CORRECTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS OF RUSSIA RELIGIOUS SECURITY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE CRIMINOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE

Abstract

According to the logic of the updated RF Constitution and the UN Resolution on enlightenment religious tolerance, the latter is defined as the optimal principle of the arrangement of interreligious relations. This logic is also consistent with the goals of effective prevention of inter-religious aggression in the context of the implementation of the doctrine of religious security, since it takes into account the religious people’s mechanism of criminal behavior features. Meanwhile, the constitutional law basis of religious security, including Russian legislation on freedom of conscience, is not consistent with such a logic. This indicates the importance of correcting the existing legal approaches. The proposed statement and consideration of the question in the research aspect are new. This study, continuing for more than ten years, touches upon a wide range of constitutional and legal issues of the religious space, and it is reflected in more than 40 articles by the authors. The research methodology is based on the dialectical methodology. The elements of other methodological approaches are also used, in particular,the methods of falsification and abstract slice. The study conducted surveys of more than nine hundred people, who identified themselves as religious people, religious agnostics, and atheists. The purpose of this research aspect presented in this article is to justify the importance of correcting the legal regulation of interreligious relations from the point of view of the criminological significance of religious tolerance for religious security purposes. This aspect is relevant in connection with the accumulation of ideas of religious exclusivity in society, as well as the rejection of religious tolerance. This article finds the criminological significance of religious tolerance as one of the most important factors of religious security, and it points out the inferiority of patience in matters of faith as the Russian legislative antipode of religious tolerance. The authors also highlight the absence of religious tolerance in Russia, and they propose priority measures to ensure legal institutionalization of tolerance in the religious space. These measures include, in particular, the use of the positive potential of the two largest religious communities in Russia: Sunnism and canonical Orthodoxy — and proposals for a legislation change.