Implementation in the Russian Federation of acts of bodies of international organizations. Acts of international organizations

Implementation is the embodiment of the norms of international law in the behavior, activities of states and other entities, the practical implementation of legal prescriptions. There are the following forms of implementation.

Compliance is a form of implementation of norms-prohibitions. Subjects refrain from committing acts prohibited by criminal law. Example: Agreement between Government Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Armenia on cooperation in the field of peaceful use of atomic energy dated September 25, 2000. In accordance with this agreement, the exchange of information constituting a state secret between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Armenia is prohibited. with other entities that did not participate in the conclusion of this agreement. Failure to share this information will be proof that this rule is being followed.

Execution is the active activity of subjects in the implementation of norms. In accordance with the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime of November 15, 2000, each State Party submits the texts of laws and regulations to the UN Secretary General that ensure the implementation of the provisions of the Convention.

Use - the implementation of the provided opportunities contained in the norms of international law.

At the stage of entry of the norms of international law into the national legal system, a number of problems emerged. On the issue of the implementation of international acts in Russia, it should be said that the practice of executing international treaties and their implementation stumbles upon numerous obstacles and complexities of a legal, organizational, and political order. It would be incorrect to say that all the obstacles to the implementation of the treaties have been eliminated to date. A number of problems should be highlighted in the implementation of international instruments in legal system Russian Federation:

1. The absence of a clearly developed regulatory mechanism for the implementation of generally recognized customary principles and norms of international law, the unsettled status of these principles and norms.

The hierarchical position of universally recognized principles and norms, the form of expression of which is international custom, in contrast to contractual universally recognized principles and norms, the priority of which in relation to the norms of laws in cases of conflict with the latter is provided by Part 4 of Art. 15 is not clearly defined in the national legal system, which significantly complicates law enforcement activities. Kapustin A.N. Constitution and international law / A.N. Kapustin// Bulletin of RUDN.- 2004.-№1.- C 26-28 Their specific list has not been established.

• 2. Incomplete compliance with Art. 3 and part 3 of Art. 5 of the Federal Constitutional Law "On the Judicial System of the Russian Federation" to the requirements of Part 4 of Art. 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Federal Constitutional Law No. 1-FKZ of December 31, 1996 (as amended on February 5, 2014) "On the Judicial System of the Russian Federation" which was expressed in the form of a federal law, clearly contradicts Part 4 of Art. 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. These agreements should already be taken today in Art. 3 and part 3 of Art. 5 of the law under consideration, a place corresponding to their status established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
• 3. Lack of systematization of the norms of international law in relation to branches of law. Speaking about the systematization of the norms of international law in general, it should be noted that this problem is very acute. Various scientists publish a large number of collections of international documents that fill the information sphere, but they are not official. In law enforcement activities, references to such sources are not allowed.

Unsystematized norms of international law significantly complicate the implementation of these prescriptions.

This problem by branches of law can be solved through the development and adoption of official annexes to sectoral codes containing the norms of international law to be applied within a particular industry.

• 4. An undifferentiated approach to determining the position of various types of international treaties of the Russian Federation in the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and the APC of the Russian Federation. Article 11 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and Art. 13 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, speaking of international treaties of the Russian Federation as a whole, they do not divide them into types, while the ratio of the legal force of the norms of international treaties of the Russian Federation and the norms of other normative legal acts applied by the courts depends on the level of the body of the state that concluded the contract, and the form expression, consent to be bound by it. A differentiated approach to determining the position of various types of international treaties of the Russian Federation, taking into account their hierarchical force, should be reflected in these codes, which requires the introduction of appropriate additions to the named articles of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.
• 3. Correlation between international legal acts and the legal system of the Russian Federation

At present, an important condition for the functioning of Russian legislation is the analysis of the nature, features, and sources of international law. According to a widely held point of view, international law has a conciliatory character, which means a special way of creating international legal norms.

Achieving such an agreement is often associated with a compromise, commensurate concessions of states to each other on certain issues, which makes it possible to conclude an international treaty. Consequently, the agreement acts as a way to create norms of international law. Coordination of positions allows the subjects of international law to interact in the international arena and embodies the unity of the states that have concluded an international treaty in solving joint problems and tasks.

The problem of acts of domestic and international law occupies one of the central places in science.

Within the national system Russian law acts of normative content and non-normative content are distinguished, united by vertical and horizontal links. The first group includes normative legal acts - laws and by-laws and interpretative acts of a normative nature - resolutions of the Plenums, acts of interpretation of the Constitution by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, non-normative ones include various law enforcement acts, with the help of which there is a consolidation of power orders aimed at regulating and protecting specific legal relationship.

Normative legal acts of the Russian Federation are classified on the following grounds:

1. Depending on the legal force: laws, subordinate legal acts. In turn, the laws are divided into: the Constitution - the main political and legal act that establishes the constitutional order, the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, determines the form of government and the state structure, and establishes federal state bodies. The legal properties of the Constitution are: its supremacy, the highest legal force in relation to other legal acts, stability, direct action, is the core of the legal system, the general procedure for the adoption, revision, amendment, special protection by the state.

Federal constitutional laws are adopted on issues expressly designated in the Constitution. Federal constitutional laws, like other normative legal acts, must not contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation. They are not adopted by a simple majority, but in a special order - for their adoption, at least two-thirds of the votes of the total number members of the State Duma, and approval by the Federation Council requires at least three-quarters of the votes of the total number of members of this chamber.

Federal laws are adopted by a majority vote of the total number of members of the State Duma and govern a fairly wide range of public relations.

The laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation are adopted by the representative bodies of the constituent entity and cannot contradict federal laws.

By-laws are acts issued by the competent authorities or officials of the state on the basis of and in the execution of laws and containing legal norms. They have less legal force than laws and are based on them. They play a supporting and detailing role.

Decrees and orders of the President - are binding on the entire territory of Russia, must not contradict the Constitution, are prepared within the powers exercised by the President. Orders are taken on current and procedural issues.

Government decrees and directives. The most important acts are issued in the form of resolutions. Acts on operational current issues are issued in the form of orders. All acts of the government are binding on the territory of Russia. They can be adopted on the basis of and in the execution of the laws of the Russian Federation, as well as decrees of the President. In case of conflict with the Constitution, federal constitutional laws, federal laws, decrees of the President, they may be canceled by the President.

Departmental acts are acts adopted on the basis of and in accordance with decrees and orders of the President, resolutions and orders of the Government and regulating relations that are within the competence of these executive structures.

Local by-laws - normative decisions and resolutions of local representative and executive authorities. These acts are independent and independent of state authorities, but are subject to the Constitution and the laws of the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Federation, and there is also a system of normative legal acts of local governments.

Local acts - various institutions, enterprises, public and economic associations are formed at the state and public level, including commercial organizations. Each institution, enterprise or organization has its own charter, regulations or other constituent document, internal regulations for employees and administration.

• 2. Depending on the time of action: permanent and temporary.
• 3. By branches of law: criminal law, civil law, family law.

In the theory of international law, an important place is occupied by the question of the place of the norms of international law in the Russian legal system.

In accordance with Part 4 of Art. 15 of the Constitution of Russia, international legal acts are part of its legal system and they are given priority over domestic legislation. If an international treaty establishes rules other than those stipulated by the treaty, the rules of the international treaty shall apply. The Constitution of the Russian Federation: adopted at a popular vote on December 12, 1993 / / Rossiyskaya Gazeta 1993. No. 237 This provision excludes the interpretation of the norm of dual international law and domestic law are independent of each other and national law occupies a central position in relation to international.

The study of international law is of great importance for the effective legal regulation of relations in the field of organization and social support for the activities of the national armed forces.

AT general theory and the history of international law recognizes the existence of two systems of international and national law. Any international agreement is fixed within the framework of these two systems as an institution, industry, sub-sector, system, subsystem.

The forms of interaction between the norms of international and domestic law are reflected in the basis of the means and methods for implementing the norms on the territory of a particular state, the creation of a mechanism for state and legal support for the implementation of international legal norms in domestic law.

B. I. Zimnenko notes that the legislator considers international and domestic law as independent legal orders and elements operating in the legal system of Russia. Zimnenko B.L. International law and legal system of the Russian Federation: monograph. -M.: Russian Academy of Justice; Statute, 2006, C 135

For example, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is stated that it is based on the Constitution of the Russian Federation, generally recognized principles and norms of international law. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; official text accepted State Duma May 24, 1996 and amendments and additions as of October 1, 2014 / / Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation.- No. 25.- Art. 1 item 2

In accordance with the Law "On the State Border of the Russian Federation" Federal Law "On the State Border of the Russian Federation": Law of the Russian Federation of April 1, 1993 No. 4730-1 as of June 28, 2014 // Ved. Congress of People's Deputies Ros. Federation and Top. Council of Ros. Federation. 1993. No. 17, Art. 3 Russia cooperates with foreign states in the field of protection of the State Border on the basis of generally recognized principles and norms of international law, international treaties of the Russian Federation. The legal system of Russia does not include the norms of international law, but only their individual provisions. In order for the norms of international law to enter the legal system of the Russian Federation, they must regulate the relations that arise between the subjects of the national legal system. The legal system of Russia includes international acts that have received the opportunity to act with the appropriate sanction of the state and complex norms. Complex norms are included in the legal system, but not in the legal system of the state.

The norms of national law, its normative content are formed only by the state itself. The state itself has the right to reformulate the norm, change it or cancel it altogether. In accordance with the system of hierarchy of normative legal acts of the Russian Federation, such actions must take place in the order in which these norms were adopted. A normative legal act may be amended, supplemented or canceled by adopting a new act that has no less legal force.

Any national legal system has its established specific form.

State bodies implementing complex rules of law should take into account that these rules are related to both the national and international legal systems. These norms can objectively function in accordance with the rules and principles specific to this regulatory system, which in turn cannot lead to a violation of the relevant international legal norms. Razumov Yu.A. Place of international law norms in the legal system of the Russian Federation / Yu.A. Razumov // International Law and International Organizations.- 2013.-№2.-С 246-249

The system of forms (sources) of international law and the system of forms (sources) of domestic law - each of them - is a complex, autonomous system in a certain volume and sense. At the same time, the totality of sources of international law is predominantly a horizontal system in its structure, but with certain elements of legal subordination. Ovsepyan Zh.I. Status of sources of international law in the domestic (national) legal system (issues of integration of international law in the Russian Federation) / Zh.I. Hovsepyan// North Caucasian legal journal. - 2010.- №4.- From 56-58

Thus, Russian legislation is based on the principles and norms of international law, on the Constitution, on laws on cooperation with foreign states.

1. Implementation in the Russian Federation of acts of bodies of international organizations. 3
2. Compare the international norms on trademarks and the provisions of Part Four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. fifteen
3. Problem 19
References 25

1. Implementation in the Russian Federation of acts of bodies of international organizations.

Growing integration processes lead to closer interaction between national and international law. Their mutual influence is becoming a powerful factor in legal development in the modern world. In metaphorical terms, we have before us "crossing parallels", when two legal systems either converge or diverge. Between them, such a variety appears as interstate associations such as the EU, CE, CIS with a stricter internal structural and regulatory organization.
Moreover, the mutual influence of internal law and "external" legal systems is very peculiar. The branches of national law are adjoined, as it were, by the corresponding international normative arrays or branches (international educational, environmental law etc.), becoming to a certain extent their source. In turn, the sectoral system of national law affects the sectoral specialization of international law. And the general theory of state and law can no longer be developed purely on a national basis, because international law and comparative law expand its source base.
In state-legal practice, acute problems arise, for the solution of which it is necessary to creatively develop a system of international norms and a mechanism for their implementation and operation in the national legal system, including the Russian one. Moreover, the emphasis is on the implementation of mainly international treaty rules. The most fundamental problems of interest to us are developed in recent times I.I. Lukashuk and S.Yu. Marochkin. The importance of universally recognized principles and other international norms cannot be underestimated. In addition, specific acts are adopted within the framework of interstate associations. The specifics of international legal acts and norms explain the features of the methods and procedures for their implementation. In the legal system of the country, these acts "meet" with others, interconnected, and have an impact on both lawmaking and law enforcement.
Let's start with clarifying the relationship between international legal personality and the sovereignty of states. International instruments, such as the European Energy Charter, recognize the sovereign rights of states. Hence the main question is inevitable: what are the criteria for the compliance of international legal norms with the Constitution and Russian legislation? Let's call them:
a) ensuring the national - state interests, enshrined in Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10, 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation;
b) compliance with the principles of the Russian legal system and the construction of legislation and its branches, basic legal concepts;
c) maintaining the stable competence of the subjects of Russian law and their relationships;
d) protection of human and civil rights and freedoms;
e) ensuring the sustainability of national parameters of the economy;
f) availability of procedures for implementing the norms and protecting the legitimate interests of citizens and legal entities.
In foreign countries, one can find peculiar constitutional formulas. According to the Spanish Constitution, an organic law may authorize the conclusion of agreements on participation in international organizations. The conclusion of certain international treaties requires the prior permission of the Parliament. According to the Italian Constitution, the country's legal order is consistent with the generally recognized norms of international law.

As you know, the Constitution of the Russian Federation limits the international component of the country's legal system to two "elements": generally recognized principles and norms and international treaties.

Nevertheless, everything that is outside the scope of law - recommendations of bodies of international organizations, acts of international conferences, model acts ("soft" law) - actively "intruded" into the law enforcement sphere. In the mid-1990s, when the development and implementation of the constitutional principle was in its infancy, the appearance in court decisions along with treaties of non-legal international norms raised perplexing questions: allegedly, the courts, primarily the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, contrary to the Constitution, “declared” the legal rules of the advisory character.

Indeed, sometimes there are curiosities when the courts “include” recommendatory acts in the MP (and sometimes even call them international legislation): the Manual of Procedures and Criteria for Determining the Status of Refugees of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees of 1979, the Declaration on Social and Legal principles relating to the protection and welfare of children, especially when placing children in foster care and adoption at national and international levels(approved by the Resolution of the UN General Assembly on December 3, 1986), the Charter of Social Rights and Guarantees of Citizens of Independent States (approved by the resolution of the Interparliamentary Assembly of the CIS), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, etc. 1

In general, as the analysis of practice shows, the courts have considered and are considering such norms and acts precisely as recommendations.

So, the judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the decision on the application of K. to invalidate certain points of the resolutions of the Government of the Russian Federation of August 12, 1999 No. 921 and of March 31, 2001 No. 247 as contradicting federal legislation, as well as the Model Agreement between the UN and the states -members providing personnel and equipment for UN peacekeeping operations, noted that the Model Agreement is only the basis for the development of relevant individual agreements and does not contain the rules of the MP.

The general trend is that recourse to international recommendatory acts has become a daily practice in all types of courts. Court decisions accompanied by references to, say, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Declaration of Principles of International Law, the Final Act on Security and Cooperation in Europe and other OSCE (CSCE) documents, many of whose provisions have acquired the features of customary law or are norms in the process of becoming , look more weighty and reasonable.

Strictly speaking, the courts do not apply them, but use them to clarify the concepts used, formulate and justify their position, confirm or strengthen the legal argument. And the questions sometimes raised in the literature about what their application order is, whether they are self-fulfilling or not, hardly make sense.

Involvement in judicial activities of a huge "layer" of international recommendatory norms is a solid step in the practical development of the constitutional principle of the international component of the Russian legal system.

recommendatory acts. As part of the guiding clarifications to lower courts, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation also interprets the relevant international recommendations. The Decree of the Plenum of the Court dated February 24, 2005 No. 3 “On judicial practice in cases of protecting the honor and dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities” draws the attention of the courts to the provisions of the Declaration on the freedom of political discussion in the media mass media, adopted on February 12, 2004 at the 872nd meeting of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, regarding public political discussion and criticism in the media (para. 9). Later, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation published a review of the practice of considering this category of cases by courts 1 . He noted that the courts were guided not only by the law, but also by international norms, in particular the Declaration, as well as the Resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe 1165 (1998) on the right to immunity privacy, and gave an interpretation of some of its provisions.

The range and list of international recommendatory acts used is very wide. This once again indicates that the courts very often turn to them on a variety of issues and branches of law to argue their position on the cases under consideration.

These instruments include: the Declaration on the Human Rights of Persons Who Are Not Citizens of the Country in which they Live; Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power; Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe No. I (85) 11 “On the position of the victim in criminal law and procedure”; Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment; Recommendation No. I 16 (2003) of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to member states on the enforcement of administrative and judicial decisions in the field of administrative law; Resolution No. 3 of the XXIV Conference of European Ministers of Justice "Common approaches and means to achieve effective enforcement of judgments"; Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1687 (2004) Combating terrorism through culture; Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Recommendation 1704 (2005) “Referendums: Towards good practice in Europe”; UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (Annex to UN ECOSOC Resolution 2006/23 of 27 July 2006); Basic principles of the independence of the judiciary; Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 818 (1977) on the situation of the mentally ill; Declaration on Social and Legal Principles Concerning the Protection and Welfare of Children, Especially in the Placement and Adoption of Children at the National and International Levels, etc.

In order to strengthen the argument, the courts sometimes resort to the "generally accepted international practice”, using the recommendatory acts of international organizations in which Russia does not participate. So, back in 1998, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in the case on the verification of the constitutionality of the provisions of the Fundamentals of the Legislation of the Russian Federation on Notaries, noted that the methods provided for in them to control the notary chambers over the activities of notaries are consistent with the resolution of the European Parliament of January 18, 1994. In another case, the Court referred on the 1988 Code of Conduct for Lawyers in the European Community 1

A special and rare case - reduction of solutions international bodies as information only for information, which, however, may well affect the development of practice. In this capacity, the decision of the UN Committee on Human Rights No. 1310/2004 on Russia's violation of the requirements of paragraphs 1 and 7 of Art. 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in court decisions on charges of B.

International model standards. A special kind of rules and norms that the courts resort to to strengthen the argumentation when substantiating a decision in a case are the provisions of draft regulations adopted by the bodies of unions, commonwealths, allied states as samples (models) of legislative acts of participating states (model norms). They reflect the coinciding or similar positions of these states, contain developed formulations, and are a stage in the possible emergence of future legal norms (law in the making). There are reasons to believe that model regulation tends to develop. Not only the model norms themselves are being developed and adopted, but also agreements on them (“rules on norms”). Thus, within the framework of the EurAsEC, an Agreement was adopted on the status of the Fundamentals of Legislation of this Community, the procedure for their development, adoption

and implementations 1 . As future legal norms, model norms are also used for argumentation in court cases.

In the aforementioned ruling on the case of violation of constitutional rights and freedoms by the provisions of the Law of the Russian Federation “On currency regulation and currency control”, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation correlated the requirements for goods transported across the border with the Fundamentals of the Customs Legislation of the CIS Member States of 1995.

Later, a judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation resorted to a similar argument when considering M.'s supervisory complaint about the revision of court decisions on his claim to invalidate the decision of the customs authority on the payment of customs duties. Moreover, the judge noted that this regulation is generally accepted in international practice, and referred to the International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs Procedures of 1973, the EU Customs Code of 1992. Presumably, he made such a reference, pursuing a purely comparative legal goal, since Russia is not a member of them.

Individual and normative decisions of bodies of international organizations. Courts often turn to the decisions of bodies of international law enforcement organizations. The judgments of the ECtHR have a special status and role, and they will be given special attention. Here we also note cases of references to decisions of other bodies in the acts of Russian courts.

Sometimes there are references to decisions of the European Commission and the EU Court of Justice, which in principle have no legal significance for Russia. It is obvious that the only role of such examples is to reflect experience and approaches in resolving such cases, and, accordingly, to strengthen the argument of the court.

In one of these cases, the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation considered the cassation appeal of the public organization Dianetics Center against the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Bashkortostan to liquidate this organization as carrying out educational and medical activities without licenses in violation of the law and violating human rights and freedoms. In addition to a detailed assessment of the legislative framework, the Board, in support of its conclusions, cited the relevant provisions of the ECHR, as well as the decision of the ECHR on a similar issue. And, apparently, to reinforce the conclusions, she noted: “The decision taken by the court to liquidate the Dianetics Center of the Republic of Bashkortostan is consistent with the practice of decision-making in such cases in the European Community”, referring to the decision of the European Commission of December 17, 1968. 1

A distinctive feature of UN Security Council resolutions is that they are addressed not to specific people or organizations, but to member states. Hence, at first glance, they have no place in the decisions of domestic courts. Nevertheless, such resolutions are periodically mentioned in the jurisprudence.

Thus, assessing the constitutionality of the provisions of the legislation related to the burial of persons whose death occurred as a result of the suppression of a terrorist act committed by them, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation resorted not only to a literal, formal legal interpretation of the disputed provisions, but also to a broader, systemic interpretation from the point of view of goals of counter-terrorism policy in the domestic and global spheres. In this context, the Court observed that “The United Nations Security Council, in Resolution 1624 (2005), adopted on September 14, 2005 at the level of heads of state and having binding force, emphasizes the importance of taking appropriate measures at the national and international levels to protect the right to life” .

In the case of checking the constitutionality of Art. 188 “Smuggling” of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the Court concluded that the established procedure for moving currency across the customs border is consistent with international standards developed with the participation of Russia, in particular with the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF). “The UN Security Council, in Resolution 1617 (2005) of July 29, 2005, urged all UN member states to comply with this and other FATF recommendations” 1 .

In these and other cases, resolutions of the UN Security Council, decisions of other international bodies serve to substantiate the courts' final assessment of the situation and their own decision.

Decisions of the Economic Court of the CIS have a different meaning. Being binding on the parties to a particular dispute, they, in addition, take on the character general rule. In Resolution No. 8 of June 11, 1999 “On the Validity of International Treaties of the Russian Federation in Relation to Civil Procedure Issues”, the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation drew the attention of the courts, in particular, to the rule for collecting state duty when considering economic disputes between subjects of different states, formulated in decision of February 7, 1996 No. 10/95 C1 / 3-96 (paragraph 15 of the decision).

Decisions of an imperative binding nature have the right to be taken by the bodies of the EurAsEC. Here is the decision of the Commission of the Customs Union dated November 27, 2009 No. 132 "On the unified non-tariff regulation of the customs union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" . The Commission formulated a number of direct specific instructions to the governments of these countries, state executive bodies, and the Secretariat. Another example is the decision of the Interstate Council of the EurAsEC dated July 5, 2010 No. 51 “On the agreement on the procedure for the movement of cash and (or) monetary instruments by individuals across the customs border of the customs union” 1 . The Council decided: to accept the Treaty; to the governments of member states "to ensure that national legislation is brought into line with the Treaty".

In pursuance of such decisions, federal bodies adopt implementing acts. Let us mention, in particular, the order of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation of June 9, 2010 No. 489 on amending the order of November 18, 2008 No. 335 on the basis of the decision of the Interstate Council of the EurAsEC of November 27, 2009 and the letter of the Federal Customs Service of Russia dated 6 July 2010 No. 01-11/33275 "On Passenger Customs Declaration" based on the decision of the Commission of the Customs Union of June 18, 2010

Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

A solid array of the international component of the Russian legal system, in addition to its normative part (generally recognized principles and norms and international treaties), is represented by the judgments of the ECtHR. Of course, there is no mention of them in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, since Russia joined the Council of Europe and recognized the jurisdiction of the Court after the adoption of the Constitution. Nevertheless, over the past period, this array has quite tangibly, even powerfully “intruded” into the legal system, mainly into its practical part thanks primarily to the courts.

In this sense, the courts again had a great influence on the development of the constitutional principle of the international component of the country's legal system.

The federal law on the ratification of the ECHR outlined the specific limits of the recognized jurisdiction of the Court: it is obligatory for Russia on the interpretation and application of the Convention and its Protocols in cases of alleged violation by Russia of the provisions of these treaty acts, when the alleged violation took place after their entry into force against Russia 1 . Nevertheless, after years of “work” of the Russian courts with the decisions of the ECtHR, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, interpreting this provision of the Law, gave a significant assessment of their role in the legal system of Russia: “Thus, like the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the decisions of the European Court on human rights - insofar as they, based on the generally recognized principles and norms of international law, give an interpretation of the content of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention ... - are an integral part of the Russian legal system ...(highlighted by me. - S. M.)".

In fact, the range of judgments of the ECtHR used by the Russian courts turned out to be much wider both in terms of time and subject matter than it is outlined by the Law on Ratification of the Convention. As practice has shown, the courts did not ask themselves whether or not they have an obligation (if this Law is interpreted formally legally) to take into account other judgments of the ECtHR, except for those binding on Russia. The list of emerging issues is far from being limited to the recognition and enforcement of his rulings against Russia, and it is hardly possible to administer justice, taking into account some rulings and "turning a blind eye" to others. Just most of The judgments of the ECtHR used and cited by the courts apply to other countries.

The courts perceive the decisions of the ECHR (refer to them) in various aspects: when assessing specific concepts or situations, when interpreting the ECHR, to take into account the legal positions of the ECHR and its case law, as a basis for reviewing judicial acts.

The role of guiding explanations of the highest judicial instances. Documents adopted by the upper echelons of the judiciary provide guidance to lower courts in order to ensure uniform application of the law.

Apparently, after the adoption of the Law, which ratified the Convention and recognized the compulsory jurisdiction of the ECtHR, the Supreme Court was the first to react. Court of Arbitration RF. In order to ensure the development of arbitration practice in line with the Convention and its application, the ECtHR, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, sent the mentioned information letter “On the main provisions applied by the European Court of Human Rights in the protection of property rights and the right to justice” to arbitration courts.

In Resolution No. 17 of March 12, 2007 “On the Application of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in the Review of Judicial Acts that Have Enforced Due to Newly Discovered Circumstances,” the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation determined the circle of persons who may apply for review of court decisions in connection with the judgment of the ECtHR.

The central document on the issues under consideration for the courts of general jurisdiction is also the aforementioned resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated October 10, 2003 No. 5. Despite the specific name of the resolution, a number of its paragraphs are devoted to the ECtHR and the implementation of its decisions and directly prescribe: the application by the courts

The ECHR must be implemented taking into account the practice of the ECtHR in order to avoid any violation of the Convention (para. 10).

The legal positions and acts of the ECtHR are also named as binding for the courts in the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 19, 2003 No. 23 “On the Judgment”, dated February 24, 2005 No. 3 “On Judicial Practice in Cases of Protection of Honor and the dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities", dated February 6, 2007 No. 6 "On amendments and additions to certain decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on civil cases", in the "Review of the judicial practice of consideration by courts of cases on the protection of honor and dignity" 1 and others.

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, as an independent independent branch of the judicial system, determines the forms of appeal to the positions and acts of the ECtHR in its specific decisions and rulings. And, as can be judged, it is the most active in this regard among all types of courts. In one case, he emphasized his appointment and outlined the limits of the powers of his own and the ECtHR.

Citizens appealed to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation with complaints about the verification of the constitutionality of a number of provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and the Law of the Russian Federation "On Psychiatric Care and Guarantees of the Rights of Citizens in its Provision". Moreover, the complaints were filed after the ECHR in the case “Shtukaturov v. Russia” (one of the applicants) stated a violation of the rights to liberty and security of person, a fair trial, enshrined in the ECHR, against him.

Despite the final judgment of the ECtHR and its compulsory jurisdiction, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation accepted the complaints for proceedings, stating that the assessment of the constitutionality of legislative provisions is its exclusive prerogative. “Since such verification cannot be carried out either by other domestic judicial bodies or by any interstate body, including the ECtHR, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation recognizes the applicants’ complaints, filed by their chosen representatives, as admissible.” It should be noted that, for its part, the ECHR, in cases on complaints that mention the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, until recently did not try to interfere with its powers. An unprecedented example was the judgment of October 7, 2010 in the case “Konstantin Markin v. Russia”, in which the ECtHR decided to “evaluate” and criticize the arguments of the Constitutional Court in its decision on the applicant’s complaint, as well as Russian legislation, which, according to the ECtHR, is incompatible, with the convention. This has been sharply assessed as being clearly outside the scope of the competence established by the ECHR 1 .

Judgments of the ECtHR as an example of the assessment of specific concepts or situations. When considering cases, courts sometimes evaluate certain concepts and situations from the point of view of law, citing similar assessments given by the ECtHR as an argument.

Thus, in the case of the liquidation of the public organization Dianetics Center, one of the main questions was whether the activities of the Center were educational, in order to then correlate it with the requirements of the law. Considering the Center’s cassation appeal against the decision of the previous court instance, the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation concluded: “The understanding of education presented in the court decision corresponds to the legal position of the European Court of Human Rights, according to which education is considered as a continuous learning process. In support of this, the judgment of the Court in the case of Campbell and Cosans v. United Kingdom (Eur. Court. H.R. Campbell and Co-sans v. United Kingdom, Judgment of 25 February 1982. Series A. No. 48) should be cited.

Use of the judgments of the ECtHR in the interpretation of the Convention by the courts. Courts often consider judgments of the ECtHR as an authoritative interpretation of the norms of the ECHR and use them to substantiate their positions and decisions. Since such an interpretation enriches the content of the norm, it can be assumed that the relevant parts of the decrees have elements of rule-making.

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation has repeatedly appealed to the interpretation of the ECHR, paragraph 1 of Art. 6 of the ECHR (the right to a fair trial), which indicates an essential element: the execution of a decision of any court is an integral part of the “court”, the violation of the “right to a court” may take the form of a delay in the execution of the decision (another element of this article is the possibility of preliminary participation of administrative bodies in exercising a jurisdictional function); Art. 5 and 6 on the liberty and security of persons of unsound mind and their right to a fair trial; Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on the concept of “own property” 1 . His interpretation of paragraph 1 of Art. 8 of the ECHR on the right to respect for personal and family life was given by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

Legal positions. Russian courts have worked out the practice of comparing (correlating) the legal positions they develop with the positions of the ECtHR. The latter help the perception and understanding of the meaning of the provisions of the ECHR, its adjustment, the development of judicial practice in line with the norms of the Convention and the activities of the ECtHR, sometimes even the amendment of legislation. In Resolution No. 2-P of February 5, 2007, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, as already mentioned, prescribed that the federal legislator should, “taking into account the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights ... bring the legal regulation of supervisory proceedings ... into compliance with the international legal standards recognized by the Russian Federation”.

The importance of legal positions is periodically drawn to the attention of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation: in a general decision of October 10, 2003 No. 5 (p. 12), as well as in decisions on specific categories of cases 1 .

Without taking into account the legal positions of the ECtHR, a literal interpretation of the provisions of the Convention may lead to different results in their application. In this context, we note, in particular, some of his positions used by the courts in specific cases.

The requirements of legal certainty and stability are not absolute and do not prevent the resumption of the proceedings on the basis of newly discovered circumstances; the state cannot use such legal regulation that would lead to inequality between public law entities and private individuals; the right to freedom of speech under Art. 10 of the ECHR must be considered in the light of the right to free elections, they are interrelated; the principle of legal certainty means that neither party can request a review of an effective ruling only for the purpose of holding a rehearing and obtaining a new ruling; the right to form an association under Art. 11 of the ECHR (although it only mentions trade unions) it is possible for citizens to create a legal entity in order to act together in the area of ​​their interests; the right to a fair trial (art. 6) implies that a binding decision cannot be changed by a non-judicial authority; education is seen as a continuous learning process.

The role of the case law of the ECtHR. As already mentioned, the Federal Law on the Ratification of the ECHR and the Recognition of the Compulsory Jurisdiction of the ECtHR actually opened the way for the widespread introduction of the case law of the Court into the Russian legal system. Moreover, in this aspect, Russian courts rely not only on the binding judgments of the ECtHR adopted in relation to Russia, but also on any others that may relate to the subject of the case under consideration or the relevant article of the Convention.

Referring to the precedents of the ECtHR, judging by the results of the study of cases, has become everyday and habitual in the activities of the courts 1 . Like the interpretation of the provisions of the Convention, legal positions and precedents equally help the Russian courts in clarifying the arguments in the case, forming their own sustainable practice on similar or coinciding issues. From a formal legal point of view, the judgments of the ECHR play a subsidizing role: the courts cite them to confirm and reinforce their assessments and conclusions (“this position is confirmed by the practice of the ECHR”, “it also follows from the practice of the European Court”, “such a conclusion corresponds to the practice of the Court”, “ the same approach is taken by the ECtHR”, etc.). In fact, they often "lead" the courts to substantiate and make their own decision on the case under consideration.

The particular importance of taking into account the precedent decisions of the ECtHR is seen in the fact that they sometimes not only apply, but also develop the provisions of the Convention. So, in the case of checking the constitutionality of Part 3 of Art. 292 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation turned to the legal position expressed by it earlier: it is not an unconditional basis for refusing to accept a complaint if the deadline set for its filing is not accepted for good reasons. To confirm the validity of its position, the Court correlated it with the practice of the ECtHR and found that the latter also “does not consider this term to be the maximum permissible (punitive) period for protecting the violated right, although the Convention itself does not contain rules on the restoration of a missed deadline(highlighted by me. - S. L /.) ".

In its ruling dated July 16, 2007 No. 11-P on the case of checking the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Federal Law "On Political Parties" in connection with the complaint of the Communist Party, the Court noted that the limits of discretion of the legislator in regulating the creation and activities of political parties are predetermined by constitutional rights and freedoms in particular the right to association, including in political parties. This right is inalienable within the meaning of Art. 11 ECHR, although it speaks only of trade unions, which has been repeatedly confirmed by the case law of the ECtHR.

Sometimes judgments of the ECtHR play a “negative role” when they are used as an “unsuitable” means of argumentation. In the aforementioned decision of December 21, 2005 No. 13-P on the verification of the constitutionality of the Law on the General Principles of Organizing the Authorities of the Subjects of the Federation, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation cited the decision of the ECtHR in the case of Gitonas v. Greece” dated July 1, 1997 as an example of the application of Art. 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the ECHR. But both the resolution and the article refer to elections only to legislative bodies, while the complaint of citizens and, accordingly, the subject of the case relate to the election of senior officials of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The court, however, used them as an argument in a case on a different subject, actually substantiating, with the help of an inappropriate argument, the compatibility of the changes made to this Law with the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

Introduction into law enforcement practice of generally recognized principles applied by the ECtHR. One of the most important values ​​of the judgments of the ECtHR is that they contain not only the interpretation of the provisions of the Convention, the legal positions and case law of the Court, but also the generally recognized principles on which justice should be based.

It is significant that Russian courts appeal both to positive law and legal positions, and to principles. Due to this, the general principles of law and the generally recognized principles of IL are actively introduced into the country's legal system, primarily into law enforcement practice, and become the "usual" normative basis for decision-making along with legislation.

The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation in an information letter dated December 20, 1999 "On the main provisions applied by the European Court of Human Rights in the protection of property rights and the right to justice" noted the relationship between the competences of national courts to resolve disputes and the ECtHR to consider complaints of violation of property rights , recommended to take into account in the administration of justice, in particular, the following principles from which the ECtHR proceeds: the balance of private and public interests, access to court, dispute resolution by an independent court and compliance with the statutory procedure, impartiality, fairness of the trial, reasonableness of its time and openness.

The Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in its resolution of October 10, 2003 No. 5 gave a definition of the concept of universally recognized principles of MP. In rulings on specific issues, the Plenum orients the courts to certain groups of principles. Thus, in the resolution of March 17, 2004 No. 2 “On the application by the courts of the Russian Federation of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation”, he drew the attention of the courts to the obligation, when applying a disciplinary sanction to an employee, to comply with the general principles of legal responsibility recognized by Russia of justice, equality, proportionality, legality, guilt, humanism; in the resolution of June 19, 2006 No. 15 "On issues arising from the courts when considering civil cases related to the application of legislation on copyright and related rights" - to the list of international principles for the protection of authors' rights enshrined in the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and artistic works. In the Review of Normative Acts and Judicial Practice Concerning Ensuring Human Rights to Liberty and Personal Inviolability, 1 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation listed documents containing generally recognized principles and norms in this area.

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation regularly correlates its legal assessments with the principles enshrined in the decisions of the ECtHR: the independence of the judiciary, the provision of justice for human rights, fair justice, the finality and stability of decisions that have entered into force, legal certainty, etc. 1

Judgments of the ECtHR as a basis for the revision of judicial acts. Of all the above forms of “presence” of ECtHR decisions in the legal system of the Russian Federation, their influence on law enforcement practice, this form, obviously, is most consistent with the content of the Federal Law on Ratification of the ECHR. The recognition of the jurisdiction of the Court as binding on the interpretation and application of the Convention not only implies, in the event of a decision against Russia, the obligation to pay compensation, but may also lead to a change in legislation, in the judicial sphere, a revision of the decisions made.

Constitutionality Part 2 Art. 392 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation it was precisely in this aspect that the citizens challenged in their complaints to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. In its judgment of February 26, 2010 No. 4-P, the Court came to exactly this conclusion: taking into account the proclaimed Art. 15 (part 4) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation of the priority of the rules of an international treaty of the Russian Federation, this provision of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation cannot be considered as allowing the court to refuse to review its decision if the ECtHR has established a violation of the provisions of the Convention when considering a particular case.

In its resolution of March 19, 2010 No. 7-P, for the same reasons, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation found Part 2 of Art. 397 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

In the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the judgments of the ECtHR are considered as grounds for reviewing court decisions due to new circumstances (Articles 413 and 311, respectively).

The Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation does not provide for such a basis, however, the revision is quite acceptable by analogy with law - based on the principles of legislation (Article 1) and the constitutional principle under consideration. Otherwise it would be illogical and run counter to the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

Two rulings of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation can serve as an example of such an impact of ECtHR judgments. When considering criminal cases, he canceled court decisions: in one case, in connection with the decision of the ECtHR of June 9, 2005, in which a violation of Art. 1 Protocol No. 1 to the ECHR 1 ; in the other, in connection with the ruling of 13 July 2006, which found a violation of paragraph "6" of § 3 and § 1 of Art. 6 of the Convention. Moreover, in the second decision, the conclusion of the Presidium was placed in the heading of the decision (obviously, for guidance to the courts when considering subsequent similar situations).

• See: Russian justice. 2003. No. 3. S. 6-8; Universally recognized principles and norms of international law, international treaties in the practice of constitutional justice: materials of the All-Russian meeting / ed. M. A. Mityukova et al. M., 2004. S. 528-531.
• See, for example: Generalization of the judicial practice of considering cases related to the application of legislation on refugees and internally displaced persons// Air Force of the Russian Federation. 2000. No. 5; rulings of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 12, 1999 No. 2-G99-3, dated April 28, 2000 No. 50-G00-5; resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of March 15, 2005 No. 3-P; determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of April 4, 2006 No. 113-0.
• Russian Air Force. 2009. No. 1.
• Russian Air Force. 2005. No. 4; 2007. No. 12.
• See: resolutions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of December 8, 2003 No. 18-P; dated May 11, 2005 No. 5-P; dated December 26, 2003 No. 20-P; dated July 14, 2005 No. 8-P; dated March 21, 2007 No. 3-P; dated June 28, 2007 No. 8-P; dated February 28, 2008 No. 3-P; dated March 17, 2009 No. 5-P; dated February 27, 2009 No. 4-P; rulings of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated June 23, 2000 No. 147-0; dated November 5, 2004 No. 345-0; dated December 1, 2005 No. 462-0; from

Recently, there has been a significant expansion of the forms of participation of international organizations in international rule-making.

In the MP, a new method of creating norms has been actively disseminated - through the adoption of acts of international bodies and organizations. As G. I. Tunkin noted, “along with the contractual and usual processes of the formation of international law norms, there is currently the formation of international legal norms through the adoption by international organizations of legally binding normative resolutions for states.” "Resolutions of an international organization - a new method of creating norms of international law, a new source of international law."

It must be said that the legal force of acts of bodies of international organizations is determined by their constituent documents. According to the statutes of most international organizations, the decisions of their bodies are advisory in nature. However, it is possible to single out two groups of acts containing the norms of international law. Among them:

a) resolutions establishing rules binding on the bodies of this organization (regulations of bodies, resolutions on the formation of the budget of the organization, norms governing the functioning of this organization, etc.). These international norms form part of the internal law of the organization.

As an example, the EEC Council Regulation No. 3955/92 of December 21, 1992 can be mentioned. The Regulation not only approves the Agreement establishing the International Center for Science and Technology between the USA, Japan, the Russian Federation and the European Atomic Energy Community and the European Economic Community acting jointly, but and responsibilities of the EU Council, the European Commission and other EU institutions.

The Rules of the CIS Economic Court, approved by the Decree of the Plenum of the Economic Court on July 10, 1997, determine the procedure for the Court's procedural activities when considering disputes and requests for interpretation within its competence.

b) acts that become legally binding by virtue of the norms of international treaties (regulations and directives of the European Commission, the Council of the EU, ICAO standards, IMO, etc.) and / or domestic legislation.

According to Art. 37 of the Convention on International civil aviation 1944, The International Civil Aviation Organization adopts and, as necessary, amends from time to time international standards, recommended practices and procedures relating to: communications systems and air navigation aids, including ground markings; characteristics of airports and landing sites; rules of the air and air traffic control practices; and such other matters relating to the safety, regularity and efficiency of air navigation.

In particular, the Order of the Russian Aviation and Space Agency dated August 15, 2003 No. 165 "On Approval of the Federal Aviation Regulations" Organization of the Work of Medical Personnel of Aviation Organizations of Experimental Aviation" states that "when sent to work in foreign countries experimental aviation aircraft must be equipped medical means according to ICAO recommendations.

According to Art. 15 of the Convention on the International Maritime Organization, the IMO Assembly makes recommendations to the Members of the Organization regarding the adoption of rules and guidelines relating to maritime safety and the prevention and control of marine pollution from ships, as well as other matters relating to the impact of shipping on the marine environment, which are entrusted to the Organization international instruments or in accordance with them, or amendments to such rules and guidelines as have been transmitted to it;

Resolution A.741(18) of the International Maritime Organization approved the 1993 International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and Pollution Prevention, which is mandatory both for IMO member states (including Russia) and for ship owners, managers and charterers.

The Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation, which approved the Regulations on the Federal System for the Protection of Maritime Navigation from Illegal Acts against the Safety of Navigation, dated April 11, 2000, provides that "information about each illegal act against the safety of navigation is submitted by the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation to the International maritime organization(IMO) in accordance with the procedures established by that organization."

According to Art. 22 of the WHO Constitution, rules adopted by the Health Assembly of WHO shall become binding on all Members after duly notification of their adoption by the Health Assembly, except for those Members who notify the Director-General within the time specified in the notification of their rejection or reservations in regarding them.

The norms confirming the international legal nature of the acts of some bodies of international organizations are also enshrined in foreign legislation. Yes, Art. 10 of the Portuguese Constitution establishes: "the rules emanating from the competent bodies of the international organizations to which Portugal is a member are directly applicable in domestic law, insofar as this is established in the relevant constituent treaties." Provisions for this are contained in Art. 23 of the Austrian Constitution, art. 29 of the Constitution of Ireland, chapter 10 of the Constitution of Sweden and other documents.

In addition to automatic implementation in the Russian Federation, the “one-time” method of acts of an international organization is also used.

For example, in 1995, the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation “On measures for the implementation of the documents of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe” “Vienna Document 1994 Negotiations on Confidence and Security Building Measures”, “Global Exchange of Military Information”, “Code of Conduct regarding politico-military aspects of security” and “Decision on the principles governing non-proliferation”.

The decision of the State Customs Committee of the Russian Federation of December 7, 2000 No. GKPI 99-881 indicates that the customs authorities are bound by the "Unified Methodology of Customs Statistics of Foreign Trade of the States Members of the Commonwealth of Independent States" (approved by the decision of the Council of Heads of Government of the CIS on December 9, 1994).

According to the Order of the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation dated November 1, 2002 No. 138, the minimum composition of the crews of self-propelled transport vessels is approved in accordance with IMO resolution - A. 890 (21).

Thus, in the process of creating normative acts of international organizations, two stages in the creation of international legal norms can be distinguished: the establishment of a rule of conduct and the giving of legal force to an agreed rule of an international legal norm.

Containing MP norms:

a) resolutions establishing rules binding on the organs of the organization. These int. the rules form part of the internal law of the organization.
b) acts that become legally binding by virtue of the norms of international. treaties and (or) domestic legislation.

There are two types: intergovernmental and non-governmental international acts. Only intergovernmental acts are the source.

Intergovernmental acts. The statutes of organizations that are the source of IL (an international treaty, because the organization is created by states) fix which bodies have the right to create legally binding norms. There are about 2.5 thousand organizations and many organizations accept legally binding documents.

Organizations issue two types of documents:

1) Internal law of organizations. The charter is not rubber, you can’t write everything in it. In it, you can write only what organs are there and how they interact. And how they work is in separate acts, which the organization issues for itself. For example, the European Court of Human Rights wrote and adopted for itself the rules by which it resolves cases.

2) External law of organizations. External law is designed to be applied by the participating states by their natural and legal persons.

Airplanes fly according to ICAO rules (an international organization), ships fly according to INCOTERMS rules, nuclear power plants fly according to AKOTE rules. There is the Council for Rail Transport - it approves the rules for international rail transport. There is an international container organization, which container is needed for what, what is needed for them (specialized, large-tonnage ...). There are a whole bunch of documents of international organizations. The same Visa Code is an act of the European Union. Or TK TS. The Customs Code of the Customs Union is an international agreement contained in a document of an international organization (EurAsEC Interstate Council).

Many international organizations issue documents that are higher in legal force (they are stronger than) the national legislation of the member states.

The legal system of the Russian Federation in the light of Part 4 of Art. 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

In domestic legal science, the problems of the legal system have been actively developed since the mid-1970s. XX century: at the same time, research was and is being conducted mainly within the framework of the general theory of law. The term "legal system" itself is used in domestic science in several meanings. Depending on the context, it can mean:

1) the system of law in terms of its organizational structure (a set of principles of law, industries, sub-sectors, legal institutions etc.);

2) a set of legal norms of any state (national legal system or family of legal systems) or MP;

3) a socio-legal phenomenon formed by various elements, among which are called: legal norms; the result of their implementation (legal relationship); legal institutions; legal awareness, etc. On the issue of the content of the legal system understood in this way, several main approaches have developed.

The constitutional provision (part 4, article 15), according to representatives of the branch of science, allows us to consider "international norms as national ones." Moreover, generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of Russia are recognized as sources of branch law (constitutional, civil, procedural, etc.). One cannot agree with this. First, the Constitution declares international treaties not part of Russian law, but part of the Russian "legal system". Secondly, international norms cannot, in principle, be part of Russian law. MP and domestic law are different systems of law. MT and national law differ from each other in terms of the range of subjects, sources, method of formation and provision of MT, and other characteristics. Thirdly, the forms of law of one system of law cannot be simultaneously forms of law of another system (GV Ignatenko).

There is no generally accepted definition of the “legal system of the state” in the MP, and this concept itself began to be found in documents only very recently the European Convention on Nationality (Strasbourg, November 6, 1997) (Article 2), but it also provides a simple enumeration of the elements included in the legal system - the constitution, laws, regulations, decrees, case law, customary norms and practice, as well as norms arising from binding international documents.

Much more attention is paid to the problems of the Russian legal system in the science of international relations. What scientists have in common is the inclusion of IL norms into the legal system of the Russian Federation on one basis or another.

One can say the following:

1. In federal regulations the content of the term "legal system" is not disclosed; they only repeat (with some variations) the constitutional norm. Acts of federal law proceed from the fact that the legal system of the Russian Federation must include the norms of not only national, but also international law, but other elements of it are not named.

2. In the regional legislation, a new concept is introduced into circulation - "the legal system of the subject of the federation", in the definition of which several approaches are distinguished:

a) the legal system of a subject of the Russian Federation includes federal legal acts, regional legislation and agreements, as well as international treaties of the Russian Federation (Charters of the Sverdlovsk Region and the Stavropol Territory);

b) the legal system of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation includes only acts of its authorities and acts of local self-government bodies located on the territory of a given region (Charter of the Irkutsk Region);

c) in some regions, the term "legal system of a subject of the federation" is used without disclosing its content, however, it is stipulated that international norms are also part of it (the Charter of the Voronezh region, the law of the Tyumen region "On international agreements of the Tyumen region and treaties of the Tyumen region with the subjects of the Russian Federation " and etc.).

Thus, in the regional legislation, the "legal system of the subject" is considered as an integral part of the Russian legal system and is understood as a set of legal norms in force in a given territory.

3. With regard to the inclusion in the legal system of legal consciousness, legal relations, law enforcement process, etc. The term "system" implies the unification of single-order phenomena in a single phenomenon. With regard to the term "legal system", we should be talking about the same type of components - the norms of objective law in force in a particular state.

Thus, it is more correct to understand the "legal system of the Russian Federation" as a set of legal norms applied in the Russian Federation. In this case, there are no doubts about the exact interpretation of the constitutional norm.

The wording of Part 4 of Art. 15 of the Constitution must also be considered as a general sanction Russian state for the inclusion of IL norms in the system of norms in force in Russia, for the direct application of IL in the field of implementation of Russian legislation. However, the direct application of international norms in the Russian Federation does not at all mean their inclusion in the norms of Russian law: the norms of international law are not "transformed" into the law of the Russian Federation, but act on their own behalf.

Implementation in the Russian Federation of the norms of international treaties.

The following forms of implementation can be distinguished.

In the shape of compliance prohibitions are enforced. Subjects refrain from committing acts that are prohibited by international law. For example, under the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, some states (possessing nuclear weapons) undertake not to transfer nuclear weapon other states not to assist, encourage or induce states to produce or acquire them, and other states (non-nuclear weapons) undertake not to produce or acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

Executioninvolves the vigorous activity of subjects to implement the norms. Execution is typical for norms that provide for specific obligations to perform certain actions. In accordance with the Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents, 1992, the parties shall take appropriate legislative, regulatory, administrative and financial measures to prevent accidents, ensure preparedness for them and eliminate their consequences.

In the shape of use regulations are implemented. The subjects independently decide on the use of the provided opportunities contained in the norms of international law. For example, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea enshrines the sovereign rights of a coastal state to explore and develop the natural resources of the continental shelf, and conduct economic activities in the exclusive economic zone.

The implementation process includes two types of activities - legal and organizational support for implementation and direct activities to achieve the result.

The implementation mechanism is a structure of bodies that are entrusted with legal support for the implementation of these norms through the implementation of various types of legal activities - law-making, control and law enforcement. The result of such activity is legal acts, the totality of which in theory is called legal mechanism implementation.

The implementation of international law in the sphere of domestic relations is the activity of the subjects of these relations in accordance with the norms of international law.

The obligation of the participants in intrastate relations to be guided in their activities by the norms of international law is fixed by domestic legal acts.

Our legislation contains many regulations, according to which the competent authorities in their activities guided not only by the Constitution, laws and other acts, but also by generally recognized norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation. These are, for example, clause 3 of the Regulations on Immigration Control, clause 3 of the Regulations on the Federal Highway Agency, clause 4 of the Regulations on the Federal Agency for Special Construction.

The international obligations of states are implemented by state bodies, organizations and institutions. They also take measures to ensure the domestic implementation of international legal norms.

The totality of domestic legal acts that ensure the compliance of the activities of subjects of domestic relations with the requirements of international law is domestic regulatory mechanism for implementation.

Legal acts that ensure the implementation of international law on the territory of the state may be different.

AT general acts the fundamental rules relating to the implementation of international law are fixed, the place of international law in the domestic legal system is determined. These are the provisions of Part 4 of Art. 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, part 1 of Art. 5 of the Federal Law "On International Treaties of the Russian Federation", according to which the generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation are recognized as an integral part of its legal system.

Most of the acts provide for the traditional formula, if an international treaty establishes other rules, then the rules of the international treaty are applied (Article 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, Article 1.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, Article 4 of the RF LC, Article 6 of the RF IC).

A number of acts contain the obligations of state bodies to take measures to comply with the norms of international law or to exercise control over the fulfillment of international obligations (Part 3, Article 21 of the Federal Constitutional Law "On the Government of the Russian Federation").

Legal acts to ensure the implementation of a particular treaty may be adopted both before and after the entry into force of the treaty

National legislation may the competent authorities for the implementation international treaty, the powers of these bodies are specified, the necessary measures for the implementation of international norms are determined, as well as responsibility for failure to comply with the measures envisaged.

Law-enforcement rule-making, control over the implementation of the norms of international law in the sphere of domestic relations, as well as the application of appropriate measures for violation of the norms are carried out by the legislative, executive, judicial bodies of the state.

Under domestic organizational and legal (institutional) mechanism refers to the system of bodies that carry out legal and organizational activities in order to ensure the implementation of international law.

Implementation in the Russian Federation of acts of bodies of international organizations.

As a result of the analysis of the practice of implementing acts of international organizations in Russia, the following picture emerges. The implementation of these documents is carried out by all state bodies; various methods are used.

Domestic implementation of the provisions of the acts of the bodies of organizations is carried out by:

1) legislative authorities of the Russian Federation. So, in accordance with Art. 6 of the Federal Law of July 19, 1998 No. 114-FZ "On Military-Technical Cooperation of the Russian Federation with Foreign States", decisions of the President of the Russian Federation prohibit or restrict the export of military products to individual states in order to ensure the implementation of decisions of the UN Security Council on measures to maintain or restore international peace and security;

2) The President of the Russian Federation (for example, Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of May 5, 2008 No. 682 "On measures to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1803 of March 3, 2008") establishes the following that not only measures have been taken to apply sanctions against Iran, but and changes were made to the Russian legal system;

3) The Government of the Russian Federation (for example, by Decree No. 798 of August 7, 1995 "On measures to implement the documents of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe" Vienna Document 1994 Negotiations on Confidence and Security Building Measures "," Code of Conduct Concerning Military-Political Aspects security" and "Decision on the principles governing non-proliferation"" The Government of the Russian Federation approved measures to ensure the implementation of OSCE documents);

4) federal executive authorities. For example, according to the Regulations on the Procedure for Investigating Accidents with Vessels, approved by Order No. 75 of the Ministry of Transport of Russia dated May 14, 2009, investigation of accidents with ships is carried out taking into account the requirements of the Code international standards and recommended practice for the investigation of an accident or incident at sea;

5) the highest courts of the Russian Federation. Thus, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in particular, has repeatedly motivated its rulings with the provisions of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (December 14, 1990), the Basic Principles Concerning the Role of Lawyers (September 7, 1990).

Implementation in the Russian Federation of generally recognized principles and norms of international law.

Thus, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation refers to the universally recognized principles and norms of international law the provisions enshrined in many international treaties. Some of them can be called generally recognized (ILO Convention No. 156 on equal treatment and equal opportunities for working men and women: workers with family responsibilities (Geneva, June 23, 1981), Convention on the Rights of the Child (November 20, 1989)), others are not. Thus, the European states participate in the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 (recall that there are about 220 countries in the world). The United States does not participate in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966.

The generally recognized principles and norms of the IL, but in the opinion of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, are also contained in the acts of bodies of international organizations. These include: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the Set of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment (December 9, 1988), Procedures for the Effective Implementation of the Basic Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary (May 24, 1989 .), etc. Documents of the UN General Assembly under the UN Charter are advisory in nature.

At the same time, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation considers as "generally recognized" the provisions recorded in the documents of regional organizations, in particular the Council of Europe. Among them: Recommendations No. I (85) 11 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the position of the victim in the framework of criminal law and procedure (June 28, 1985), Resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe No. 1121 on instruments for citizen participation in representative democracy (1997). ), Council of Europe Recommendation No. 1178 on sects and new religious movements (1992). These documents are advisory in nature.

It happens that the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation refers to documents that have nothing to do with Russia (Resolution of the European Parliament on sects in Europe (February 12, 1996), European Parliament resolution on notaries (January 18, 1994), the EU Customs Code ( 1992)). It is unlikely that in these cases one can speak of "general recognition" of these provisions (there are 27 states in the EU), especially for Russia.

An attempt to define "generally recognized principles and norms" was undertaken by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Decree of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation of October 10, 2003 No. 5 by "generally recognized principles" the International Law understands the fundamental peremptory norms of international law accepted and recognized by the international community of states as a whole, the deviation from which is inadmissible. The universally recognized principles of international law, in particular, include the principle of universal respect for human rights and the principle of conscientious implementation international obligations . The "generally recognized norm" of IL should be understood as a rule of conduct accepted and recognized by the international community of states as a whole as legally binding. The content of these principles and norms of international law may be disclosed, in particular, in the documents of the UN and specialized agencies.

Incorrect application by the court of the generally recognized principles and norms of the IL may be the basis for the cancellation or change judicial act. Incorrect application of the IL norm can take place in cases where the court did not apply the IL norm that is subject to application, or, on the contrary, the court applied the IL norm that was not subject to application, or when the court gave an incorrect interpretation of the IL norm.

AT Russian science also there is no unity on this issue. There are two main approaches to this issue. Some authors (T.N. Neshataeva, V.A. Tolstik) believe that generally recognized principles are the same norms, only they have the highest legal force, deviation from them in the practice of individual states is unacceptable, these are imperative international norms of the nature of jus coqens. Generally recognized principles have greater legal force than generally recognized norms (A. N. Talalaev, B. L. Zimnenko, O. A. Kuznetsova). Other authors (A. M. Amirova, A. V. Zhuravlev, T. S. Osmanov) list the specific norms of individual documents, which, in their opinion, contain generally recognized principles and norms of the IL (Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966, etc.).

International legal personality of international organizations.

Confirmation of the international legal personality of the member states of an international organization does not prevent the implementation of international legal personality by interstate entities with their participation.

The legal personality of international organizations was confirmed by the opinion of the International Court of Justice in 1980 concerning the interpretation of the Treaty between WHO and Egypt (March 25, 1951): " An international organization is a subject of international law, bound as such by all the obligations arising for it from general norms international law, as well as from the founding act and from the treaties in which this organization participates".

In some international events and international treaties, parallel participation of both an international entity and member states is possible. The participation of an interstate entity in any international treaty does not impose obligations on the member states. It is the interstate entity itself that is obliged, within the framework of its powers, to ensure the implementation of the provisions of the treaty.

The charter of the organization defines the goals of its formation, provides for the creation of a certain organizational structure (acting bodies), and establishes their competence. The presence of permanent organs of the organization ensures the autonomy of its will; international organizations participate in international communication on their own behalf and not on behalf of their member states. In other words, the organization has its own (albeit non-sovereign) will, different from the will of the member states. At the same time, the legal personality of the organization is functional in nature, i.e. it is limited by statutory goals and objectives. In addition, all international organizations are required to comply with the basic principles of the IL, and the activities of regional international organizations must be consistent with the goals and principles of the UN.

Basic rights of international organizations:

Participate in the creation of international legal norms, including the right to conclude international treaties with states and international organizations;

Participate in international relations by establishing relations with states and international organizations;

Bodies of the organization enjoy certain powers of authority, including the right to make decisions that are binding;

Enjoy the privileges and immunities granted to both the organization and its employees;

Consider disputes between participants, and in some cases with states not participating in this organization;

Apply sanctions in case of violation of international obligations.

Non-governmental international organizations, such as the World Federation of Trade Unions, Amnisty International, etc., are established, as a rule, by legal entities and individuals (groups of individuals) and are public associations "with a foreign element." The statutes of these organizations, unlike the statutes of interstate organizations, are not international treaties. True, non-governmental organizations may have a consultative international legal status in intergovernmental organizations, for example, in the UN and its specialized agencies. Thus, the Inter-Parliamentary Union has the status of the first category in the UN ECOSOC. However, non-governmental organizations do not have the right to create IL rules and, therefore, cannot, unlike intergovernmental organizations, have all the elements of international legal personality.

The status of subjects of the federation in MP.

The Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany, for example, provides that the Länder (with the consent of the federal government) may enter into agreements with foreign states. In matters of their own jurisdiction, the lands may conclude state agreements with states bordering Austria or their constituent parts (Article 16 of the Austrian Constitution). Norms of a similar content are enshrined in the law of some other federal states. At present, the lands of the Federal Republic of Germany, the provinces of Canada, the states of the USA, the states of Australia and other entities, which in this regard are recognized as subjects of international relations, are actively participating in international relations.

The international activity of subjects of foreign federations develops in the following main directions: the conclusion of international agreements; opening representative offices in other states; participation in the activities of some international organizations.

The issues of concluding, executing and terminating treaties by states are regulated primarily by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969, but neither it nor other international documents provide for the possibility of independent conclusion of international treaties by subjects of the federation.

Generally speaking, the MP does not contain a ban on the establishment of contractual relations between states and subjects of federations and subjects among themselves. So, for example, Art. 1 of the European Framework Convention on Transfrontier Cooperation between Territorial Communities and Authorities (Madrid, May 21, 1980) provides for the duty of states to encourage transfrontier cooperation between territorial communities and authorities.

Cross-border cooperation is understood as "any concerted action aimed at strengthening and encouraging relations between neighboring territorial communities and authorities, as well as the conclusion of any agreements and arrangements necessary to achieve the above goals." Cross-border cooperation is carried out within the limits of the powers of the territorial communities and authorities, determined by the internal legislation of the states.

MP "the law of international treaties", it is not enough to be a party to an international agreement. It is also necessary to have the legal capacity to conclude international treaties.

As for the status of subjects of the Russian Federation, as is known, the Constitution of the USSR of 1977 recognized the union republics as subjects of the MP. Ukraine and Belarus were members of the UN, participated in many international treaties. Less active participants international relations there were other union republics whose constitutions provided for the possibility of concluding international treaties, exchanging missions with foreign states. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the former Soviet republics acquired full international legal personality, and the problem of their status as independent subjects of the International Relations disappeared.

The subjects of the Russian Federation tried to independently act in international relations, concluded agreements with the subjects of foreign federations and administrative-territorial units, exchanged representations with them and fixed the relevant provisions in their legislation.

The normative acts of some constituent entities of the Russian Federation provide for the possibility of them concluding international treaties on their own behalf. Moreover, in some constituent entities of the Russian Federation, regulations are adopted that regulate the procedure for concluding, executing and terminating contracts, for example, the Law of the Voronezh Region "On Legal Regulations of the Voronezh Region" of 1995 establishes that the state authorities of the region have the right to conclude contracts that are regulatory legal acts. acts, with state authorities of the Russian Federation, with subjects of the Russian Federation, with foreign states on issues of their common, mutual interest.

Subjects of the Russian Federation, with the consent of the Government of the Russian Federation, may carry out international and foreign economic relations with state authorities of foreign states. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 91 dated February 1, 2000 regulates the procedure for the adoption by the Government of the Russian Federation of decisions on consent for the implementation of such relations by the subjects of the Russian Federation.

Currently, the subjects of the Russian Federation do not have all the elements of international legal personality and, therefore, cannot be recognized as subjects of international law.

Forms and types of recognition in MP.

There are two forms of recognition: de facto recognition and de jure recognition.

Confession de facto - this recognition is official, but incomplete. This form is used when they want to pave the way for the establishment of relations between states, or when the state considers de jure recognition to be premature. So, in 1960, the USSR recognized the de facto Provisional Government of the Algerian Republic. As a rule, after some time, de facto recognition is transformed into de jure recognition. Today, de facto recognition is rare.

Confession de jure - recognition is complete and final. It presupposes the establishment of international relations between the subjects of international relations in full and is accompanied, as a rule, by a statement on the official recognition and establishment of diplomatic relations. Thus, by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of August 26, 2008 No. 1260, the Republic of Abkhazia was recognized by Russia "as a sovereign and independent state." The Russian Foreign Ministry was instructed "to hold talks with the Abkhaz side on establishing diplomatic relations and formalize the agreement reached with appropriate documents."

Ad hoc recognition (recognition for the present case) can be considered as a specific type of recognition. This happens when one state enters into some kind of "one-off" relationship with another state or government (say, the protection of its citizens located in this state) under a policy of official non-recognition. Such actions are not considered recognition.

Sometimes recognition appears in the form of actions that clearly testify to recognition (the so-called "tacit recognition"). Examples would be the establishment of diplomatic relations with a new state, the conclusion of a bilateral treaty, or the continuation of relations with a new government that came to power as a result of a revolution.

However, the fact of participation of non-recognizing subjects of international relations in one treaty or one international organization is not considered as recognition (Article 82 of the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character (Vienna, March 14, 1975)). For example, according to Art. 9 of the Act of the International Conference on Vietnam (1973), the signing of the Act "does not mean recognition of any Party in the event that this recognition was not previously." Participation in a treaty and representation in an international organization, on the one hand, and recognition, on the other hand, are legal relations governed by different norms of IL.

Types of recognition

Distinguish between the recognition of states and the recognition of governments.

State recognition occurs when something new enters the international arena independent state that arose as a result of a revolution, war, unification or division of states, etc. The main criterion for recognition in this case is the independence of the recognized state and independence in the exercise of state power.

Government recognition occurs, as a rule, simultaneously with the recognition of a new state. However, it is possible to recognize the government without recognizing the state, for example, if the government comes to power in an already recognized state in an unconstitutional way (civil wars, coups, etc.). The main criterion for the recognition of a new government is its effectiveness, i.e. the actual actual possession of state power in the relevant territory and its independent exercise. In this case, the government is recognized as the only representative of this state in international relations.

A special kind of recognition of governments is the recognition of governments in exile or governments in exile. The practice of their recognition was widespread during World War II. However, the government in exile often loses contact with the respective territory and population and therefore ceases to represent this state in international relations. Currently, the recognition of governments in exile is rarely used.

In the middle of the 20th century, widespread recognition of resistance organs and national liberation movements. This recognition was neither the recognition of the state nor the recognition of the government. Organs of resistance were created within already recognized states, and their powers differed from the traditional powers of governments. As a rule, the recognition of resistance organs preceded the recognition of the government and had the task of representing the people fighting for liberation in international relations, providing them international protection and the possibility of getting help.

Currently, there is a desire of individual leaders of national separatist movements to obtain the status of resistance bodies, and, accordingly, the rights and benefits arising from this.

Peaceful means as the only legitimate way to resolve international conflicts

International conflicts differ in terms of grounds, forms of manifestation, types, methods of solution and other grounds. There are two main types of international conflicts: dispute and situation.

Dispute - this is a set of mutual claims of subjects of international legal relations on issues related to their rights and interests, interpretation of international treaties, etc.

Under situation is understood as a set of circumstances of a subjective nature that caused debate between the subjects of international legal relations without regard to the specific subject of the dispute.

Thus, in the actual situation there is no dispute yet, but there are prerequisites for its occurrence; a situation is a state of potential dispute.

In accordance with the norms of the IL, and in particular the Charter of the United Nations, and also taking into account the relevant principles of the Final Act of the CSCE, the threat or use of force should not be used to settle disputes between states. They must be resolved by peaceful means in accordance with international law. All states must comply in good faith with their obligations to maintain international peace and security in accordance with the universally recognized principles and norms of international law.

Appropriate dispute resolution procedures are required to implement the principle that all disputes must be resolved exclusively by peaceful means. Such procedures are an essential contribution to the promotion of international peace and security and justice.

International disputes must be resolved on the basis of sovereign equality states and taking into account the principle of free choice of means in accordance with international obligations and the principles of justice and international law.

Agreement, whether ad hoc or pre-arranged, between the parties to a dispute on dispute resolution procedures appropriate to the parties concerned and appropriate to the particularities of the dispute is essential to an effective and durable system of amicable dispute settlement.

The implementation of binding judgments issued under the amicable settlement of disputes procedures is an essential element of any overall framework for the amicable settlement of disputes.

In this way, peaceful means of resolving international disputes - this is a set of institutions for the peaceful settlement of international conflicts in accordance with the basic principles of the IL, the norms of the IL and the principle of justice.

The Institute of Peaceful Means of Resolving International Disputes in the MP is an intersectoral one. Its norms are contained in various branches of international law - the law of international security, the law of international organizations, international humanitarian law, etc.

Should disputes nevertheless arise, States shall pay particular attention to preventing the development of the dispute in such a way as to pose a threat to international peace and security. They take appropriate steps to properly manage their disputes until they are settled. To this end, states:

Address disputes at an early stage;

Refrain during the dispute from any action that may worsen the situation and make it more difficult for the peaceful settlement of the dispute or hinder it;

Seek, using all appropriate means, to reach agreements allowing them to maintain good relations between them, including, if appropriate, the adoption of provisional measures that do not prejudice their legal positions in the dispute.

Depending on the degree and form of participation of the disputing parties in making a decision on the merits of the dispute, three groups of peaceful means of resolving international disputes are distinguished: diplomatic; legal; resolution of disputes in international organizations.

Diplomatic means should include: direct negotiations; conciliation procedure (investigative and conciliation commissions); negotiations with the participation of third parties (mediation, good offices). Legal means include arbitration and judicial procedure. Dispute resolution in international organizations involves participation in dispute resolution in the bodies of international organizations to which this authority is granted by international documents.

Legal regime of the Arctic.

The territory of the Arctic is divided between the United States, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Russia into the so-called "polar sectors". According to the concept of polar sectors, all lands and islands located north of the Arctic coast of the corresponding circumpolar state within the sector formed by this coast and converging at the point North Pole meridians are considered to be within the territory of this state.

The definition of the boundaries of the Arctic in the subarctic countries is different. At the same time, their legislation on the continental shelf, as well as economic or fishing zones, applies to the Arctic regions.

The USSR secured its rights in the polar sector by a resolution of the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR dated April 15, 1926, according to which all lands, both open and those that may be open in the future, located between the northern coast of the Soviet Union and the meridians converging at the North Pole, were declared territory of the USSR. The exception is the islands of the Svalbard archipelago, which belong to Norway on the basis of the Svalbard Treaty (1920)

After the collapse of the USSR, the rights of the Russian Federation in the Arctic are enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Law of the Russian Federation of 04/01/1993 No. 4730-1 "On the State Border of the Russian Federation", Federal Laws of 11/30/1995 No. 187-FZ "On the Continental Shelf" and of 17.12. 1998 No. 191-FZ "On the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Russian Federation". Currently being developed the federal law"About the Arctic zone".

The side borders of the polar sectors are not the state borders of the respective countries. The state territory in the polar sector is limited by the outer limit territorial waters. However, given the special importance of the polar sectors for the economy and security of coastal states, the difficulty of navigation in these areas, and a number of other circumstances, it can be said that a legal regime operates on the territory of the sectors that differs from the regime of territorial waters. The circumpolar states establish a permit procedure for conducting economic activities in the area of ​​the polar sector, environmental protection rules, etc.

Recently, cooperation between the Arctic states has been actively developing.

In 1993, representatives of the governments of the Arctic countries adopted the Declaration on the Environment and Development in the Arctic. The Arctic States have reaffirmed their intention to protect and conserve the Arctic environment, recognizing the special relationship that exists between indigenous peoples and local peoples and the Arctic, and their unique contribution to the protection of the Arctic environment.

Negotiations are currently underway on the status of the natural resources of the Arctic Ocean. The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea allows the Russian Federation to claim an extended Arctic shelf zone, up to the North Pole, in the sector from the 30th meridian to 180 °, with access to Wrangel Island, as well as an enclave of the continental shelf beyond 200 miles in the Sea of ​​Okhotsk .

In addition, Russia, in order to establish sovereign rights to the enclave of the continental shelf with an area of ​​56.4 thousand square meters. km in the Sea of ​​Okhotsk, it is necessary to coordinate with Japan the reference lines used for reference of sea spaces. Shelf reference lines must be exclusively Russian and must not start from the coast of the disputed area claimed by Japan. Until the final settlement of the issue of ownership of the Kuril Islands, Russia cannot use them as baselines for counting the width of all maritime spaces, including the continental shelf beyond 200 miles.

Legal regime of Antarctica.

In the late 1950s The Washington Conference was convened to determine the mode of operation in Antarctica. As a result, in 1959, the Antarctic Treaty was signed (Washington, December 1, 1959), in which about 40 states participate. This Treaty at the Conference of the States Parties in 1995 was recognized as open-ended.

In 1959, the participants of the Conference put forward the idea of ​​declaring Antarctica the common heritage of mankind and proposed that the functions of managing Antarctica be transferred to the UN. However, the countries-participants of the Treaty did not agree to this.

In accordance with the provisions of the Antarctic Treaty, all territorial claims of states in Antarctica are "frozen". While not recognizing anyone's sovereignty in Antarctica, the Treaty does not deny the existence territorial claims, but freezes existing ones and prohibits new claims by states.

The treaty establishes that Antarctica can only be used for peaceful purposes. In Antarctica, in particular, the following are prohibited: the creation of military bases and fortifications, the conduct of military maneuvers, and the testing of any type of weapon. In addition, nuclear explosions and the dumping of radioactive waste. Thus, Antarctica is recognized as a demilitarized territory. The Treaty, however, does not preclude the use of military personnel or equipment in Antarctica for scientific research or for any other peaceful purpose.

To promote international cooperation in scientific research in Antarctica: exchange of information regarding plans scientific works in the Antarctic; exchange of scientific personnel in the Antarctic between expeditions and stations; exchange of data and results of scientific observations in the Antarctic and free access to them is provided.

Compliance with the Treaty is strictly monitored. Each State Party to the Treaty may designate its observers, who shall have the right of access to any area of ​​Antarctica at any time. Antarctic stations, installations, equipment, ships and aircraft of all states in Antarctica are open for inspection.

Observers and scientific personnel of stations in Antarctica are subject to the jurisdiction of the state of which they are citizens.

The legal regime of Antarctic living resources is also regulated by the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (Canberra, May 20, 1980), according to which any fishing and related activities are carried out in accordance with the following principles: preventing the decline of any harvested population to levels below those that would ensure its sustainable recruitment; maintain ecological relationships among harvested, dependent and associated populations of Antarctic marine living resources and restore depleted populations; preventing changes in marine ecosystem, which are potentially irreversible.

The Government of the Russian Federation issued Decree No. 1476 dated 12/11/1998 "On Approval of the Procedure for Reviewing and Issuing Permits for the Activities of Russian Individuals and Legal Entities in the Antarctic Treaty Area". At present, permits are issued by Roshydromet in agreement with the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Russian Ministry of Natural Resources on the basis of applications from Russian individuals and legal entities and the conclusion of Rostekhnadzor on assessing the impact of planned activities in the Antarctic Treaty area on the Antarctic environment and dependent and related ecosystems.

Responsibility in MP

At present, a whole branch of MT has been formed - the law of international responsibility. There are also norms on international legal responsibility in other branches of international law (the law of international legal personality, the law of international organizations, the law of international security, etc.).

grounds international responsibility are the objective and subjective signs provided for by international legal norms. There are legal, factual and procedural grounds for international legal responsibility.

Under legal grounds understand the international legal obligations of the subjects of international law, according to which this or that act is declared an international offense. In other words, in case of an international offense, it is not the IL norm itself that is violated, but the obligations of the subjects to comply with this rule of conduct. Therefore, the list of sources of legal grounds for liability is different from the range of sources of MP. The legal grounds for international responsibility arise from: treaties, customs, resolutions of international organizations, documents of conferences, decisions of international courts and arbitrations, as well as unilateral international obligations of states that establish binding rules of conduct for a given state (in the form of declarations, statements, speeches of officials, etc. .P.).

Actual the basis of responsibility is an international offense in which all the elements of the offense are present. The factual basis is expressed in the act of the subject, expressed in the actions (inaction) of its bodies or officials that violate international legal obligations.

Procedural the grounds of liability are the procedure for considering cases of offenses and bringing to responsibility. In some cases, this procedure is fixed in detail in international legal acts (for example, in the Charter of the International Military Tribunal for the Trial and Punishment of the Chief War Criminals of the European Axis Countries (London, August 8, 1945)), in others, its choice is left to the discretion of the authorities applying liability measures.

Sanctions in international law.

Historically, sanctions in the MP were initially applied in self-help. As the system of international relations became more complex, there was a need for closer integration of states. A system of international organizations is being created that has a functional legal personality, so their right to coercion is of a secondary and special nature. Being an element of the legal personality of an international organization, the right to coercion means the ability to apply coercive measures only in those areas of interstate relations that fall within the competence of the organization and only within the limits specified by the charter.

Sanctions cannot have a preventive effect; their goal is to protect and restore the already violated rights of the subjects of MP. No reference to the national interests of the state as a justification for the application of sanctions is allowed..

Sanctions in the MP, these are coercive measures of both armed and unarmed nature, applied by the subjects of the MP in the established procedural form in response to an offense with the aim of suppressing it, restoring violated rights and ensuring the responsibility of the offender.

Correlation of responsibility and sanctions in international law

Sanctions in MP differ from liability in the following ways:

Sanctions are always the actions of the victim (victims) applied to the offender, while responsibility can act in the form of self-restrictions of the offender;

Sanctions, as a rule, are applied before the implementation of liability measures and are a prerequisite for its occurrence. The purpose of sanctions is to stop an international offense, restore violated rights and ensure the implementation of responsibility;

Sanctions are applied in a procedural manner different from that in which international legal responsibility is exercised;

Sanctions are the right of the victim; their application does not depend on the will of the offender;

The basis for the application of sanctions is the refusal to stop illegal actions and comply with the legitimate demands of the injured subjects.

International legal sanctions These are coercive measures permitted by the IL and carried out in a special procedural manner, used by the subjects of the IL to protect the international legal order, when the offender refuses to stop the offense, restore the rights of the victims and voluntarily fulfill the obligations arising from his responsibility.