Body Of Constitutional Control Research Articles

Development of Public Power in Judicial Acts and Legal Positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation: To the 30th Anniversary of the Constitution of the Russian Federation

The paper analyzes the main legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation since the 1990s until 2023 on the organization and functioning of public authority in Russia in the context of the theory of the «living» Constitution of Russia. To expand on the topic the author dwells upon the legal positions of the constitutional control body as an explanation of the norms of the Russian Constitution, which influences the law-making process and law enforcement practice. Based on the analysis of judicial acts, the main constitutional characteristics of public power are determined: inclusion of municipal government in its composition (the presence of organizational isolation of local government bodies with their functional unity with state power); continuous functioning and historical succession of public power; exercise of public power at the level of the Federation, constituent entities of the Federation, municipalities with the inadmissibility of violating each other’s competence by these levels. It is noted that the main task of state building may be to bring the activities of public authorities closer to the forms of democracy, as well as the development of their direct connections through public discussions between public authorities and the people, society, and citizens.

Problems of Immunity in Relation to the Sole Residential Premises of a Citizen

Executive immunity for the sole living space of a debtor-citizen has been the subject of lively discussions for theorists, law enforcement officers and legislators for a long time. To date, the instructions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation denying the absolute nature of such immunity remain unfulfilled. The bills received on this issue find a negative response. In practice, there are often facts of abuse by debtors of the right to inviolability of the only housing. The purpose of the article is to develop proposals to establish the limits and mechanism of action of executive immunity for the only living space of a citizen, taking into account the need to balance the interests of the debtor and the recoveries. To achieve the goal, the position of the supreme constitutional control body, the practice of enforcement bodies are analyzed, problematic issues of interpretation of such concepts as family members of the debtor and the suitability of residential premises are considered, the relationship of executive immunity with the principle of correlation of the volume of the claimant’s claims and enforcement measures is revealed. When writing the article, the general philosophical method, general scientific methods, as well as private scientific methods were used. Proposals have been developed to improve legislation establishing the limits and mechanism of executive immunity, guarantees of the constitutional right to housing. The necessity of extending immunity to objects of unfinished construction is justified. An introduction was made about the need to resolve the issue of foreclosure on the only housing within the framework of an independent trial with a study of all the factual circumstances of the dispute.

The Role of the Practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Fede­ration in the Development of Constitutionalism

The study conducted a systematic analysis of both the domestic doctrine and the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the field of development of constitutionalism is carried out. The paper notes that for the constitutionalization of the national legal system, the rules identified by the body of constitutional control, which guide the legislator when adopting a law, become essential. The practice developed by the Constitutional Court contributes to the adoption of a constitutional and balanced decision when checking the compliance of the law with the constitutional provisions. The legal position contained in the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation becomes the basis for future legal regulation. It is a guideline in the legislative process and in the activities of all public authorities and local self-government. The methodological basis of the research is the dialectical method of scientific knowledge, as well as logical, historical, systemic methods. Of particular importance were the methods of analysis and synthesis. We applied a functional method to study the main directions for ensuring a reasonable balance of private (individual) and public interests. The study revealed that the legal positions of the Constitutional Court are based on the analysis of universal provisions that characterize the basic constitutional values. The Constitutional Court carries out a broad interpretation of the norms being checked, explaining to the law enforcer that their content is not limited to the literal meaning. In the scientific literature, the potential of the body of constitutional control has been understood in terms of reforming legislation and adjusting law enforcement practice, as well as features of the implementation of functions to ensure the constitutionality of all acts and actions. At the same time, the boundaries of the implementation of constitutional control practice do not allow going beyond the framework of legal protection and protection of the constitution, since in this activity the body of constitutional control is guided only by constitutional norms and determines the constitutionally permissible boundaries for the application of the verified normative legal acts.

History of establishment and features of constitutional control in Estonia

Ukraine has chosen for itself the European model of centralized constitutional control, which implies creation of a separate Constitutional Court to resolve cases on the constitutionality of laws and some other legal acts. Of course, this model is not unique is also not the only one in the organization of constitutional control among those used in Europe. One of the most attention-grabbing alternative options for the organization of constitutional control is the Estonian model - which, although it is similar to those countries where disputes about the constitutionality of laws are resolved by courts of general jurisdiction (or only by the Supreme Court), is nevertheless unique in many ways.
 The article examines the factors that influenced Estonia's development of its unique approach to the organization of constitutional control, as well as an analysis of the possibility and expediency of transferring this experience to countries with already existing constitutional control, where the Constitutional Court operates. In particular, to begin with, the history of the development of the judicial system in Estonia in the 20th century was considered. Immediately after this country gained independence, its first Constitution was adopted, which became the basis for the birth of constitutional control in Estonia. The article also examines the peculiarities of the procedure for reviewing constitutionality of laws in Estonia by courts of all levels (including the Supreme Court) under the current legislation.
 A separate subject of attention in the article is the discussion that has been going on for a long time in Estonia about the necessity and expediency of depriving the Supreme Court of its powers to exercise constitutional control with the formation of the Constitutional Court as a separate body. The key arguments put forward by both supporters and opponents of the changes have been considered.
 According to the results of the study, possible risks for the Supreme Court and the mandate of its judges, which may be accompanied by the transfer of the Estonian experience in the organization of constitutional control to countries where there is a separate Constitutional Court, are highlighted.
 The relevance of the study is due to the fact that despite the lively interest in the unique features of the organization of the Estonian judicial system, due to the language barrier, the question of the history of the formation of the Supreme Court of Estonia as a body of constitutional control escapes the attention of researchers.

Constitutional judicial control as a means of directly ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens

The article offered to the reader is devoted to the study of the institution of constitutional judicial control as a means of directly ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens. The authors argue that the institution of specialized judicial control is an integral element in ensuring the balance of the branches of government, providing a system of checks and balances in a democratic state based on the rule of law, especially in the context of a “legal explosion” and active juridification of public relations. The latter necessitates the existence of an effective mechanism of constitutional and control activities for the observance of the rule of law, both the procedure for adopting normative legal acts, and the compliance of their provisions with the content of the Basic Law of the state in order to prevent violations of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, as the main task of balanced activity of all branches of government. Combining normative control and “advisory” functions in their activities, as well as interpreting constitutional provisions, specialized bodies of constitutional control make decisions that, in fact, become the “standard” of law enforcement and fundamentally affect the legal policy of the state in the field of protecting human rights and freedoms and citizen. Special attention is paid to the empirical analysis of the resolutions of the supreme body of judicial constitutional control of the Russian Federation, as well as a number of foreign bodies of constitutional justice, in the field of protection and restoration of violated constitutional rights of citizens in the framework of the a posterior abstract and specific normative control, as well as a priori normative control, which is a novelty of domestic legislation.

��ů ��������ֲ��ί ������� � �������� ������ ���������ί ̲���ֲ� � ̲��Ϊ���� ��в�� (1918-1945 ��.)

The article deals with the analysis of the views of constitutional state by the Ukrainian diaspora scientists in law in interwar period made basing on their scientific and theoretical heritage. The author reviews the diversity of these scientists� general and academic scientific outlook on constitutional state and shows the essence of legal organization, state making ideas and ways of their implementation in the future sovereign Ukraine build-up. The article also reveals the contents and characteristic features of their doctrines of the state build-up, in particular the views of the constitutional legislature�s role in it as well as such basic constitutional and legal institutions as the parliament, the government, courts and the body of constitutional control. A particular attention is paid to the constitutional and legal status of a man and a citizen, national minorities, the Ukrainian people as the only source of power in their state. Considering Ukraine�s state and legal reality it seems especially interesting and topical to have been traced the basic nature of unicameral and bicameral legislature, their distinctive features and political and legal efficacy as well as emphasizing the Prime Minister�s independence and the determination of the judges� specific status. Key words: constitutional state, Ukrainian diaspora, legal conceptions, branches of power, state system.

The powers of constitutional (statutory) councils of subjects of the Russian Federation as bodies of legal protection of the Basic Law

Constitutional (statutory) council is a new state body of federal subjects of Russia. The council is designed to replace the regional body of constitutional justice, abolished since 2023. At the same time, status of this new body is not detailed in the federal legislation, therefore, it gives rise to conflicting approaches in legal science. It is not clear whether the constitutional (statutory) council should (can) be a constitutional control body. Or it should be a supervisory body. It is not clear what set of powers the constitutional (statutory) council should have. The work uses historical and comparatively legal research methods. The authors study the experience of constitutional councils in republics of Yakutia, Bashkiria and Adygea. The conclusion is made about the main purpose of constitutional (statutory) councils: to ensure the supremacy and direct action of the Basic Law of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation and to exercise its legal protection. This implies the presence of powers: for normative control; on the interpretation of the constitution (charter) of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation; to resolve disputes between the highest authorities of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation. At the same time, an analysis of the laws on constitutional councils of subjects of the Russian Federation shows that they have the authority to exercise normative control in relation to all normative acts of a subject of the Russian Federation and local governments. However, they cannot deprive them of their legal force, since their decisions are advisory in nature. The right to interpret the Basic Law is granted to constitutional councils only in Yakutia and Bashkiria. The results of the interpretation are also advisory in nature, so the interpretation cannot be called an official interpretation (especially since the Constitutional Council of Bashkiria is preparing only a draft of such an interpretation). There is no power to resolve disputes in the laws on the status of constitutional councils in Yakutia, Bashkiria and Adygea. The conclusion is made about the ineffectiveness of the means of legal protection of the Basic Law available in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Mechanisms are proposed that will ensure the effectiveness of decisions of constitutional (statutory) councils. The right of constitutional councils to give an official normative interpretation of the Basic Law of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation is substantiated.

Орган конституционного контроля как субъект конституционализации уголовно-процессуального законодательства

The increasing influence of constitutional ideas and principles on the system of legal regulation, including the regulation of pre-trial and judicial stages of criminal proceedings, has had a serious impact on the emergence and development of the concept and practice of constitutionalizing the legal system in modern states. The same trend has also affected the sphere of criminal proceedings, since, firstly, it is objectified by the need to improve the system of protecting human and civil rights and freedoms. Secondly, this trend is due to the fact that the subjects of criminal proceedings involved in the criminal process, on the one hand, are protected by the rights that are established in constitutional norms and regulations, on the other hand, these rights may be restricted in cases provided for by law. Determination of the balance in this matter is provided by law enforcement agencies in the process of law enforcement activities. At the same time, when situations arise when there are doubts about the constitutionality of the norms of criminal procedure legislation, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan has the last word in the dispute about the right, which expands the boundaries of constitutional legality through the adoption of regulatory decisions. In this aspect, the article analyzes the activity of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan as one of the main subjects of the constitutionalizing the norms of criminal proceedings. The author of the article examines the work of the constitutional control body through the content of its normative resolutions, which are an important source of constitutionalizing criminal procedure law.

Aspects of taking into account foreign experience in the formation of bodies of constitutional jurisdiction in Ukraine

The publication examines the formation of the judiciary of constitutional jurisdiction both in Ukraine and abroad. Different approaches to the formation of the composition of constitutional review bodies are analyzed, historical, economic, political and niche factors that determined a certain order of formation of such bodies are identified. The important role of the peculiarities of the formation of the composition of the bodies of constitutional jurisdiction in ensuring the independence of this body and in ensuring the proper legal protection of the constitution is noted. It is noted that the analysis of foreign experience in this issue is an impetus to expand scientific and expert discussion in this direction in order to find the best ways to overcome the problem of quality formation of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, given the established successful practices of foreign countries.
 It is established that the role and importance of the body of constitutional justice in society and the legal and political system of a modern constitutional, democratic state is extremely important. The Constitutional Court, as a body of constitutional control, occupies an important place in the mechanism of legitimation of state power, as it is designed to protect the constitutionally enshrined sovereignty of the people from illegal actions and decisions of public authorities. To this end, the Court must act as an unconditional authoritative body of state power, endowed not only with the right but also with a real opportunity to take measures aimed at protecting the Constitution. One of the important elements of ensuring this status is the proper and high-quality staffing of the Court with highly professional staff, which is primarily related to the processes of forming the CCU.
 However, as noted in the scientific and expert community, even in those European countries where the so- called mixed principle of forming a body of constitutional jurisdiction (as in Ukraine), no universal approach is used to appoint judges of the constitutional court, as each state regulates this issue. in his own way. Therefore, proposals are made, in particular, given the peculiarities of our political system and incomplete judicial reform, it would be appropriate to exclude the Congress of Judges from among the entities authorized to form the Constitutional Court of Ukraine (let’s not forget that this requires changes to Of the Constitution), and to entrust the procedure of selection of CCU judges to the relevant commission, the members of which would be nominated by both national and international experts. Resolving these issues is extremely important, and therefore is an impetus to expand scientific and expert discussion in this direction in order to find the best ways to overcome the problem of quality formation of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, given the established successful practices of foreign countries.

Transformation of the Status of the Constitutional Court: Search for a New One or Return to the Past?

2020 was the year of a major constitutional reform in Russia, which affected various aspects of the state structure. The Constitutional Court of Russia was no exception. The Russian Constitution has been amended to change the composition, powers, principles and guarantees of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. These amendments have been concretized and significantly deepened by the amendments to the Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation”. This article attempts to analyze the constitutional and legislative changes in the status of the Constitutional Court and determine whether the new regulation is completely new or whether it continues and consolidates the already established trends in the development of the Court, and, possibly, returns the Constitutional Court to its origins. In the course of the study, methods of formal legal analysis were applied, as well as elements of historical and legal analysis. The main result of the study was the conclusion that the reform of 2020 consolidated and continued trends noticeable over several years in the practice of the Constitutional Court, namely, the strengthening of the Court in the system of public authorities, a decrease in the composition, a decrease in publicity and openness, as well as the formalization of the process. Positive innovations should be considered the constitutional consolidation of the Constitutional Court as the highest judicial body of constitutional control, the expansion of the subjects of complaints about the violation of constitutional rights and freedoms, the constitutional consolidation of the status of interpretations in the decisions of the Court and the legislative consolidation of the foundations of the mechanism for systematic execution of decisions. At the same time, the reduction of the composition, the transformation of the Court’s powers into the sphere of preliminary control, the reduction of guarantees of the independence of the Court and constitutional judges, and the strengthening of written procedures appear to be controversial and undesirable. In general, the constitutional and legal status of the Court has not under gone significant cardinal changes in the course of the reform and is, perhaps, not the beginning, but the result of there forms taking place since 2009.

Retracted: The constitutional court as a subject of the political process

AbstractThe article presents a study of the special powers of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, reflecting the specifics of the state structure. The Constitutional Court of Bosnia has certain powers that can determine the specifics of the legal nature of this state. Leading in this study is the method of systems analysis, which allowed the author to analyze the degree of participation of the constitutional control body in ensuring the continuity of the law‐making process. As a result of the study, it was revealed that the implementation of the constitutional project is associated with ensuring the parity of interests of constitutive peoples and making the state mechanism provided in the constitution effective. Analyzing the institution of protection of vital interests in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the author concludes that the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina significantly influenced the change in the structure and content of this institution in the studied state.Related ArticlesNwokora, Zim, and Riccardo Pelizzo. 2015. “The Political Consequences of Party System Change.” Politics & Policy 43(4): 453–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12124/.Sevin, Efe. 2017. “A Multilayered Approach to Public Diplomacy Evaluation: Pathways of Connection.” Politics & Policy 45(5): 879–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12227.Skoog, Louise. 2021. “Where Did the Party Conflicts Go? How Horizontal Specialization in Political Systems Affects Party Conflicts.” Politics & Policy 49(2): 390–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12397.

Influence of the Constitutional Court on the transformation of vital national interests of Bosnia and Herzegovina

ABSTRACT The presented research is relevant, as the Constitutional Court of Bosnia has certain extremely specific powers that can determine the specifics of the legal nature of this state. The purpose of the article is to study of the influence of the Constitutional Court on the vital national interests of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). Within the framework of this study, a set of methods was used, the central of which was the method of systems analysis, which allowed the author to analyse the degree of participation of the constitutional control body in ensuring the stability of the law-making process. It was revealed that the implementation of the constitutional project is associated with ensuring the parity of interests of constitutive peoples and making the state mechanism provided in the Constitution effective. It was concluded that the Constitutional Court significantly influenced the change in the structure and content of the institution of protection of vital interests in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Prosecutorial activity in the light of additional guarantees of proper execution at the federal level of decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation

The article considers the prosecutor's activity in the context of the proper execution at the federal level of decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (the highest judicial body of constitutional control), taking into account additional guarantees established by the legislator. Ensuring that law enforcement agencies take into account the positions of the supreme judicial body of constitutional control within the framework of the current legal system is a necessary element of maintaining the rule of law and order in the country. A special role in this process is assigned to the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation, which interacts with the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation within its competence, can inform the President of the Russian Federation in appropriate cases, and also applies response measures against supervised federal state authorities. The author also analyzes the reasons for the improper execution of decisions of the supreme judicial body of constitutional control, which are highlighted in scientific publications on this issue.

Hans Kelsen's Normative Theory as a Basis for Understanding the Legal Nature of the Constitutional Court Acts

The paper is devoted to certain provisions of the Hans Kelsen’s pure doctrine of law (normativism). Based on an analysis of legal and doctrinal sources, the author attempts to find the most accurate concept for the status of decisions of the constitutional court as a judicial body of constitutional control. The identification of the theoretical foundations for a clear definition of the boundary between rule making and law enforcement is one of the most important problems of law. The situation of the constitutional control bodies is of particular interest. The status of the constitutional court as a judicial body of constitutional control implies that its acts are generally binding on the entire territory of the state. The question of the legal nature of these decisions, which in Russian science initially belonged to the number of debatable ones, deserves attention. Longterm disputes, however, have not yielded positive results; have not revealed the fundamental foundations on which it would be possible to develop the doctrine of the guarantees of the constitution. Thus, the decisions of the constitutional court are equated with both law enforcement acts and sources of law that exist in the form of a precedent or even in the form of a special normative act.

Constitutional control in the post-soviet states: general and distinctive features

This paper discusses a number of issues related to the structure, status and powers of constitutional control bodies in the post-Soviet countries. The differences between these institutions and the body of constitutional control of Ukraine are analyzed. Particular attention is focused on the key features of the constitutional review body in each of the countries. Thus, a key feature of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is its right to abolish normative legal acts not only at the federal level, but also by the subjects of the federation. Studying the provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus, it should be noted that the Constitutional Court of Belarus is empowered to decide issues on the compliance of acts of the Supreme Economic Court with the provisions of the Constitution. A key feature of the Kazakhstan constitutional review body is the powers it has been given to review only those laws passed by parliament that have not yet been signed by the President. A specific feature of the status of judges of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania is the consolidation of sufficiently high qualifications for candidates in the provisions of the Constitution. No judge can hold office for no more than one term, which is 9 years. The system of constitutional control in Georgia cannot boast of a large number of features. So, they include the absence of a separate section in the Constitution that would regulate the procedure for carrying out constitutional proceedings, as in most countries – only a separate article is devoted to this provision. On the basis of the conducted advancement of the proponation of the idea and the provision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, more importantly, from the dispute, the competence of the state bodies is based. It is proponated to propose the lineage of the seat of the court.

SOME ASPECTS OF THE ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONING OF REGIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

The development of the institution of constitutional control emphasizes the importance of the Constitution as an act that establishes the basis of the legal status of the individual, the structure and relationship of state bodies and the basis of the legal status of the state at the international level. The peculiarities of the organization of the activities of specialized bodies of constitutional justice and other bodies of constitutional control in foreign countries are of considerable scientific interest. In countries with a federal form of territorial structure, both a federal body of constitutional control and similar bodies in the subjects of the federation can be created. From the point of view of the considered problems, the experience of the constitutional justice of the Federal states of Germany is instructive. The organization of their work and the results of their activities are considered to be among the most successful on the European continent. Most often, the terms of reference of the German land courts are determined by analogy with the Federal Constitutional Court. The paper notes that the experience of the functioning of constitutional justice in the federal states of Germany can be used in the organization of the system of regional constitutional control in Russia in the context of the ongoing processes of its reform.

The Legal Positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the Execution of Decisions Made by the European Court of Human Rights

Amendments to the Russian take effect on 4 July2020. In Chapter 3, Structure, of the of the Russian Federation there is a provision for a set of amendments specifying the status of constitutional law in the Russian Federation regarding domestic and international/interstate relations as well as relating to questions of Russian national/state identity and guarantees of its preservation and protection. On 15 January 2020 in the Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly a number of constitutional amendments were proposed for discussion, including the introduction of certain changes to the of the Russian Federation. These changes will be guaranteed priority in Russia's legal framework. President Vladimir Putin noted that, requirements of international law and treaties as well as decisions of international bodies can be valid on Russian territory only to the point that they do not restrict the rights and freedoms of our people and citizens and do not contradict our Constitution The topicality of considering the relationship between national and international court jurisdictions is predetermined by the fact that Russia has ratified Protocol No. 15. On 1 May 2017 a federal law-ratifying protocol establishing a subsidiary role of the European Court of Human Rights was signed. Such a role, in addition to the national mechanism of the judicial protection of human rights, is necessary to implement judicial protection, primarily in Russian courts including the Supreme Court (which is the highest court for civil, economic, criminal and administrative cases and which also protects human rights and freedoms by considering cassation and supervisory complaints against final and binding court rulings) and the Constitutional Court (which, as the highest court body of constitutional control, considers cases of citizens' complaints about the violation of constitutional rights and freedoms by a law applied by state bodies). At the current level of legal development, there are both a necessity and practical possibility of altering approaches to the implementation of international rules. This paper considers the correlation of national and international law. On the basis of decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the so-called request for the applicability of decisions of the European Court of Human Righ ts, legal views are given on the applicability of international rules by Russian courts, including their interpretation by international court institutions. The revised version of Article 101 of the Federal Constitutional Law on the Constitutional Court, which makes it possible to apply to the Constitutional Court contrary to an official ECHR decision, has been in effect since 2014.

The Constitutional Court of Ukraine: Some Discussion Questions about Its Place in the Modern State Mechanism

The constitutional reform in the field of justice in 2016 led to the development of the institution of constitutional justice in Ukraine. As a result of constitutional changes, the scientific discussion on the legal nature and place of the Constitutional Court in the mechanism of the state has become especially relevant. The Constitutional Court is a legal institution, but it operates in both the system of legal and the system of political relations. Many of the decisions adopted by him on the basis of the Constitution have political and legal content and significance. If the Constitutional Court declares acts or their individual provisions unconstitutional, they shall cease to be valid. Therefore, the bodies of constitutional control are called "negative lawmakers". However, in some cases they are also "positive legislators", which also characterizes the legal nature of the Constitutional Court, as its legal positions are characterized by normative-interpretative, generalizing nature and universality. The article is devoted to the study of the legal nature and place of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the modern mechanism of the state. In essence, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is the highest constitutional body and occupies a special place in the system of separation of powers. By changing the status of the Constitutional Court as the only body of constitutional jurisdiction, the 2016 constitutional reform significantly changed its nature: it became an independent body of constitutional control, equidistant from the legislative, executive, judicial bodies and president. On certain grounds, the Constitutional Court is above these bodies, because through the exercise of constitutional control, this body can influence their activities by resolving cases on the constitutionality of acts issued by them and the official interpretation of the Constitution of Ukraine

Конституционный Суд Российской Федерации в свете конституционной реформы 2020 года: некоторые вопросы теории и практики

Based on the study of historical and legal material, theoretical and practical generalizations, the article examines the issues of organizational and functional reform of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the light of the constitutional reforms of 2020 and the impact of this process on the establishment of the Russian constitutional system in its modern sense. Certain aspects of the functioning of the constitutional control bodies of foreign state-legal systems are analyzed. The purpose of the study is to determine the structural changes in the Russian legislation, their impact on the political and legal status of the federal body of constitutional control and trends in the development of the system of interaction of the highest state authorities. It is shown that constitutional changes have a systemic impact on both the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the constitutional system of the Russian state as a whole. The author draws attention to the possibility of functioning of a democratic state only if there is an independent and independent federal body of constitutional control.

О НЕОБХОДИМОСТИ СОЗДАНИЯ КОНСТИТУЦИОННОГО СУДА В РЕСПУБЛИКЕ КРЫМ

The article discusses the feasibility of establishing the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Crimea, analyzes the functioning of the judicial system in the Republic of Crimea, and concludes that it is necessary to create a body of constitutional control at the local level, which would be able to resolve current problems in a timely manner. The legislation regulating the creation and functioning of constitutional (statutory) courts in the subjects of the Russian Federation is analyzed, the activities of the constitutional (statutory) courts functioning today in the subjects of the Russian Federation are considered, the positive and negative sides are identified. The corresponding changes in the legislation necessary for the effective functioning of the system of constitutional courts in the subjects of the Russian Federation and in the Republic of Crimea are proposed.