Direct democracy “ad hoc”: on the question of extraordinary forms of direct people’s rule

Abstract

The possibility of classifying the institutions of direct democracy as “ad hoc” legislation, that is, institutions that are extraordinary forms of direct expression of the will of the people, is being considered. The criteria for distinguishing such forms of direct democracy from forms that are of an ordinary nature, that is, designed for repeated use, are determined. The question of the advantages of forms of direct expression of the will of the people, classified as “ad hoc” legislation, over ordinary forms is explored. The article also raises the question of the risks that can be realized when using special institutions of direct democracy to solve specific problems. The relevance and novelty of the study are due to the small number of scientific works devoted to this topic - on the one hand, and the growing practical interest in the application of institutions of constitutional law related to “ad hoc” legislation in the implementation of direct democracy - on the other. At the moment, there are studies on the topics considered, carried out within the framework of the scientific subject of the theory of state and law, as discussed in the article. At the same time, there are simply no substantive constitutional and legal studies. For a long time, the answer to the question of the effectiveness of such institutions remains unclear. Conclusions: the only objective criterion that allows one to classify a particular institution or norm as an “ad hoc” norm is an indication of its one-time application of a rule of law; It seems incorrect to attribute a particular norm/institution to “ad hoc” legislation only because the law was adopted “for a specific task”; extraordinary forms of direct democracy are the most effective for conducting various kinds of electoral events, that is, voting.