Abstract
Introduction. The triumph of liberal democracy in developed countries did not reduce the protest activity of citizens, revolutions and uprisings are still a phenomenon of modern time. The issue of the essence and mechanism of exercising the right of resistance (right of rebellion, right of revolution, iusresistendi) is becoming relevant, which also requires a historical analysis of Eastern political, legal and religious thought. Theoretical analysis. The author found out that the doctrine of the right of resistance is not the concept developed exclusively by Western lawyers and philosophers. Representatives of Chinese philosophical and Islamic religious thought made a significant contribution to the development of the idea of iusresistendi. The author concludes that there is no significant contribution of legal scholars from African countries in defining the essence of the right of resistance. Еmpirical analysis. The author conducted a comparative analysis of the teachings and legislation of several countries, which allows to solve the issue of the possibility of recognising criteria for legitimizing forms of resistance to oppression and the mechanism for their exisicing by acts and international documents in the future. Results. The idea of the right to resist oppression is fully reflected in Eastern political, legal and religious thought, which means its independence and self-sufficiency. The author revealed the essence of this right formulated by philosophers, jurists and authors of international law documents, the criteria for legitimizing resistance.
Highlights
The triumph of liberal democracy in developed countries did not reduce the protest activity of citizens, revolutions and uprisings are still a phenomenon of modern time
Representatives of Chinese philosophical and Islamic religious thought made a significant contribution to the development of the idea of iusresistendi
The author concludes that there is no significant contribution of legal scholars from African countries in defining the essence of the right of resistance
Summary
Говоря же о субъекте сопротивления угнетению, важно отметить, что Мэн-цзы толкует сопротивление преимущественно как коллективное, а не индивидуальное. Анализ учения наводит на мысль, что инструментом реализации сопротивления угнетению у Мэн-цзы выступает скорее придворная элита, которая свергает своего правителя, либо враги из других владений. Вооруженное восстание, таким образом, оправдывалось некоторыми мыслителями, однако право на сопротивление угнетению может быть реализовано и в других формах, в том числе пассивных [15]. Основной вклад в развитие идеи оправдания восстания внесли богословы, которые указали на несправедливое правление как критерий для легитимации сопротивления угнетению. Представители политико-правовых учений стран Африки упоминают сопротивление угнетению преимущественно как способ оправдания борьбы против колониального гнета XX столетия, а также в связи с текущими современными демократическими процессами. Эта норма не подразумевает поддержки права на сопротивление угнетению, потому что его субъектом в классическом понимании выступает народ либо индивид. Позитивацию права на сопротивление можно также обнаружить в основных законах Уганды, Мали, Бенина
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Izvestiya of Saratov University. New Series. Series Economics. Management. Law
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
