Articles

The article represents the abstracts of the report at the plenary session of the joint XXIV International Scientific and Practical Conference “Legal Support of Russian Sovereignty: Problems and Prospects”

Based on an analysis of legal norms and the original texts of the constituent documents, the publication argues that the constituent acts of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS, i. e. the Agreement on the creation of the CIS of December 8, 1991 and the Protocol to it of December 21, 1991) came into full force on December 21, 1991. Thus, the Commonwealth as an interstate association was formed precisely on this date, December 21, 1991, and not December 8, 1991, as is widespread in domestic legal science. At the same time, based on an analysis of official information from the CIS Executive Committee, a reasoned answer is given to a question that has not previously been covered in legal science (Russian, and especially foreign) — on what date did the constituent acts of the Commonwealth fully come into force for each CIS member state? In addition, the publication assesses the legal status in the Commonwealth of Azerbaijan, Georgia (before its withdrawal from the CIS in 2009), Moldova and Ukraine.

The article analyzes the role and place of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and its principles in regulating relations related to the use of wage labor and constituting the subject of labor law, as well as issues of practical application of international and sectoral principles of law in the field of labor. The issues related to the consolidation and development of constitutional principles in the labor legislation of the Russian Federation are analyzed. First of all, these are the basic principles of legal regulation of labor relations and other directly related relations, enshrined in Article 2 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. It is clarified that the principles are not “slogans” and purely theoretical constructions — they should be actively used at the stages of rulemaking and law enforcement. This provision is illustrated by the judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The problem of the correlation of such important categories as politics, economics and law is touched upon, the need for an optimal ratio of their inherent mechanisms in all spheres is emphasized.

Apple’s Vision Pro mixed reality headset was debuted at the annual WWDC on 5 June 2023, the new headset seamlessly blends the real world and virtual world, the Vision Pro can be controlled by voice, hands and eye movement. The rapid development of technology also brings corresponding risks to people, which include not only privacy violation, but also injuries such as dizziness, migraine, brain injury, etc. .At present, although China has a number of legal regulations on the risks of new technology, they are still not perfect for such a latest model of mixed reality headset. The article presents and analyzes the risks of using a mixed reality headset, reveals the problems of imperfections in the current legislation in China, and suggests ways to overcome the shortcomings.

The legal regulation of deprivation of liberty as a measure of criminal liability is not limited to criminal law rules on its purpose and other application. Punishment by imprisonment is associated with a whole complex of regulatory norms of criminal executive, criminal procedural and other sectoral legislation. A conclusion is made about the complex nature of the formation of the legal status of deprivation of liberty and on this basis a differentiation is made of the elements that form it, depending on their functional purpose, influence on the content and nature of the origin of other legal institutions and measures of criminal law. Theoretical foundations of penitentiary criminopenology are being developed, which allows us to talk about classifying deprivation of liberty as a type of punishment as a penitentiary type of criminal liability. This direction creates the prerequisites for a comprehensive solution to the problem of saving penalization, including penitentiary repression at all stages of its regulation (from the establishment of criminal law sanctions to full implementation in relation to a specific convict). The system of penitentiary criminology is revealed as an independent direction in the doctrine of punishment by deprivation of liberty, its subject and main parameters are determined. Certain aspects of the social, criminal-political, criminological and criminal-legal conditionality of the nature of differentiation and individualization of criminal penitentiary repression are considered. The content of punishment in the form of imprisonment is analyzed in terms of measuring the parameters of penitentiary criminology. On this basis, the content of the protective task of criminal law in the conditions of the development of the social state and modern society is clarified.

The article focuses on the constitutional changes in the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus, aimed at the protection of spiritual and moral values. It is concluded that in the current conditions there is a clear retreat in Western countries from the recognition of the absolute nature of personal (inalienable) rights, and, on the contrary, the adoption of legal measures to limit them and even to establish responsibility for those actions that do not fit into the formed mainstream, which is confirmed by the facts of discrimination on the basis of nationality, use of native language, restrictions on freedom of religion, freedom of movement, as well as property rights and others. The author consolidates with the position of those scholars who believe that values are the highest level of social regulation, the basis for the development of personality and maintenance of legal order in society. Attention is drawn to the similarity of the new constitutional norms of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus in terms of strengthening traditional family values, the formation of respect for the feat of arms of the people during the Great Patriotic War, the need to honor the memory of the defenders of the Fatherland, to ensure the protection of historical truth and others. The analysis of amendments and additions to the constitutions of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus convinces us of the desire of our states to preserve the basic constitutional values, to strengthen them, to provide for measures aimed at preventing emerging threats to the unity of society and the erosion of public consciousness.

The article deals with the definition of the judiciary and its authority as one of its descriptions as they are presented in procedural science. Attention is paid to the constitutional basis of the independence of judiciary. It is shown that authority of the judiciary is one of its independence guarantees. The difference between internal and external independence of judiciary as it has been treated in pre-revolutionary science is examined, as well as a definition of the authority of the judiciary as a sufficiency of its powers that make it possible to judiciary to control all the criminal procedure, the definition of the subsidiary bodies of judiciary and their role in provision of the authority of judiciary under the Judicial Reform of 1864. A conclusion is drawn that there are two aspects of the authority of the judiciary: judicial and procedural. Authority of the judiciary is also compared with the principle of equality of everyone under the law and in trial. The evolution of the definition of the authority of the judiciary in soviet science, when the separation of powers has been rejected and subsidiary bodies of judiciary has been separated from it, and in modern procedural science is exposed. Justice as a key power of the judiciary is compared with its other powers including those administered not by courts.