Russian Law Journal (RLJ)
Not a member yet
210 research outputs found
Sort by
No full textThis article discusses the current trends in Russian legal doctrine and legislation on aligning the legal status of women and men, taking into account the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights.It analyzes and critically reflects upon the gender aspects and content of those branches of Russian law in which such aspects are most clearly represented, either objectively or by tradition – techniques for gender neutralization of legal norms, the establishment of gender privileges and gender restrictions in legal status.Constitutional law: the basic premise of gender equality, preferential treatment for certain categories of citizens, gender limitations; problems of quotas for women’s representation in government, administration and other structures, provisions for women’s representation in party electoral lists, etc.Criminal Law: trends in the gender neutralization of crimes of a sexual nature while maintaining criminal responsibility for offenses against pregnant women, etc.; gender neutralization of preferential treatment in the punishment of persons with children.Family Law: Russia’s traditional view of marriage and parenthood; privileges for women in the divorce process, disputes about children, maintenance obligations; gender restrictions on adoption, assisted reproductive technologies; variants of gender neutralization of some family law norms.Labor law: the preservation of absolute protection of the rights and interests of pregnant women and mothers of young children; the trend for gender neutralization of the legal status of parents of young children; continued restrictions on women’s access to certain areas of work.Analysis of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights shows that on a number of gender equality aspects in Russian legislation and law enforcement practice, the views of these courts differ greatly. At the same time, there is a convergence of views on certain issues (for example, on the implementation of the legal status of persons with family responsibilities)
No full textReviewed book: Vladimir Lebedev and Elena Radevich (eds.) Labour Law in Russia: Recent Developments and New Challenges (Adapt University Press 2014)
No full textThe II Annual Symposium of the journal Herald of Civil Procedure ‘2015: The Civil Procedure 2.0: Reform and Current State’ took place on October 9, 2015, at the Faculty of Law of Kazan (Volga region) Federal University.The Symposium is now an established tradition for the University. In 2015 it brought together in Kazan eminent scholars of civil procedure from cities across the whole of Russia: Moscow, St. Petersburg, Saratov, Ekaterinburg, Omsk, Samara, Nizhnekamsk and others. This large-scale event attracted the attention not only of Russian scholars, but also of legal scholars from abroad: Elisabetta Silvestri (Professor, University of Pavia, Italy), William B. Simons (Professor, University of Tartu, Estonia), Jaroslav Turlukovsky (Professor, Warsaw University, Poland), Stuart H. Schultz (Practising Attorney, USA), Irina Izarova (Associate Professor, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine).The opening ceremony of the Symposium began with greetings to all participants and best wishes for productive discussions. Participants were welcomed with remarks by Marat Khairullin, Deputy Chair of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan, Radik Ilyasov, Head of the Federal Bailiff Service of the Republic of Tatarstan, and Ildar Tarkhanov, Academic Supervisor at the Faculty of Law. They expressed their appreciation for the great value of the journal Herald of Civil Procedure in the growth of the science of civil procedure and enforcement procedure, and for its contributions to the development of the judicial system of the Russian Federation.In addition to hearing prepared reports and discussing viewpoints on current issues of civil and arbitration procedure, participants attended presentations by representatives from procedural law periodicals in the frame of the Symposium. The Editor-in-Chief of Herald of Civil Procedure, Damir Valeev, and the Commercial Director of the Statut Publishing House (Moscow), Kirill Samoilov, presented new books in the series ‘Classics of Civil Procedure,’ which is a joint publication of the University and Statut. Editors of law periodicals noted this great event, too. Professor Vladimir Gureev introduced the first publication of the new scientific and practical journal Herald of Enforcement Procedure and Professor Dmitry Maleshin presented the new book Eurasian civil procedure: the 25th anniversary of the CIS and Baltic countries. The conference topics were devoted to the actual issues facing civil procedure and enforcement procedure in the Russian Federation, and in other countries, too
A Critical Analysis of the Recent Russian Regulation on Credit Rating Agencies
Full text linkSince the recent financial crisis of 2008, credit rating agencies (CRAs) have been under scrutiny for their role in the proliferation of structured finance products. Whether their methodological tools and evaluations have been up to standard is in question. As is well-known, CRAs are multinational enterprises that operate on a global basis. Their evaluations may well hinder the stability of international markets. As a legal response to the many concerns raised about CRAs, different approaches have been applied to the use of credit ratings in the US and EU with many similarities. In this international scenario, the government of the Russian Federation also recently introduced a new regulation on CRAs, drafted on the lines of the European regulation. This short paper is targeted to inform the reader of certain aspects of the newly approved regulation in Russia and to examine – in a comparative way – whether the introduced rules match the expectations behind the initiatives of the Russian government
No full textThe 1990s in Russia were marked by major political and economic reforms. Those significant transformations inevitably changed relations within society, and the legal regulations that were supposed to control them demanded a considerable change as well
No full textThe most recent and effective method to resolve aconflict between countries is information war. Information warfare, i.e. propaganda, information sabotage, blackmail, could be more damaging than the effects of the traditional methods of war. The government must be prepared to prevent and counteract the bleeding-edge techniques of warfare that is to work out measures, to oppose enemy’s information weapons , to gain information superiority , to develop a society thatis immune to disinformation, to elaborate a concept of information warfare counteraction.The authors have examined both foreign and Russian sources of law which define the requirements for the government activities to oppose information warfare. They also refer to the opinions of foreign and Russian researchers, politicians and public figures who have commented on the concept and features of such political and legal constructs as information warfare and information weapons. The problem of information warfare must be identified as a profoundly serious and damaging threat. This paper provides the features of information warfare and the methods to resist it as well as the proposals to amend the domestic legislation to create conditions for an accurate understanding of this political and legal phenomenon. In addition, it points out that the amendment of the Information Security Doctrine is not sufficient to counterbalance the threat of information warfare. In a certain document it is necessary to recount all notions, requirements and methods for the government actions aimed to gradually change the situation, particularly, the development of sectoral (information security) legislation, specialists training to be able to deal with informational and psychological aggression forming public opinion through the government-run mass media, etc
Mediationo of Labour Disputes in Kazakhstan in Comparative Context
Full text linkThe authors undertake an analysis of features of mediation in individual labour disputes settlement in the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation. The current paper also analyzes the experience of some foreign countries (USA, UK, Germany), based on a study which suggests the ways of improving the mediation institution in Kazakhstan. In addition, the identified advantages of mediation as an extra-judicial regulation of labour disputes, the authors point out the identified shortcomings of the matter in new the Labour Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Relevance of the topic is reasoned to the fact that in the 21st century extra-judicial settlement of disputes is preferred worldwide these days. In this context, it is no exception to the regulation of individual labour disputes without appealing to the courts. It demonstrates the role and significance of the introduction and development of conciliation procedures, including mediation, without diminishing the importance of other remedies to protect labour rights and freedoms provided in the labour legislation. An analysis of Kazakhstan’s and Russia’s procedural laws indicates a steady trend of expansion of alternative legal ways of disputes settlement in general, and particularly in labour disputes, including disputes between economic agents (employer and employee), which seems to be responded to the modern development of economic relations. Extrajudicial ways of conflict resolution may be undertaken not only by jurisdictional, but also by non-judicial mechanisms that are in the beginning stage of formation as alternative ways of resolving labour disputes at this period of Kazakhstan’s development
No full textContemporary authors often overstate the differences within the human rights regimes in the Russian Federation and the United States. This article is meant to provide insight into why the two systems, although taking markedly different developmental paths, have come to be far more similar than is often realized. The first question raised is, how did the two human rights systems develop historically? The next question is, how did the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and its subsequent split into two separate Covenants affect the rights within each system? The third question raised is, what modern advancements have taken place within each system? And finally, what failures within each system are also demonstrative of similarities within the two systems? Thus, the article begins by tracing historical developments within the two systems in order to elucidate regional variances that exist, and to explain how such variance materialized. Next, the article will provide concrete examples by comparing specific rights – such as the right to a public education, the right to social security, the right to participate in political life, and the right to privately own land – in order to provide some insight into why the author believes the differences in the two systems are often overstated by commentators. Finally, the article will explore some shortcomings that also share marked similarities within both systems. The article concludes that while the human rights regimes within Russia and the United States took markedly different paths during their development, and have relied on vastly different political and social situations during their evolution, they have ultimately reached a much greater level of maturity and protection under the law than is often given credit
No full textThis paper explores the ambiguous nature of two principles of international law – self-determination and territorial integrity – illustrating the controversial nuances of international law on a political level, nuances with which the Crimean crisis has been described. Multiple paradigms will be applied to interpret the juristic status of the quoted principles. The foundation of this research is the collision between Russia and the West over the legal interpretation of these two principles throughout history and particularly in the case of Crimea. From the very beginning, the legal interpretation of the situation in Crimea was that Russia’s legal rhetoric was groundless and that her legal justification for the secession of Crimea was simply not plausible, and therefore could not be linked to either legal or moral theories. After exposing the fragility of these principles in international law, the paper then concludes by proposing an alternative approach that utilizes a different philosophical logic, thus further illustrating the hidden nature of such contradictions in politics
Do Legal Rights Correlate to Development?
Full text linkAs far as correlation does not mean causation, even it found a high correlation between some legal rights and economical parameters, it doesn’t mean that the latter are caused by legal dimensions only. However, if strong correlations exist between some legal rights and some socioeconomic outcomes, this is a good argument for policy makers to improve situation with proper legal rights which highly correlate with their first priority, that of socioeconomic policy aims. It’s important to know the real impact of improving legal rights for society to avoid overestimation or underestimation of this impact. Also, regarding the increase in the amount of different international ratings of legal rights, the question which is more reliable should be raised (“competition of ratings”). The correlation analysis shows that “economic oriented” legal rights such as like property and intellectual property are relatively more correlated with GDP per capita. On the other hand, political rights and civil freedoms such as the right not to be tortured unlawfully detained are relatively more correlated with social progress as a more complex and general socio-economic outcome. At the same time there is no high correlation observed between legal rights and life expectanc