Ономастический софизм: изменять, а не познавать (о толковании Конституции)
The author of this article restarts the polemics around the realist theory of interpretation. Examining the thesis of this theory about identity of legal interpretation and jurisdictional decision-making, the author proves that confusion between these two different phenomena is based on incorrect use of the term “interpretation”. In the article are discussed six meanings of this term, at least present in legal interpretation, and each meaning must be used in the appropriate context. Undue confusion between these meanings enables the partisans of the realist theory of interpretation to construct “interpretation” as a notion without clear conceptual limits. This argument is designated by the author as an onomastic sophism, as a rhetoric stratagem based on the idea that a term has the same meaning in different contexts. The author repudiates the thesis forwarded by the realists that it is impossible to cognize meaning of legal texts, and draws on the incoherence of this argumentation which lastly recognizes a possibility to attribute a meaning through a judicial decision. In general, as O. Pfersmann argues, the realist theory of interpretation intends to justify changes in constitution through judicial argumentation without considering the order prescribed by the constitution for changes and amendments.
The article is devoted to the main constitutional principles of Russian social security law.
The book presents a comprehensive value of the Constitution of Russia in the global legal space, including substantiated typology constitutions, defined the modern constitutional model and perspectives of their development. Studied issues of sovereignty and integrity of the state, Federal, and international relations, a new mechanism of state management, as well as the origin and development of the Constitution as the political, socio-economic. the spiritual and intellectual life
This publication contains materials of the scientific conference on "The constitutional theory and practice of public authorities: patterns and deviations", held in April 2015 at the initiative of the Department of Constitutional and Municipal Law at the Faculty of Moscow State University Lomonosov.
The publication is addressed to teachers, graduate students, applicants, students of universities, scientists - employees of legal academia. It is lso of interest to those working or studying in the faculties of political science, philosophy and sociology of education, for deputies and members of staff of representative bodies.
In this article the author examines the problems connected with definition of nature of constitutional interpretation. On the base of the cases from the judicial practice, Michel Troper shows that specificity of constitutional interpretation does not reside in particular character of constitution which is the object of interpretation. According to this French theorist who is leader of the school of French legal realism, the particular trait of constitutional interpretation is due to the fact that this kind of interpretation results in constructing a hierarchy of normative acts in a given legal order. Even if such a hierarchy is described in a constitution, it will nevertheless remain hypothetical and subject to changes through an act of constitutional interpretation. Michel Troper insists that a meaning of a legal text cannot be defined prior to interpretation; therefore this legal text will not have any definitive content before being interpreted. The French theorist concludes that a legal norm is not created by the way of legislation — it is created through authentic interpretation of the legislative acts. As authentic interpretation the author holds such construction of a legal text which brings any legally relevant consequences having binding force in this given legal order, there consequences being immune to overruling by any higher instance. Such interpretation can be exercised both by judicial and non-jurisdictional bodies.
In the domestic literature with increased attention to such issues as constitutional theory, the protection of individual rights and freedoms, form of the state, the status of head of state regulation of international relations can not find the proper coverage, many issues related to the referendum and its consequences. Meanwhile, a referendum (people's will) — the central institution of direct democracy, it is located at the intersection of law and policy, which makes it advisable to study based on a system-integrated method, which finds more and more widely used in law and political science.
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/