Articles

The article examines the issue of when the state chooses to build vertical relations with investors by providing them with standard measures of state support and other incentives or horizontal structure by means of concluding private law agreements with them, where the parties are formally recognized as equal. The authors came to the conclusion, that any state at any specific moment can determine the ratio between vertical and horizontal support measures within the framework of the implementation of state investment policy, shifting the emphasis from one type to another. Each type of incentive or their combination has its own advantages and disadvantages that compensate each other. The choice in the use of horizontal or vertical measures is determined by the conditions of a specific economic system, the level of competence of state bodies, as well as the quality of economic policy. The Russian Federation is an example of the country that implemented different measures of state economic policy in coordination of the state and private investors in different periods of history.

The article substantiates the hypothesis of the historian of philosophy Charles Kahn and philosopher A. V. Lebedev about the presence of ontological doctrine of natural law encoded in the form of cognitive metaphors in the fragments of the treatise “On Nature” by Heraclitus of Ephesus. It is concluded that this doctrine is fundamental to the further development of the ancient natural-law tradition. The genesis of one of the central concepts of this doctrine, “nature” (Greek φύσις), which Heraclitus recites from Miletian fusiologists, but gives it an innovative meaning of absolute being, which is the basis of the reality of human legal orders, is considered. Semantically close to the metaphor φύσις are the metaphors “logos” (Greek λόγος) and “cosmos” (Greek κόσμος). Heraclitus also formulates the epistemological principle “according to nature” (Greek κατά φύσιν), which means the procedure of correct “deduction” in reality of the triadic in structure law of struggle and identity of opposites. Practical embodiments of this law in political and legal life are shown according to the principles of “art imitates nature” (Greek ή τέχνη μιμείται την φύσιν) and the microcosm of the human soul. Finally, Heraclitus’ doctrine of natural law consciousness, which relies on the “common” (Greek το ξυνόν) as an expression of the monistic nature of all things, is examined.

The article characterizes the views on the problem of the common good of one of the representatives of the school of natural law, the German lawyer, philosopher and political thinker Johannes Althusius, whose activities are largely associated with the formation of political and legal thought of the New Age. Using the example of Johannes Althusius’s main work “Politics” and some others, his views on the origin of the ideas of good, justice and humanity from one source — the idea of the common good, its coordination with the good of an individual and society as a whole are traced. The question of what the common good is has not yet been resolved. There is no unambiguous definition, which is directly related to its different understanding and perception in society. This is due to many factors, including in the context of a particular historical period. The theory of the common good has always considered issues related to supreme power, sovereignty, legality, the concept of good, morality, ethics, justice, compromise of the common and individual good. The main goal of the article is to identify the fundamental ideas of the German thinker, which underlay his views on the state and law.

The article examines the problems of historiographic analysis of psychological theories of law, which clearly accompany the evolution of political and legal thought for more than two centuries. Interest in the topic is due to a significant deficit of historiographic literature on the origin, formation and main directions of development of psychological theories of law in the mainstream of political and legal thought of the last two centuries. The existing review and special studies of psychological theories of law in the history of political and legal thought, with rare exceptions, so far only episodically consider psychological approaches to law, not to mention the lack of independent development of the historiography of the psychological direction in the evolution of modern political and legal thought. The solution to this problem is associated with a revision of the attitude to the principles of historiographic work with political and legal teachings of the past and present, improving the quality of coverage of original literature, including in the subject field the relevant historical-philosophical and problem-theoretical reconstructions of general literature, especially valuable for the detailed development of the psychological direction in the evolution of legal thought, studying the genre and plot characteristics of psychological interpretations of law. For the science of the history of political and legal teachings, the refinements and generalizations that are made in the study in connection with the study of the historiography of psychological theories of law can be significant.

In the period of constantly changing conditions and instability, the legal regulation of labor relations is being adapted to new challenges, which are caused by both global processes taking place in the world and economic, political, cultural changes. Thus, throughout the history of the development of employer power, the relevant questions are what elements are included in the concept of employer power, to what extent the employer has the right to control employees and regulate the performance of the labor function in terms of its flexibility, and what limits of the implementation of employer power are permissible in the field of labor. The definition of the concept and the content of the concept of employer power are considered depending on the development of the science of labor law in a particular historical period. Nevertheless, despite this, the essence of the nature of the employer’s power for the most part remains unchanged and characteristic of labor relations. This article will consider the concept of employer’s power through the prism of historical aspect, issues of influence of new technical means and information technologies on the implementation of employer’s power, permissible goals of employer’s control as a constituent component of the power, taking into account the interests of the parties to labor relations and the state. Particular attention is paid to the limits of realization of normative and disciplinary power of the employer.

At present, cooperation between the Eurasian Economic Union and third countries is generally carried out within the framework of signed free trade agreements or agreements on trade and economic cooperation. By their legal nature, the EAEU’s agreements with third countries are “mixed” agreements, where not only the Union itself, but also all EAEU Member States act on one side. This raises doctrinal and practical problems due to the fact that in the EAEU states, when taking certain measures at the national level, often act in fulfilment of their obligations under the law of their integration association without having any discretion. That is why the norms regulating liability for breach by the parties of their obligations arising from mixed agreements come to the fore. The current practice of states, international organizations and international courts in attributing conduct under mixed obligations of integration associations is far from being uniform and is not always in line with the provisions of the draft Articles of the International Law Commission On the responsibility of international organizations. The actions of the EAEU bodies are attributable to all EAEU Member States irrespective of their actual involvement in the challenged actions, which means the implementation of the doctrinal concept of joint obligations and joint responsibility of an international organization and its member states in the case of mixed agreements, whereby the injured party has the right to direct its claim to any joint co-defendant of its own choice.

The article deals with one of the problematic issues related to the reorganization of enquiry and preliminary investigation, which were actively discussed during the NEP period. It is about the idea of creating a unified investigation apparatus by means of structural unification in one form or another of the bodies of enquiry and investigation (in some of the proposed projects — and criminal investigation). As an integral part of the process of such unification, the discussion on judicial militia, the beginning of which was laid in the pre-revolutionary period, is also considered. A significant contribution to the development of these problems was made by the Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspectorate of the USSR, which conducted surveys of judicial, investigative and law enforcement agencies in the second half of the 1920s. The methods proposed by Rabkrin to improve the police’s work on enquiries were aimed, among other things, at creating a unified investigative apparatus in the future. These proposals after lengthy discussions found a normative embodiment. However, the idea of a unified investigative apparatus, despite its support by a significant part of justice officials and even an experimental project for the creation of such an apparatus, developed without the participation of the NK RKI, was not realized in the end.

The article discusses a number of bills of the late 1920s containing a proposal to introduce the institution of indeterminate sentences into Soviet criminal law. The initiative to develop the bills came from the people’s commissariats of justice and internal affairs. The projects were based on a scientific basis, as well as on the wide practice of parole from places of deprivation of liberty. Based on archival sources and published materials, the position of the leadership of both departments on this issue in the late 1920s was studied. The author comes to the conclusion that despite the external similarity of the views of the representatives of the two departments, in fact, they fundamentally differed. The leadership of the NKVD (E. G. Shirvindt, V. R. Yakubson) considered indeterminate sentences from the point of view of correcting the term of imprisonment as a result of observing the evolution of the personality of convicts in places of detention. The People’s Commissariat of Justice (N. V. Krylenko) saw in vague sentences the possibility of unlimited repression against socially dangerous persons. The planned innovations, as it turned out, contradicted the All-Union criminal legislation. The study of the fate of the institution of indeterminate sentences in Soviet legislation allows us to better understand the factors influencing the development of the branch of Soviet criminal and corrective labor law in the 1920s.