On the necessity of improving legislative technique (evidence of Federal Act no. 54-FZ of June 19, 2004 “On meetings, rallies, demonstrations, marches and picketing”)

Abstract

Introduction. The article considers an important issue of the modern institute of public events the ambiguous understanding of a number of definitive provisions of Federal Act No. 54-FZ of June 19, 2004 “On meetings, rallies, marches, demonstrations and pickets”Materials and methods. The methodological basis of the work is a number of general and specific scientific methods of cognition. The formal legal and logical method is of particular importance for the achievement of the goal.Results. The federal law under consideration, which is the main subject of research,fulfilsthe most important legal function – it concretizes the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The complexity of clarifying and correctly perceiving the letter of the lawsignificantlycomplicates both thescientificand theoretical comprehension of a number of its provisions and introduces verysignificantshortcomings into law enforcement practice and into the practice of realization by citizens of the Russian Federation of their constitutional rights to organize and participate in public events. In this regard, thedefinitiveapparatus needs to be substantially refined.Discussion and Conclusion. The problem addressed in the study has been the “generic” feature of the institution of public events for many decades. For example, it is interesting, for example, that the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR No. 9306-11 of 28.07.1988 “On the Procedure for Organizing and Conducting Meetings, Street Processions and Demonstrations in the USSR” did not clearly delineate such concepts as rally or picketing, procession or demonstration either. Misunderstanding the specifics of a particular form of public event local government bodies often suggested that the organizers and citizens hold a meeting instead of, say, a rally, or a procession instead of demonstration assuring people that there was nothing terrible in such a replacement. At the same time in practice there were cases when law enforcement officers, when making decisions on cases of violations of public order during mass events, referred not to the norms of the existing substantive law, but to the Ozhegov Russian language dictionary.