted that the defining element of the status of federal territories will be the purpose of their creation. The authors propose a conceptual division of federal territories in Russia into two types: inhabited and uninhabited. It is stated that at the moment, the status elements can be clearly defined only in relation to uninhabited federal territories. The formation of the concept of inhabited federal territories will depend on definition of the purpose of their creation. Conclusions. It is proposed to consider the elements of the status of federal territories in Russia, based on the elements of the status of the subject of the Russian Federation, and in comparison with them. Such elements are: territory, population, subjects of jurisdiction, responsibilities, state power organization, property and budget, system of taxes and fees, names and symbols, population’s role in the state affairs management.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 86-93
Author(s):  
K.A. Sultanov ◽  

Since 2014, Federal legislation and the legislation of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in the field of public order protection, including the regulation of the activities of people's vigilantes and public associations, has been developing very actively. The subject of the research of the manuscript is the legislation of the Russian Federation on the participation of citizens in the protection of public order and the normative legal acts of the subjects of the Russian Federation adopted in accordance with it. The article analyzes the adopted Federal law of 02.04.2014 No. 44-FZ "on participation of citizens in the protection of public order" for the possibility of implementing its individual provisions. The author considers the author's position in terms of strengthening guarantees to persons involved in the protection of public order in administrative legislation on the example of the Kaluga, Penza and Lipetsk regions and the Republic of Crimea and Dagestan. Specific recommendations are proposed to increase the prestige of citizens ' participation in the protection of public order


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (6) ◽  
pp. 4-7
Author(s):  
B. Kh. ALIYEV ◽  

The article examines the current state of the fiscal policy of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation, which is a combination of diverse economic management measures based on the distribution and redistribution of financial flows. The analysis of fiscal policy on the example of the subject of the Russian Federation (Republic of Dagestan). The article outlines the problematic issues of the tax policy of the Republic of Dagestan and suggests ways to overcome the identified problems.


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.


Author(s):  
D. Naranova

To consider the main directions and extent of influence of ethical groups on political processes in the Republic of Kalmykia.The authors analyzed scientific research on the ethnic identity of the Kalmyk people, as well as media materials and statistical data on the cause and effect of the influence of ethnic groups on regional policy. Seven key areas of influence of the Kalmyks, as a titular nation, on political processes in the region, including through the formation of an ethnic majority among senior positions in the authorities of the subject of the Russian Federation, were identified. The theoretical significance of the study is due to the complex systematization of facts about the influence of the ethnodominating nation of the Republic of Kalmykia on political processes in the region. The practical significance is expressed in the proposal of specific recommendations for partial stabilization of the situation in the Republic.


2021 ◽  
pp. 434-442
Author(s):  
A.Ya. Petrov

On the basis of the analysis of Art. 11 of the Labour Code of the Russian Federation, Federal Law of July 27, 2004 No. 79-FZ “On the State Civil Service of the Russian Federation” and judicial practice, topical legal issues of the official discipline of State civil servants are considered.


Author(s):  
I.V. Ponkin

Conclusion on the draft federal law № 986679-7 “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation”, introduced on July 10, 2020 to the State Duma of the Russian Federation by the Deputy of the State Duma P.V. Krasheninnikov and Senator of the Russian Federation A.A. Klishas.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document