Abstract
The subject of the research are the materials of judicial practice (texts of court decisions and information sources, the content of information about the results of court hearings), data from sociological surveys.The purpose of the article is to identify the relationship between the knowledge of municipal law, local self-government or urbanism obtained during training at a university and subsequent professional activities related to local self-government carried out at different levels of public authority.The methodology. A comprehensive methodology was used, including legal and sociological research methods. Formal legal, legal technical and comparative legal were used among the legal methods. The sociological methods include the method of expert survey and the method of content analysis, which makes it possible to reveal the real position of the respondent, if he wants to disguise it not only the positions expressed, but also the words actually used were analyzed. The most repeatable ones were identified with the help of special software products.The main results, scope of application. Quite significant amendments were made to the Russian Constitution in 2020. One of the novels concerns a unified system of public power, the inclusion of a new term in the text of the constitution. The implementation of these novels in the legislation on local self-government is expected after the completion of the formation of the updated composition of the Federal Assembly. For this, it is necessary not only to reveal the term itself and list the levels of public authority, but also to establish new principles of their relationship, incl. in a sense, uniform standards, rules and requirements for state and local authorities. One of the possible consequences of this may be an increase in the prestige of work in local self-government bodies, a change in attitudes towards work in local self-government bodies.Conclusions. The analysis of the materials of law enforcement practice, the data of opinion polls on trust in local self-government bodies, attitude to the results of the work of local self-government bodies and their officials show that of all levels of government the municipal level is least trusted. Unfortunately, such an attitude begins to form in the process of training future employees of public authorities at different levels.
Highlights
Анализируется взаимосвязь знаний по муниципальному праву, местному самоуправлению или урбанистке, полученных при обучении в вузе, и последующей профессиональной деятельности, связанной с местным самоуправлением, осуществляемой на разных уровнях публичной власти
The purpose of the article is to identify the relationship between the knowledge of municipal law, local self-government or urbanism obtained during training at a university and subsequent professional activities related to local self-government carried out at different levels of public authority
The sociological methods include the method of expert survey and the method of content analysis, which makes it possible to reveal the real position of the respondent, if he wants to disguise it - the positions expressed, and the words used were analyzed
Summary
С одной стороны, если обращать внимание только на информацию, которая фигурирует в публичном пространстве и касается государственного контроля за местным самоуправлением, то можно сделать вывод, что основными нарушителями являются органы местного самоуправления и их должностные лица. Это полномочие органов государственной власти субъектов, хотя операторами выступают органы местного самоуправления. No 306-ЭС19-12938 по делу No А55-20012/2018; дарственной власти субъектов Российской Федерации пытаются отказаться от выполнения своих расходных обязательств перед органами местного самоуправления, но в публичном пространстве информации об этом почти нет. Вышеприведенные последствия отношения к органам местного самоуправления возникают не одномоментно, являются результатом не только информационной политики, сформированной в публичном пространстве, но и тем, какие основы закладываются в головы юристов и иных сотрудников органов публичной власти в период их обучения. В одну группу вошли ответы условных «практиков» (представители органов государственной власти и местного самоуправления, эксперты, представители НКО, в том числе ТОСов), в другую – условных «теоретиков» (преподаватели и студенты).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
