?
Государственный иммунитет в долговых отношениях: от абсолютного иммунитета иностранного государства до иммунитета бюджетов
The article examines state immunity as the basis for the special legal status of public law entities in debt relations. The author analyses two manifestations of this institution – the external one (immunity of a foreign state) and the internal one (budget immunity) – proceeding from the premise that both reflect the same duality of the state's legal position as a sovereign and as a participant in property relations. The study traces the evolution of the doctrine from absolute to restrictive (functional) immunity, grounded in the distinction between sovereign (jure imperii) and commercial (jure gestionis) acts of the state, and analyses the consolidation of restrictive immunity of a foreign state in Russian legislation (Federal Law No. 297-FZ of 3 November 2015). Particular attention is paid to recent case law of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which demonstrates an expansive application of the reciprocity principle to disputes arising from restrictive measures (the Tsvetkov v. Finland and Alekseenko v. Norway cases), as well as to the role of the opinion of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs as evidence rather than a binding precondition for limiting immunity. The second part of the article addresses the institution of budget immunity (Article 239 of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation) as a functional analogue of foreign state immunity within the domestic legal system, revealing its constitutional justification in light of Ruling No. 39-P of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 18 November 2025, along with the mechanism for enforcing judicial acts under Chapter 24.1 of the Budget Code. The author concludes that the content of state immunity, in both of its manifestations, is shaped not only by doctrinal criteria but also by political-legal and budgetary context, which limits the scope of liability of public law entities towards their creditors.