• A
  • A
  • A
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
Regular version of the site
Of all publications in the section: 159
Sort:
by name
by year
Article
Шаблинский И. Г. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2019. № 5 (132). С. 15-33.

The article is based on the thesis that the unifi ed tradition of parliamentarism perception has not

decisively formed in Russia so far, as well as the unifi ed pattern of the interaction of the people’s representative body with the executive authorities. The splitting of the model into at least three different ones can be viewed as the result of the country contemporary political history with the not quite successful attempts of the constitutional reform. The author examines some of the key events of the last stage of this reform. Its results are assessed form the point of view of the condition of the representative body. The author tries to show the constitutional grounds for the Parliament “weakness” as per the Constitution of 1993. The author also reviews the legislative practice of the last two decades, in particular the evolution of the law on the Accounts Chamber and parliamentary investigations. Special attention in the article is paid to certain historical analogies: according to the author “the Monarchy of the 3d of June”, - the political regime that existed approximately from the end of 1907 and until the beginning of 1917, - can be viewed as prototype of the modern pattern of interaction between the executive authorities and the Parliament. The author also examines the possibility of supplementing the constitutional law with a number of more effi cient institutions of parliamentary control.

Added: Nov 12, 2019
Article
Медушевский А. Н. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2017. Т. 117. № 2. С. 15-31.
Added: Jan 8, 2018
Article
Краснов М. А. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2015. № 5(108). С. 87-103.
Added: Nov 13, 2015
Article
Болдинов Я. В., Ильина Е. А., Гаврилова О. и др. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2016. № 6 (115). С. 4-20.
Added: Nov 13, 2017
Article
Болдинов Я. В., Ильина Е. А., Бруслик А. и др. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2016. № 4 (113). С. 4-13.
Added: Nov 13, 2017
Article
Болдинов Я. В., Ильина Е. А., Сидоренко Т. и др. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2016. № 5 (114). С. 4-13.
Added: Nov 13, 2017
Article
Болдинов Я. В., Виноградов Т. П., Зиганшин И. и др. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2015. № 1 (104). С. 3-10.
Added: Nov 13, 2017
Article
Болдинов Я. В., Афанасьев С., Ефендулов Е. М. и др. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2017. № 4 (119). С. 4-12.
Added: Nov 13, 2017
Article
Болдинов Я. В., Виноградов Т. П., Евсеев А. и др. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2014. № 6 (103). С. 3-14.
Added: Nov 13, 2017
Article
Евсеев А. П. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2014. № 3. С. 18-22.
Added: Jan 20, 2019
Article
Мазаев В. Д. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2013. № 5(96). С. 95-105.

The article describes the concept of nationalization. The author notes the legal uncertainty of this term, delineates constitutional aspects of nationalization and analyzes problem of adopting a law on nationalization and proposals regarding its concept

Added: Nov 20, 2013
Article
Храмова Т. М. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2014. № 3 (100). С. 42-53.

Public order and safety are among the most commonly used grounds for restricting freedom of assembly. The inherent imprecision of these public interests as well as the tendency to overestimate danger posed by manifestations add to vulnerability of freedom of assembly. The goal of this article is to check the necessity, adequacy and proportionality of the limitations aimed at securing public order and safety. Comparative analysis helps to make the research illustrative and convincing.  

Added: Jul 21, 2014
Article
Евсеев А. П. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2019. № 3. С. 127-140.

This article analyzes judgment no. 1-r/2019 of the Constitutional Court of  Ukraine from February 26, 2019, which abolished criminal liability for illegal  enrichment. The article provides a general description of both the socio-po- litical environment and the courtroom atmosphere in which this judgment  was adopted. This article criticizes number of procedural tricks, especially  that the trickts were used by judges to prevent their condemnation from  civic society and protect their personal records. Special attention is paid to  the international standards of the ķght against corruption, which are en- shrined in various conventions. Being able to appeal to such international  conventions would allow the Court to strengthen its position. The author  conducts a detailed analysis of the argumentation of the ķnal decision, con- sistently isolating the motives that led the Court to its corresponding conclu- sions. These arguments are investigated using a comparative legal method,  which contributes to their deeper understanding and re{ection. A conclu- sion is made about the expediency of using a constitutionally conforming  interpretation in this case, which would allow the Court, without recogniz- ing the contested norm to be unconstitutional, to nevertheless prevent a  number of possible risks associated with the application of this norm in  practice. In general, it emphasizes a higher standard of rights and freedoms  laid down in the Constitution of Ukraine compared with some European  countries. Projections are made regarding the success of the constitutionally  approved task of ķghting corruption in the new political environment, in  which Ukraine will ķnd itself in the aftermath of the presidential elections of  2019.

Added: Jul 1, 2019
Article
Заикин С. С. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2011. № 6. С. 77-81.
Added: Nov 28, 2012
Article
Краснов М. А. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2013. № 1. С. 82-93.
Added: Mar 22, 2013
Article
Медушевский А. Н. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2009. № 2.
Added: Feb 1, 2010
Article
Виноградова Т. И. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2007. № 1 (58).
Added: Mar 19, 2012
Article
Тасалов Ф. А. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2011. № 2. С. 146-154.
Added: May 25, 2011
Article
Ильин А. В. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2019. Т. 28. № 4. С. 35-55.

As a result of the unified essence of regulatory affairs as a logical operation for comparing the meaning of several normative legal acts, disagreements have yet to cease about whether it is possible to realize normal and constitutional direct regulation according to unified rules for administrative legal proceedings. There is a difference of the subject of legal action within the framework of the named types of direct regulation that are mainly seen in the method with the help of which they are realized. These differences define the main legal-procedural characteristics of direct constitutional regulation, among which is (1) the need to consider a case by the court in a wide collegial bench of judges that are equal to each other, (2) the subsidiary character of constitutional legal proceedings for this category of cases, and (3) the need to appeal the decision of the court. These create specific characteristics for legal proceedings for constitutional justice, specifically: the need to introduce special requirements for candidates for judgeships and guarantees for the status of judges presiding in constitutional legal proceedings, and empowering the court apparatus with quasi-judicial functions. These differences in the subject of legal action prove that there are no dogmatic, political, or legal grounds for conclusions regarding the principal similarities between constitutional and general direct regulation and on the possibility for general jurisdiction courts to perform constitutional regulation.

Added: Oct 7, 2019
Article
Лебедев А. О. Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. 2011. № 6. С. 125-141.
Added: Nov 28, 2012