The purpose of this article is to examine the causes and consequences of the formation in a non-democratic state of the digital infrastructure of control and suppression of society. As a research method, a comparative case study was used in the interpretation of A. Lijphart and a cross-temporal comparison, as an analysis of dynamic changes in specific periods of time. It should be noted that the comparison here also serves as a special view at the political phenomenon (in this case, the use of digital technology in autocracies). The theoretical foundations of the emergence of modern autocracies and the reasons for increasing government attention to technology are considered. Specific examples consider the use of digital technologies to control society and strengthen the political regime of autocracies. Both political and socio-economic aspects of the functioning of modern authoritarian systems are revealed on the example of the China and the Philippines. At the end of the text is considered the probability of the spread of such practices in modern Russian Federation. Based on a theoretical and practical analysis, the authors come to the following conclusions: autocracies use digital technological infrastructure to form a system of control over citizens; the technological leader in the formation of such control systems is China, which exports elements of the technological infrastructure to other autocracies through state-owned corporations; In the Russian Federation, after a number of legislative changes in the information sphere, with the support of the China, elements of control over the internet and a system of big data collection subordinate to the state are being formed.
The Olympic Games of 1980 and 2014 present a case study in the hosting of sport mega-events by repressive regimes. In both cases, the authoritarian government sought hosting rights in order to enhance their own legitimacy, an aim that was largely met at home but at the cost of incurring damaging criticism abroad about human rights violations. In both cases, the Games sparked debates about how sporting events could be most effectively used to improve human rights overall. These debates revolved around familiar poles: on the one hand, claims that the events could help spur reform, and on the other hand, the argument that hosting would lead to heightened abuses. In 1980 even before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan triggered a large- scale boycott, some voices in Western Europe and the United States were arguing that Moscow should be spurned because of the Soviet Union’s record of repression. In 2014 though some boycott calls were made, boycotting seemed a less compelling tactic. Instead, reformers hoped to achieve results through public pressure. In the final tally, the results of both Games suggest that sports mega-events in repressive regimes are likely to lead to more repression.
In the 1970s there was a change in the political regime in Spain and Portugal. The result was the adoption of constitutions designed to create the legal basis for democratization that were characterized by a broad perception of the foreign experience of constitutionalism. In particular, some institutions were included in the state mechanisms, which had won recognition in states that are committed to constitutional values, but were new to Spain and Portugal. One of them is the institution of the ombudsman. The development of an ombudsman was widely discussed in professional circles. Legislators held discussions on the necessity an ombudsman in the state’s legal system, its name, and some other important issues. However, the situation with human rights, the judicial system, and defects in other human rights institutions, such as violations by executive bodies and undermining public confidence to the institutions of public authority as a result of the dictatorial regimes in Spain and Portugal, were obvious enough. Hence the prevailing of the viewpoint on the expediency of the institution of the Ombudsman as an institution designed to control the administration from the perspective of respect for human rights. Herewith, in the course of building the Ombudsman concept, a special role was assigned to representatives of science and journalism. In the process of adopting the Constitutions and, subsequently, the laws on the ombudsman, the legislators demonstrated an understanding and unwillingness to transform the institution into a political tool of any political party. The provisions regulating the status and activities of this institution in the Iberian countries of Europe allowed the Ombudsman to not be guided by political interests in the process of investigating the improper activity of executive bodies. As a result of the adoption of constitutions and laws regulating the status and activities of the Ombudsman, the institution was provided with guarantees of political neutrality: the status of ombudsmen was fixed in the law at a high level; the organizational independence of the Ombudsman from public authorities was ensured; Ombudsmen were empowering with a broad competence, including the authority to initiate amparo proceeding in Spain, and to forward the appeal to the Constitutional Court with a request to verify the constitutionality of normative acts in Spain and Portugal; ensuring the financial independence of the Ombudsman’s activities; securing the responsibility for interference in its activities; regulating the procedure for empowering and terminating the powers of the ombudsman; and, in Portugal at least, ensuring that the ombudsman also has immunity. The authors of the current constitutions of Portugal and Spain aimed not only to borrow constitutional institutions that proved to be justified in foreign countries, but also to increase their effectiveness. Therefore, ombudsmen in these countries have some powers aimed at increasing such efficiency and expressing the features of their status. The establishment of the ombudsman institution in Portugal and Spain had an impact on Latin America, where the institution of the ombudsman appeared and spread with the inherent characteristics of the Ibero-American ombudsman.
The article is devoted to the problem of comparison between the international human rights law and the international humanitarian law. It is demonstrated on the basis of particular cases from the European Court of Human Rights practice that all attempts to erase the boarders between two spheres of international law are dangerous and counterproductive.
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/