Тема 7. Нормотворчество
Quantitative data on introduced bills and adopted laws for 20 years of work of the Russian parliament. The subjects of the bills submitted to the State Duma are presented. The essence of rulemaking (concept, principles, etc.) is revealed. Important in both theoretical and practical importance is the section on the stages of the rule-making process. The concept and types of systematization are considered. A separate section is devoted to the concept and main types of legal techniques.
This collector contains international conference papers on legal theories. Papaers are related to a problem of symbolic and attributive entity of law. This problem is tried to solve in perspectives of legal phylosophy, history, techniques as well as in perspective of different branches of law.
Collected papers may be of law researchers, teachers, postgraduates and students interest.
A critical analysis of a new model of legal regula-tion of the norm-setting process in the Republic of Kazakhstan was carried out. Positive and negative aspects of the law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On legal
acts" were singled out. The author's model of the legal regulation of the norm-setting process is proposed, through the adoption of the Federal Law "On the sources (forms) of law in the Russian Federation, the Federal Law" On Regulatory Legal Acts in the Russian Federation "and specific normative legal acts.
The purpose of teaching this topic is to tell students about the distinctive features of rulemaking that delimit it from other forms of social management. Students should understand the principles of rulemaking, revealing its content. It is very important that they clearly represent the stages of the legislative process and are able to distinguish them in the legislative activities of the State Duma and the legislative body of the subject of the Russian Federation. Finally, in this topic, students get acquainted with the forms of systematization of methods, methods and means of legal technology. All this should help students navigate in the real legal life, understand the logic of the actions of state bodies developing and adopting normative legal acts.
The chapter describes the concept and means of normative legal technology and law requirements for projects of normative legal acts, the problem of monitoring of normative legal acts, as well as theoretical and applied problems of systematization of legislation.
In this article are discussed the limits of application of general theory of systems in legal science. The author criticizes utilization of the notion «systemacity» for description of how legal norms are organized and how legal phenomena are structured. In author’s opinion, the term «system» is charged with a multiplicity of meanings, so that in social sciences this term is sometimes applied for characterization of the fundamentally different phenomena and realities. That is why legal scientists shall be especially careful in using this term. In the Russian jurisprudence the term «system» is applied for both «social reality of law» and for a set of the norms belonging to the positive law of the country. This use is tautological and has no conceptual justification. The author proposes to use the term «legal order» only for description of a structured set of legal rules, reserving the use of «system» for characterization of law from the point of view of comparative jurisprudence, legal sociology and other sciences which examine the relations between the law and other sectors of social reality. Argumentation in favor of «systemacity» of law is theoretically based on philosophy of objectivism. It results in vain illusions about a capacity of norms to produce themselves a legal order which emerges automatically insomuch as law is a functional entity. But this «systemacity» is not given in (the) law a priori. Logical coherence and consistence of norms always remain relative, being the outcome of the purposeful activity of lawmakers, judges, legal scholars. It is naïve to suppose that rules can enter into the law and find their adequate position there without human intervention. Such understanding can lead to apology of irresponsibility of those who create redundant and inconsistent norms in the false hope that these norms will anyways find their place in the law grace to «systemacity» of this latter.
"10.07.27 Философские проблемы государства и права
10.07.31 Социология права
10.07.61 Теория права
10.09.91 История государства и права отдельных стран
The collection includes the papers devoted to institute of regulatory impact assessment in Eurasian Economic Union and Russian practice of the rulemaking