As capitalism expands to new horizons, in an increasingly globalized and ever more digitalized economy, it is becoming even more important to find a right approach to regulate economic competition. Key questions of balancing incentives for innovation and capital investments on the one hand, and reducing negative externalities and mitigating some existential risks for society as a whole on the other, are clearly related to the competition law and policy domain. Competition is a fundamental element of the capitalist economic system, distinguishing it from the administrative centrally planned economy. However, in different structural settings and frameworks existing within the capitalist economy, competition could take different forms and modalities, changing in line with the transformations of the capitalist system itself. Transition to digital capitalism is clearly one of those paradigmatic shifts in economic life, which poses a certain adaptation challenge for the legal systems all around the world. In this context, a choice of forms and modalities of economic competition to be accepted and encouraged by laws, as well as accurate calibration of the legal tools to be used for this task become important policy challenges. Russia in this context represents an interesting case of experimentation with institutional designs and policy responses to these challenges as this jurisdiction already in a short period of time has been going through a number of changes in the way it approaches economic competition in the new economy. At both practical and legislative levels, the Russian jurisdiction is working at the cutting edge of the global digital agenda. A number of recent cases handled by the Russian competition authority (the Federal Antimonopoly Service, FAS) are not only making important developments in the Russian competition law practice but also contributing significantly to the global competition law and policy debate in terms of its adaptation to digital capitalism.
The article is devoted to a particular form of freedom of assembly — the right to counter-demonstrate. The author underlines the value of this right as an element of democratic society, but also acknowledges the risk of violent actions among participants of opposing demonstrations. Due to this risk, the government may adopt adequate measures restricting the right to counter-demonstrate, certain types of which are analyzed in this paper.
Development of standards of international controllability is reviewed in the article. Institutional approach is applied to development of international legal regime of Energy Charter. Definition of controllability is connected to development of international standards of dispute settlement, which are described in the article in detail. In connection with controllability, Russian interest, defense of investment in European Union and ecological investment encouragement, is reviewed in the article.
мировое управление и управляемость, Мировая экономика, международное экономическое право, энергетическая хартия, International control and controllability, International economics, international economic law, Energy Charter
международное частное право; недвижимость; ; школа бартолистов; бартолисты; теория статутов; статуарная теория/