Cover Page


The article reveals the essential characteristics of justice as a specific type of state activity; identifies the main features of justice that distinguish it, on the one hand, from other types of state activity, and on the other - from other types of judicial activity. The purpose of this article is to identify and analyze the features of justice in its modern sense. The versatility of this legal category as an ambivalent definition is reflected in its various characteristics, through the consideration of which the most general definition of justice is formulated in the work. The methodological basis of the article is the modern achievements of the theory of knowledge. In the course of research theoretical, General philosophical (dialectics, system method, analysis, synthesis, deduction), traditional legal methods (formal-logical) were applied. Turning to the question of the characteristics of justice, the author touches upon the problem of its broad and narrow understanding due to the increasing role of mediation, conciliation and arbitration as alternative forms of resolution of legal conflicts, as well as in connection with the empowerment of certain state bodies of jurisdictional powers, and concludes that, unlike a number of foreign countries, justice in Russia can be carried out only by state courts. Of considerable interest is also the study of the subject area of justice, which is related to the situation of legal conflict. In this context, the author's analysis of the concept of "legal conflict" and his proposed differentiation of such conflicts into types with subsequent consideration of each of them is quite legitimate. In the context of the formation of the new Russian statehood, the arbitration sign of justice acquired a different sound, which is considered in the work from the standpoint of the special jurisdictional procedural activity of the court and the situational nature of justice. Since the beginning of the modern judicial reform, objective changes in the activities of the courts associated with the emergence of simplified and writ proceedings that have simplified the procedure for the consideration and resolution of certain categories of administrative and civil cases, as well as the allocation of jurisdictional powers to other state bodies that are not part of the judiciary, but use quasi-judicial procedures, i.e. almost judicial procedures as close as possible to them, have significantly changed the attitude to the procedural form of justice, which has lost its former importance. In this regard, the author substantiates the point of view that nowadays in order to determine the qualitative nature of the jurisdictional bodies, it is necessary to identify, in particular, the distinctive features in each of the procedural forms. Revealing in more detail the content of methods and means of justice, the author touches upon the problem of correlation of this legal category with justice and on the basis of the analysis of different points of view comes to the conclusion that these concepts can not be considered as legal phenomena that coincide in whole or in part. Justice is rather an intrinsic property of justice, contributing to its perception as a social and legal value. As one of the most important signs of justice in the work is considered the state-power nature and reliability of judicial decisions, the execution of which involves the suppression of the will (freedom) or material deprivation of one of the parties with the use in certain cases of power and force of the state. In this regard, some attention is paid to the characterization of the binding nature of the judgment as one of its essential properties. Examining justice as categories which help to reveal the contents and legal merits of this form of state activity, in the definition of the given concept into a single, unified definition.

About the authors

Olga V Pankova

O.E. Kutafin University

Author for correspondence.
Email: pancova_olga@list.ru
9, Sadovaya-Kudrinskaya st., Moscow, Russia, 123242

candidate of law Sciences, associate Professor, Department of administrative law and process, O.E. Kutafin University


  1. Argunov, V.V. (2017) Kakim bit osobomy proizvodstvy po administrativnim delam: k proekty izmenenii v KAS RF [How to be a special procedure in the administrative court: the draft amendments to the CAJ RF]. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosydiia Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Bulletin of economic justice of the Russian Federation]. (3), 62-75. (in Russian).
  2. Bonner, A.T. (2005) Izbrannie trudi po grazhdanskomu processu [Selected works on civil procedure]. Saint-Petersburg, SPbGU, pp. 992. (in Russian).
  3. Cappelletti M., Vigoriti V. (514) Fundamental Guarantees of the Litigants in Civil Procedure: Italy // Fundamental Guarantees of the Parties in Civil Litigation (Studies in National, International and Comparative Law) / еd. By M. Cappelletti, D. Tallon. Milano - Dott. A. Giuffre Editore. Dobbs Ferry, New York - Oceana Publications, Inc. P. 514. (in French).
  4. Chepurnova, N.M. (1999) Sudebnaia vlast v Rossiiskoi Federatsii: problemi teorii i gosudarstvenno-pravovoi praktiki [Judicial power in the Russian Federation: problems of theory and state legal practice]. Dissertation of Doctor of Legal Sciences. Rostov state university. (in Russian).
  5. Degtiarev, S.L. (2008) Realizatsia sudebnoi vlasti v grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve (teoretiko-prikladnie problemi) [Implementation of judicial power in civil proceedings (theoretical and applied problems)]. Dissertation of Doctor of Legal Sciences. Ural state law academy. (in Russian).
  6. Fokina, M.A. (2006) Sistema celei dokazivania v grazhdanskom i arbitrazhnom processe: obschie polozhenia [System of the purposes of proof in civil and arbitration proceeding: general provisions]. Arbitrazhnii i grazhdanskii process [Arbitration and civil proceeding]. (4), pp. 25-36. (in Russian).
  7. Fursov, D.A. (2005) Spravedlivost kak fundamentalnaia cennost arbitrazhnogo i grazhdanskogo processa [Justice as a fundamental value of arbitration and civil proceeding]. Rossiiskii ezhegodnik grazhdanskogo i arbitrazhnogo processa [Russian Yearbook of the civil and arbitration proceeding]. (4), pp. 50-59. (in Russian).
  8. Galuzin, A.F. (1996) Pravonarushenie v publichnom i chastnom prave [Offence in public and private law]. Author's Abstract of Dissertation of PhD in law. Saratov state economic academy. (in Russian).
  9. Галузин А.Ф. Правонарушение в публичном и частном праве: автореф. дис. канд. юрид. наук. Саратов, 1996.
  10. Grevtsov, Y.I. (2001) Sotsiologia prava [Sociology of law]. Saint-Petersburg, Yridicheskiy centr Press, pp. 312. (in Russian).
  11. Gromoshina, N.A. (2010) Differentsiatsia i unifikatsia v grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve [Differentiation and unification in civil proceedings]. Dissertation of Doctor of Legal Sciences. Moscow state law academy named after O. E. Kutafin. (in Russian).
  12. Hudoikina, T.V. (2002) Yuridicheskii konflikt (teoretiko-prikladnoe issledovanie) [Legal conflict (theoretical and applied research)]. Author's Abstract of Dissertation of Doctor of Legal Sciences. Nizhny Novgorod academy of MIA of Russia. (in Russian).
  13. Iacelenko, B.N. (1996) Protivorechia ugolovno-processualnogo regulirovania [Contradictions of the criminal procedure regulation]. Moscow, MYI MVD. (in Russian).
  14. Kleandrov, M.I. (2006) Ekonomicheskoe pravosudie v Rossii: proshloe, nastoiashee, budushee [Economic justice in Russia: past, present, future]. Moscow, Volters Kluver, pp. 600.(in Russian).
  15. Kosolapov, M.F. (2001) Sud v sisteme gosudarstvennoi vlasti Rossiiskoi Federatsii (konstitutsionnie aspekti) [Court in the system of state power of the Russian Federation (constitutional aspects)]. Author's Abstract of Dissertation of PhD in law. Saratov state academy of law. (in Russian).
  16. Kudriavtsev, V.N. (ed.) (1995) Yuridicheskaia konfliktologiia [Legal conflictology]. Moscow. IGiP RAN. (in Russian).
  17. Kudriavtsev, V.N. (1997) Yuridicheskaia konfliktologiia [Legal conflictology]. Vestnik RAN [Herald of the RAS]. 67 (2), pp. 125-129. (in Russian).
  18. Lebedev, V.M., Habrieva, T.I. (ed) (2017) Justice in the modern world. Moscow, Norma, Infra-M. (in Russian).
  19. Luparev, E.B. (2003) Obschaia teoriia administrativno-pravovovo spora [General theory of administrative legal dispute]. Voronezh, Voronezhskii gosudarstvennii universitet. (in Russian).
  20. Morschakova, T.G. (ed.) (2012) Standarti spravedlivogo pravosudia (mezhhdunarodnie i natsionalnie praktiki) [Standards of fair justice (international and national practices)]. Moscow, Misl. (in Russian).
  21. Nazhimov, V.P. (1970) Sud kak organ pravosudia po ugolovnim delam v SSSR [The court as body of justice in criminal cases in the USSR]. Voprosi organizatsii suda i osuschestvleniia pravosudia v SSSR [Issues of court organization and administration of justice in the USSR]. Kaliningrad, Knizshnoe izdatelstvo, 1, pp. 3-161. (in Russian).
  22. Oppetit B. (1973) Les Garanties Fondamentales des Parties dans le Proces Civil en Droit Francais // Fundamental Guarantees of the Parties in Civil Litigation (Studies in National, International and Comparative Law)/ Op. cit, p. 483. (in French).
  23. Petruhin, I. L. (ed.) (2003) Sudebnaia vlast [Judiciary]. Moscow, TK Velbi. (in Russian).
  24. Presniakov, M.V. (2008) Printsip spravedlivosti v resheniiah Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiiskoi Federatsii [The principle of justice in decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation]. Pravovedenie [Jurisprudence]. (6), pp. 48-55. (in Russian).
  25. Rabtsevich, O.I. (2005) Pravo na spravedlivoe sudebnoe razbiratelstvo: mezhdunarodnoe i vnutrigosudarstvennoe regulirovanie [Right to a fair trial: international and domestic legal regulation]. Moscow, Leks-Kniga, pp. 318. (in Russian).
  26. Riabtseva, E.V. (2008) Pravosudie v ugolovnom processe Rossii [Justice in the criminal process of Russia]. Moscow, Yurlitinform, pp. 416. (in Russian).
  27. Sahnova, T.V. (2008) Kurs grazhdanskogo processa: teoreticheskie nachala i osnovnie instituti [Civil procedure course: theoretical foundations and basic institutions]. Moscow, Volters Kluver, pp. 676. (in Russian).
  28. Serkov, P.P. (2018) K voprosu o functsionalnosti pravosudiia [On the question of the functionality of justice]. Jurnal rossiiskogo prava [Journal of Russian law]. (3), 97-105. (in Russian).
  29. Starilov, Y.N. (2004) Public administration. In: Bachrach, D.N., Rossinskii, B.V., Starilov, Y.N. (eds.) Administrativnoe pravo: Uchebnik [Administrative law: Textbook]. Moscow, Norma, pp. 928. (in Russian).
  30. Tihomirov, Y.A. (2005) Administrativnoe pravo i process: polnii kurs [Administrative law and process: full course]. Moscow, VSE, pp. 698. (in Russian).
  31. Treushnikov, M.K. (ed.) (2014) Grazhdanskii process: uchebnik [Civil procedure: Textbook]. Moscow, Statut, pp. 960. (in Russian).
  32. Voronov, A.F. (2007) Grazhdanskii process: evolucia dispozitivnosti [Civil procedure: evolution of dispositivity]. Moscow, Statut, pp. 149. (in Russian).
  33. Voskobitova, L.A. (2004) Mehanizm realizatsii sudebnoi vlasti posredstvom ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva [The implementation mechanism of the judiciary through the criminal justice]. Author's Abstract of Dissertation of Doctor of Legal Sciences. Moscow state law academy. (in Russian).
  34. Zelentsov, A.B. (2001) Konflikti v upravlenii i upravlenie konfliktami [Conflicts in management and conflict management]. Moscow, RUDN, pp. 543. (in Russian).
  35. Zelentsov, A.B. (2004) Yridicheskaia konstructsia administrativno-pravovovo spora (problemi postroeniia) [Legal structure of administrative legal dispute (problems of constructing)]. Administrativnoe i administrativno-processualnoe pravo. Actualnie problemi [Administrative and administrative procedure law. Actual problems]. Moscow, Uniti-Dana. Pp. 424-442. (in Russian).
  36. Zelentsov, A.B. (2005) Teoreticheskie osnovi pravovovo spora [The theoretical basics of the legal dispute]. Dissertation of Doctor of Legal Sciences. Peoples' friendship University of Russia. (in Russian).



Abstract - 514

PDF (Russian) - 519





  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Pankova O.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies