DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2015.9.14210

Abstract: This article analyzes the original goals and results of the two attempts of constitutionalization of Russia undertaken in 1906 and 1993. Based on these fundamental laws and legal doctrine of the corresponding period, the author demonstrates that the reception of certain constitutional institutions did not result in implementation of constitutional values and principles into the fabric of the state and public life. In author’s opinion, the cause for this lies in the fact that the architypes of Russian authority – the autocracy of the head of state and distinction between the executive and subordinate administration – do not allow to constitutionalize it, which results in only an ostensible constitutionalism. The scientific novelty of this research is the very statement of the question of architypes of Russian authority on the example of analysis of the constitutional texts from the various periods of Russian history. The author comes to the conclusion that in order for constitutionalization of the Russian authority to become possible, it is necessary (based on the axiological understanding of constitutionalism proposed by the author) to overcome its architypes and sequentially implement constitutional values into the Russian state law.

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0684.2015.9.14222

Abstract: The subject of the present article is the debate between Boris Chicherin and Vladimir Solovyov on the essence of law that took place in the second half of the XIX century. While the former was a classical liberal, who linked the essence of law solely with the values of freedom, the latter defended the understanding of law as some minimum of justice. Examining their views, the author shows that the arguments of these scholars are widespread among modern Russian jurists. Unfortunately, modern domestic legal science has not yet found a consensus on this fundamental issue. In the present paper the method of the unity of the historical and logical, together with the historical critical method are used, which allows to update the theoretical heritage of Boris Chicherin and Vladimir Solovyov. The content of the legislation and legal enforcement in the modern state directly depend on how we understand the nature of law. In order to remove the opposition of freedom and justice, the author proposes axiological understanding of constitutionalism as a theoretical form of legal consciousness, linking these values in a creative synthesis. On this basis it is possible to implement the norms and principles of the 1993 Constitution into the fabric of the Russian society.

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2015.9.42684

Abstract: This article analyzes the original goals and results of the two attempts of constitutionalization of Russia undertaken in 1906 and 1993. Based on these fundamental laws and legal doctrine of the corresponding period, the author demonstrates that the reception of certain constitutional institutions did not result in implementation of constitutional values and principles into the fabric of the state and public life. In author’s opinion, the cause for this lies in the fact that the architypes of Russian authority – the autocracy of the head of state and distinction between the executive and subordinate administration – do not allow to constitutionalize it, which results in only an ostensible constitutionalism. The scientific novelty of this research is the very statement of the question of architypes of Russian authority on the example of analysis of the constitutional texts from the various periods of Russian history. The author comes to the conclusion that in order for constitutionalization of the Russian authority to become possible, it is necessary (based on the axiological understanding of constitutionalism proposed by the author) to overcome its architypes and sequentially implement constitutional values into the Russian state law.

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0684.2014.7.11613

Abstract:

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2014.6.11096

Abstract:

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2014.6.42415

Abstract:

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2013.13.9736

Abstract:

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2013.13.42332

Abstract: