A Typical Cross-Border Metaverse Model as a Counteraction to Its Fragmentation

The subject. The interaction of modern national legal systems and the international legal system is still the most controversial legal phenomenon. An exclusively national approach to solving issues of the general theory of international law could not and cannot justify expectations and close the need for legal comprehension. The situation is aggravated by the fact that, at the level of universal international law, the solution of issues on the agenda with the help of positive methods of legal regulation, and, consequently, the implementation of the norms of existing international treaties today are criticized, tested and often completely violated. The implementation of the norms of existing international treaties is increasingly faced with attempts to refute their postulates using the "customs" under which those "rules" are veiled. In such conditions, national legal systems may experience an increased "feeling of jealousy" to their sovereignty and try to "close" as much as possible using the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of the state.Purpose of the study. In such conditions, it is most important to choose the right vector in improving international law, and not order, law based on normative principles. It is important to correctly "choose the key" to harmonizing the will of sovereign states of our time. The article is devoted to the search for a more correct way of developing international law through its interaction, and not counteraction with the national one.Methodology. The research was carried out using a formal legal interpretation of international legal acts, as well as a comparative analysis of Russian and foreign legal literature. Structural and systemic methods are also the backbone of the study. The conclusions of the work are based on dialectical unity and the struggle of opposites, as well as on interacting deduction and induction in relation to legal systems.The main results. The growing trend towards fragmentation of international law leads to a reduction in the base of sources in the universal sphere of international law. The intensification of regionalization and the creation of regional unions of sovereign states is becoming a source of polar processes: on the one hand, supranational control over the observance of international law by states within their legal system increases, on the other hand, natural situations of non-execution of decisions of international judicial bodies arise. Such situations, without a proper assessment of the reasons for the issuance of the international acts of law enforcement themselves, can lead to unfounded criticism. There is an impressive amount of work in the field of correlation between international and national law, as well as in the field of enforcement of decisions of international judicial bodies. Despite this, in the field of practical implementation of the norms of international law, there remains a lack of doctrinal developments. Such a situation will inevitably lead to attempts to create a semblance of a norm, an escalation of confrontation, and an inability to reach agreement on issues on the agenda. The situation at the level of the universal international legal system is aggravating, therefore, the verification of the limits of competence of regional education authorities, in particular of supranational judicial control bodies, becomes even more important.Сonclusions. The author comes to the conclusion that, on the one hand, in the sphere of universal international law, there is a reduction in the base of sources of international law. On the other hand, in the field of regional international integration, on the contrary, the number of sources of international legal regulation is increasing, and the process of their implementation is intensifying. Universal international law based on the principles of the UN Charter is the most qualitative regulator of the field of international public relations. However, at the present stage of development of the international community, regional integration may well come to its aid: through regional interaction, the consolidation of the wills of sovereign states can and should be achieved a legal constructive dialogue on key issues of already universal international law. Using the approaches of national legal regulation exclusively and unilaterally, it is impossible to productively approach issues of international law: neither in the field of creating international organizations of various types, nor in matters of fulfilling obligations under international law. According to the results of the study, it was concluded that only non-confrontational interaction of specialists in the field of international and national (primarily constitutional) law can provide the construction of the most effective model of interaction of these legal systems. This requires a transformation of the basic approaches to the issues of interaction between international and national law. The basic unity of the general theory of law and the specific features of legal systems should be the starting points for doctrinal research of existing legal structures and the practice of their implementation.

The article is devoted to one of the aspects of the problem of correlation between international and domestic law, namely the relationship between international and national law. This relationship is developing dynamically. The development of the interconnectedness of international and domestic law occurs in connection with the constant increase in the number of international treaties and national legal acts aimed at regulating social and domestic relations, which is the object of international cooperation. At present, trends in the further development of international law and its interaction with national legal systems have begun to emerge clearly. The process of globalization has strengthened the interconnection of states, expanded the range of intrastate social relations that are a common object of regulation of two legal systems - the international legal system and the domestic legal system. Based on the analysis of the provisions of the general theory of law and the doctrine of international law and international normative acts, the theoretical and legal problems of the relationship between domestic and international law are considered. It explores the social and legal nature of the relationship between the two legal systems and explores the importance of harmonizing domestic state law with international law. It is noted that although international law and domestic law have a single social nature, they functionally act as two relatively independent and closely interacting and interdependent systems of law. The nature of their interrelations, methods and forms of interaction, as well as their functional connection, interdependence and the role of the state in this process are revealed. It is emphasized that the relationship and interaction are not limited only to the norms of the two legal systems, but cover the two legal systems as a whole. Consequently, there must be harmonization of the norms of national law with all sources of international law, including with the individual international obligations of states. The article notes that the state is a participant in the creation of legal norms of both domestic and international law. The process of coordinating the will or position of states when concluding international treaties is regulated by the norms of international law, and the process and procedure for expressing these declarations of will or positions are determined by the norms of national law. At the same time, international law does not belong to the legal system of specific states, although in fact it is part of all legal systems. If the object of regulation coincides, the norms of international law always take precedence over domestic ones. According to the author of the article, the concept of a legal conflict should not be identified with the invalidity of international treaties. It is argued that the case of conflict occurs only with a valid contract. It is also emphasized that many norms, enshrined in international law by treaty or customary means, acquire the character of jus cogens and therefore are binding on all states, regardless of ratification or accession to certain treaties or agreements. The article points out that international law imposes an obligation on the state as a whole, but it is domestic law that determines state bodies and officials who are responsible for fulfilling the international obligations of the state.
 The purpose of the article is to theoretically clarify the essence of the relationship and interaction between international and domestic law, to identify the importance of harmonizing domestic legislation with international law and the grounds for the priority of international norms over national law.

Interconnections between International and National Criminal Law Relevant to Energy Security

Treaty override, which generally concerns international law, has a specific connotation with regard to international tax law. The specific connotation of tax treaty override essentially depends on the structure and functioning of the OECD Model on which tax treaties are commonly based. Thus, a study of tax treaty override, regardless of the classification as a monist or dualist system, necessarily involves, on the one hand, an analysis of the relationship between general international law and international tax law and, on the other hand, an analysis of the relationship between international and national law. The first analysis is directed at understanding the structure of tax treaty override and, therefore, at determining the core of the interpretative process which underlies its detection. The examination of the relationship between international and national law is, instead, functional at evaluating the legitimacy (or illegitimacy) of tax treaty override. It is also important to emphasise that nowadays, very often, the relevant relationship is not only between sources of national and international law, but it necessarily involves – as an additional parameter – EU law. This is true not only for the EU Member States, but also for third countries that conclude international treaties with them, and whose rights could easily be affected by a subsequent change to EU law. In this context, treaty override is the most damaging manifestation of lack of effectiveness of international law, which means lack of legal protection for economic operators – and therefore taxpayers – acting globally. For this reason, the resolution of the issues concerning tax treaty override represents an important step towards a necessary consolidation of the relationship between national, international and EU law. This consolidation will guarantee more certainty of law.

The existences of international and national laws are interrelated and interacting. The linkage of International and National laws is depicted in monism and dualism theories. The existence of international and national laws is examined by looking at each other's interdependence and interaction between the two. The object of this paper is related to the disengagement and interaction between international law and national law, using normative juridical methods. The results show that in actual practice between international and national laws need and influence each other, includes: international law is more effective if transformed into the national law; international law will bridge when the national law cannot be applied in the territory of other countries; international law will harmonize the differences in the national law; and international law more grow from the practices of countries. Extradition as one example, in principle contains two dimensions of interrelated international and national.

The purpose of the article is to determine the nature and features of the rules of international and national law, as well as their differences. The subject matter of the study is the correlation between the rules of international and national law. The research methodology includes the use of the following scientific methods: analysis and synthesis, formal and dogmatic, system and structural, hermeneutic, synergetic. Results of the study. The concept of the rule of law is analyzed and its features are outlined. The concepts of rules of national law and rules of international law are provided. The differences between the rules of international and national law are revealed. The procedure for ensuring the implementation of the rules national and international law is considered. Practical implementation. Some problematic issues arising from the interaction of rules of international and national law are investigated. Value / originality. Emphasis is placed on the need for interaction of rules of international and national law to improve the national legal system.

This chapter focuses on the relationship between international law and national energy law, and on how international and national law interacts in defining the total legal regime for energy activity, on the international and the national level. International energy law encompass public international law that regulates issues of relevance for energy production and distribution. The relationship or interface between international and national energy law is part of the more widely discussed question about the relationship between international law and national law. The chapter analyses the more general character of the relationship between international law and national law in regulating energy activity. The right of a state to exercise jurisdiction over its natural resources is regarded as a fundamental principle of international law. One important development in international law which has a great impact on energy production is the extension of coast state sovereignty and rights to natural resources in the sea areas outside the sea territory of states.

The author discusses the relationship between international criminal law and national criminal law. The relationship between international and domestic law is a perennial issue in the theory and practice of international and constitutional law. Slovenian law recognises the supremacy of international law over national laws and regulations but maintains the supremacy of the Constitution over international law. Customary international law poses the greatest problem in the relationship between international and national criminal law. Unlike international law, which considers customary law an extremely important source, national criminal law expressly prohibits using customary law because of the principle of legality. In Slovenia, the principle of legality in criminal proceedings is also expressly enshrined in Article 28 of the Constitution. The author considers that, by adopting the Act on Cooperation between the Republic of Slovenia and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Slovenia has ratified instruments of international law which are contrary to Article 28 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia. A similar finding applies to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Such a conflict can only be resolved in two ways: either by denunciation of the treaty or by amendment of the Constitution. The author cannot predict how the legislator will decide.

The article deals with typical problems of relationship between international and national laws. The urgency of the problem is connected with complexity of formation of a new model of international relations. The article attempts to provide a theoretical understanding of the priority of norms of international law over national law and formulates emerging laws and problems of such priority. It offers a vision of this problem from the point of view of national and international law, which may differ. The authors propose maintaining the position for Russia, according to which the supremacy of the international law and adherence to its norms in relations between states is the main vector of the concept of international policy of our state. Investigating problems of relationship between the international treaty and the Constitution of Russia, the authors analyze emerging points of view, investigate recent changes in the Russian doctrine regarding the compliance with their obligations under international law regarding constitutional provisions. In conditions of formation of a new paradigm of international relations, the extreme importance of changes introduced in 2015 to the federal constitutional law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation” is emphasized. It justifies the need for fundamental research in the field of an emerging trend - fundamental resistance. The research is aimed at practical analysis and search for such legal regulators that would allow for the coordinated functioning of two legal systems (national and international).

В умовах правової глобалізації активізуються процеси взаємодії та взаємовпливу національного конституційного права держав і міжнародного публічного права, результатом чого виступає формування та прояв стійкої тенденції конституціоналізації міжнародного публічного права і інтернаціоналізації конституційного правопорядку держав. Єдиним засобом взаємодії норм цих двох самостійних та автономних правових систем є запозичення норм міжнародного права національними правовими системами держав через механізм імплементації, коли норми міжнародного права входять до національної системи законодавства, отримуючи статус його норм.
 Метою статі виступає дослідження імплементації норм міжнародного права як конституційно-правового засобу взаємодії міжнародного та національного конституційного права.
 Наукова новизна. У статті розкрита роль і значення феноменології імплементації як міжнародного та конституційно-правового інституту, стратегії державного управління, державної політики, технологічного засобу у вузькому розумінні (прийом юридичної техніки) та технологічного засобу в широкому розумінні (як технології поведінки держави).
 Висновки. Підсумовуючи результати дослідження, можна охарактеризувати імплементацію норм міжнародного права в норми національного права як феноменологічне явище, що може бути визначене наступним чином: імплементація – це а) правовий інститут міжнародного публічного і національного конституційного права, що складається із сукупності міжнародних і національних конституційних норм, які регламентують і регулюють відповідні правила поведінки, що виникають в процесі виконання державами своїх міжнародно-правових зобов’язань, узятих ними в рамках підписаних міжнародних договорів, з метою їх виконання в рамках національного законодавства на своїх теренах; б) це стратегія державного управління, яка запозичена із однієї з найважливіших галузей міжнародного публічного права – права міжнародних договорів, з метою реалізації міжнародно-правової позиції держави по найважливішим питанням зовнішніх та внутрішніх відносин та розвитку у її внутрішньо політичній діяльності через здійснення відповідних організаційних, нормативних та процесуально-процедурних заходів, що здійснюються уповноваженими органами державної влади та державного управління в межах їх компетенційних повноважень; в) державна політика, що може бути визначена як сукупність телеологічно спрямованих дій відповідних уповноважених органів держави, передбачених конституційним законодавством, здійснюваних у відповідних організаційних та процесуально-процедурних формах, метою яких є досягнення відповідного соціального результату з питань взаємного співробітництва держав, що володіє відповідним соціальним ефектом, завдяки реалізації договірних домовленостей з державами-членами міжнародної універсальної чи регіональної спільноти; г) технологічний спосіб (у вузькому розумінні), що містить в собі відповідні діяльнісно-поведінкові та функціонально-інструментальні настанови-предикати, входить до арсеналу юридичної техніки з обслуговування, супроводження та забезпечення реалізації настанов демократичної правової державності, завдяки якому можуть бути здійсненими в практичній діяльності держави її міжнародно-правові зобов’язання за міжнародними договорами; ґ) технологія поведінки держави (у широкому розумінні), завдяки якій реалізується її облігаторно-діяльнісна програма дій на міжнародній арені, що повинні знайти своє відповідне відображення та реалізацію всередині держави у діяльності її органів, посадових та службових осіб, а також всіх інших суб’єктів національного конституційного права.

The Nuremberg tribunal was the expression and the beginning of states' recognition of their duty to prosecute genocide and other gross human rights violations. It was a first step towards fulfillin...

This chapter considers some of the implications of different forms of private authority for the dichotomy between national and international law. Section 2 considers the contemporary significance of the phenomenon of private authority to an understanding of the relationship between international and national law. Section 3 seeks to identify contemporary forms of private authority and possible bases of distinction between public and private authority. Section 4 explores some of the ways international and national law interact in addressing the accountability of private authorities. It is argued that the relationship between national and international law may be seen as chaotic, lacking order and precision, and therefore as requiring some legal categorization in order to recapture certainty. Alternatively it may be seen as accommodating new actors and opening new spaces for diverse forms of, and arenas for, regulation.

INTRODUCTION. International legal policy is a new object in international legal studies, although this phenomenon exists as long as the external relations of States. International legal policy is a rare case of research subject, which remains unexplored. International legal policy as a Concept of State's policy towards legal aspects of international relations was formed in the 80-s of last century. Earlier the questions and their particular aspects now embraced by international legal policy were divided between international lawyers and international relations researchers. However international legal policy is an integral system of State's approaches to international legal matters, therefore its punctual research is relevant only from comparative point of view. It would be interesting to compare States' positions on concrete issues or States' tactics at different stages of realization of international legal norms. This article concerns the question whether comparative studies of international legal policy can be integrated into existing fields of comparative foreign relations law or of comparative research of international law.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The article surveys theoretic questions primarily on the base of doctrinal sources. The retrospective analysis of the comparative method in international law is based on works published by Russian and foreign experts during the XX century. Particular attention is drawn upon works of founders of comparative research in international legal studies. The concept of foreign relations law in the scholarship and practice of the U.S. is researched on the base of national case law, which formulated the principle of executive exceptionalism in State foreign policy. Research work is realized with the use of analysis, synthesis, systematisation, as well as methods of historical and comparative method.RESEARCH RESULTS. The Article consistently reveals meaning and the content of international legal policy as one of the authors of the concept, French lawyer and diplomat G. de Lacharriere, presented it. The Article examines the history of foreign relations law in the U.S. and presents its doctrinal estimations from viewpoint of American constitutional law. The research work specifies different points of view on content of foreign relations law and approaches to its justification. Indeed international legal policy and foreign relations law can be compared as two types of State’s approach to its legal position on the international scene. There are six parameters for comparison: sources, functions, subjects of both concepts, questions on allocation of foreign powers in the State, on relationship between international and national law, on the role of national courts in interpretation and application of international norms. In consideration of “national interest” concept the attribution of international legal policy to international organisations or supranational association is judged as incorrect. The article examines the question of applicability of comparative method in the international law within the discourse among scholars on how differently modern States evaluate international legal norms. Analysis of the tendency to contrasting States’ approaches to the international law encompasses its development from notions “international law of transitional period”, “international legal systems”, to notions “national approach”, “legal style”, “legal culture”. Brief survey of comparative international law gives perspective on diversity of approaches to comparable aspects of the international law. Comparative studies of international legal policy could get consolidated among them.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. At first sight the comparative method is hardly applicable to the international law. However the universality of the international law doesn’t exclude variety of approaches to it. The research into international legal policy determined by national interests of every State allows to systemize positions of a State into a single strategy. At the same time comparative method doesn’t only provide classical comparison of States’ positions by issues, but also offers to compare inner-workings of the international legal policy and shaping factors. Nowadays in the context of trends on diversification of international relations (fragmentation, regionalisation), growing popularity of the comparative method translated into comparative foreign relations law and comparative international law. However international legal policy doesn’t correspond with categorial apparatus of comparative foreign relations law. International legal policy is nor able to apply methodological tenets of comparative international law due to its multivalued content. Most likely comparative studies of international legal policy can become a new approach within comparative international law, which should be based on the principles of concreteness and consistency.

Relevance. Issues of discussion of international and national law have acquired particular relevance in the light of constitutional changes, occurred in 2020 in the Russian Federation. The primacy of national law, enshrined at the level of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, has significantly changed the interaction between the national and international legal order. At the same time, the sphere of freedom of conscience (religion) is one of the most important areas of legal regulation, which has both national and international legal aspects, which determines the relevance of the chosen research goal. The Purpose of the study is to analyze international legal and domestic regulation in the sphere of ensuring the right to freedom of conscience (religion), as well as to identify and resolve urgent problems of interaction of systemic law in the context of the right to freedom of conscience. The research objectives are: 1) determination of the place of the right to freedom of conscience (religion) in the system of international and national legal regulation, in particular, analysis of the concepts of “absolute law”, “jus cogens”, “general international law”; 2) consideration of the issue of the boundaries of freedom of religion in the understanding of the national law of the Russian Federation and international law. As a result of the accomplishment of the task, it is proposed to identify the main differences in this issue between the domestic and international legal order, as well as to put forward proposals to eliminate this discrepancy. Methodology. The key tool was the method of comparative analysis, as well as system analysis. In the course of the study, the main acts of the current legislation of the Russian Federation in the field, the most important international legal acts, the works of prominent specialists in international and constitutional rights were analyzed, a study of law enforcement acts (the practice of the courts of the Russian Federation, the European Court of Human Rights) was carried out. Conclusions. As a result, original conclusions were obtained regarding the need for the doctrinal inclusion of norms on freedom of conscience (religion) in the system of international common law. The conclusion is made about the need for a more complete consideration of the position of international judicial bodies in the legislative movement of the boundaries of the right to freedom of conscience (religion).

Conceptions of the state Back in 1899, only a few of the positions now occupied by international lawyers had been provided for. Yet 1899 was a significant year. Governments met at the First Peace Conference at The Hague to set an example of codifying international law in treaties. They reached agreement on the establishment of the first international court of a permanent character, at least nominally – the Permanent Court of Arbitration. The nineteenth century had witnessed a remarkable growth in the number of treaties, and their subject matters, many of which were also governed by national law. In the same period constitutional democracy had spread widely. While it remained a government prerogative to represent the state internationally, for example when consenting to be bound by a treaty, parliamentary bodies had become centres of national law-making processes. In 1899, Professor Heinrich Triepel in Volkerrecht und Landesrecht addressed the topical issue of the relationship between international and national law. It is one of the few nineteenth-century books on international law that was quoted, or at least cited, throughout the twentieth century. Triepel has been seen as the main exponent of the dualist theory, according to which national and international law are separate legal systems. One consequence of this view is that acts contrary to international law may be valid under national law, and vice versa . The systems were described by Triepel as circles that perhaps touched but never overlapped.