RUDN Journal of Law

The sanctions practice of modern states is introducing increasingly sophisticated methods of political, economic, trade, organizational and legal restrictions, which constitute an institutional strategy of multi-vector impact on the "target state". A special legal institution of counter-sanction measures and instruments of the corresponding sanctions policy is becoming a necessary part of the mechanism for implementing external functions of the defending sovereign state. The multiplicity of sanctions restrictions and the emergence of hybrid restrictive measures give special significance to the development of effective sanctions legislation at the level of individual states and international organizations. The purpose of this article is to study the normative legal foundations of the sanctions policy of states in their historical retrospective. This article applies comparative legal methodology, formal legal analysis and historical and theoretical description of the formation of classical restrictive and punitive sanctions. The final conclusions show that the sanctions strategy of states is gradually being transformed towards expanding the list of methods for its practical implementation (in the form of sectoral sanctions, freezing of assets, sanctions lists, tracking trade with the enemy, control of smuggling and shadow fleets, extraterritorial influence on neutral countries, “controlled technological backwardness”, application of “moral embargo”, etc.). The authors summarize that the so-called “sanctions war” has become a natural result of the introduction of counter-sanctions in practice as retaliatory measures of the state and the international principle of reciprocity, which means the right to equality and mutual respect between states.

The field of public relations within the realm of legislative processes of the state undergoes theoretical and legal analysis. These social relations, which arise from the implementation of legislative activities by legislative entities, are proposed to be regarded as a form of legal relationships with their inherent structure encompassing the object, subjects, and content represented by relevant subjective rights and legal obligations. The article examines the scholarly context that has emerged within Russian jurisprudence in connection with the theoretical framework of legislative relationships. It acknowledges that despite the existence of critical viewpoints regarding this category and fragmentation in its use, it holds clear prospects for more active integration within scholarly discourse. The article establishes that this form of legal relationships indeed holds specificity determined by the nature of the activities around which legislative relationships are formed, such as the influential role in political and legal decision-making. However, this does not preclude the application of the construct of legal relationships in connection with relevant legal activities. The concept of legislative legal relationships is proposed outlining the characteristics of legislative law as the normative legal basis of legislative legal relationships. The elements of legislative relationships are delineated and scientific conclusions are formulated regarding the phenomenon of legislative relationships as a distinct form of application and implementation of law.

The article explores the 1958 “Harvard” conception of legal reasoning presented by the British philosopher and jurist Herbert Hart, within the context of a contemporary reinterpretation by American jurist and historian of legal thought, Gerald Postema. Postema’s interpretation, labeling Hart’s view as “settled-meaning positivism”, posits it as a unity that encompasses both the delineation of distinct types of argumentation in the realms of “core” and “penumbra” (linguistically mediated clear and controversial cases of law enforcement) and the reduction of law and legal reasoning to the “core” of rules and their established linguistic meanings. The article aims to analyze Postema’s perspective in the broader context of the evolution of Hart’s views on legal indeterminacy and judicial decision-making. The relevance of this topic lies in the necessity for a more comprehensive and balanced reconstruction of Hart’s theory, which is paradigmatic for modern positivism and Anglophone jurisprudence, in the light of the contentious and narrow character of its assessments. The authority of the Postema’s interpretation, seen as providing new insights into the work of the British jurist, adds to the relevance of this analysis. The research uses diverse, primarily hermeneutical, methods, drawing from Postema’s paper and the available body of Hart’s writings, as well as the representative biographical and scientific literature. The article examines the historical context of the 1958 essay’s creation and the doctrine of judicial reasoning contained within it. Ultimately, while recognizing the stimulating role of Postema’s re-description of the 1958 doctrine, the article finds some of its key assertions (including Hart’s understanding of the nature of legal indeterminacy and judicial choice, the attribution of “settle-meaning positivism”, and a doctrine of the rule of law) to be contentious or unwarranted.

Restrictions in labor law constitute a significant component of the content of the acts of the International Labor Organization’s regulatory framework, serving as vital instruments for governing labor relations at both the international and national levels. Particularly in the context of globalization, digitalization and proliferation of non-standard employment arrangements, these restrictions play a crucial role in safeguarding employee rights and maintaining stability in labor regulation. In 2023 report of the ILO Committee of Experts highlighted issues concerning the misalignment of Russian legislation with the international norms outlined in ILO Conventions Nos. 81, 87, 98, 100, and 111. Employing formal legal and comparative legal methodologies, this report conducts a comprehensive analysis of restrictions pertaining to trade union representation, the right to strike, prevention of sexual harassment and protection from mobbing, challenges related to gender and racial equality in the labor sphere and the operations of labor inspections. The study delves into the experiences of various foreign countries (France, India, Hungary, Finland, Sweden, USA, Great Britain, and Germany) in addressing these issues, and proposes strategies for enhancing Russian labor legislation to align with ILO conventions. Furthermore, through a systematic examination of law-making and law enforcement practices of the ILO, it provides a refined interpretation of the concept of “restriction in labor law”. The novelty of this work also lies in its integrated approach, analyzing labor and legal restrictions within the international and national legal systems of states. This study fills a gap left by previous fragmented research efforts that did not specifically address restrictions in labor law.

The concept of administrative prejudice, which enables the imposition of criminal liability for repeated commission of an administrative offense, has been the subject of sustained scrutiny among scholars. This attention is driven by starkly contrasting doctrinal viewpoints on the appropriateness of utilizing administrative prejudice as a method of criminalization. Given the substantial and noteworthy arguments presented by both opponents and detractors of the criminalizing repeated administrative offenses, it is impractical to comprehensively address them in a single publication. Hence, it is justifiable to endeavor to evaluate key arguments put forth by scholars, including their linkage between administrative prejudice and the longstanding legal principle of non bis in idem. The aim of this study is to assess administrative prejudice within the framework of the principle of non bis in idem. The research methodology is rooted in dialectical materialism, employing both general scientific (system-structural, formal-logical, inductive and deductive, analysis and synthesis) and specific (formal-legal, comparative-legal) methods. The findings indicate that the domestic legislator does not appear to contravene the tenets of the non bis in idem principle by enacting norms involving administrative prejudice. A generous interpretation of this principle, which precludes taking into account prior offenses when addressing subsequent ones, is deemed unwarranted. Steadfastly holding that administrative prejudice is compatible with the principle of non bis in idem should logically necessitate proponents of this position to challenge several other established institutions and norms that require consideration of pre-criminal conduct, particularly recidivism and criminal record, essentially entailing an assessment of the “dangerous state of the individual”.

Theoretical aspects concerning the safeguarding of medical information pertaining to individuals with mental disorders, minors and prisoners are expored in this article. The heightened risks of unauthorized access to such information by external parties have been identified, promoting a doctrinal reevaluation of the protective measures. Through the analysis of prevailing approaches to constitutional and legal guarantees, the article proposes a phramework for delineating primary, specific, and auxiliary measures for ensuring the protection of medical information. Employing the scientific methods of analysis, synthesis, systematization and classification, the article discerns the particular attributes of each category of guarantees, aiming to enhance their effecacy. Notably, emphasis is placed on constitutional and legal provisions aimed at preventing unlawful access to medical information by external entities.

The Indian judiciary is evolving at a rapid pace by integrating digital technologies. Under the eCourts project, new digital service centres are being created in the courts that connect the traditional court system and the modern digital infrastructure, providing various online services and also assisting in filing cases electronically. Virtual courtrooms are being introduced, guidelines for litigation conducted through information and telecommunication means are being developed. The introduction of the new Digital Personal Data Protection Act facilitates the beginning of the creation and development of specialized legislation corresponding to the digital age. The objective of this study is to analyze theoretical data on the nature of online dispute resolution in India. Empirical methods such as description, comparison, as well as general logical methods such as analysis, deduction, etc. are used. Conclusions are made about the contradictory nature of online resolution of civil disputes in India. Contemporaries share two positions. Some believe that the introduction of information technology in the activities of the courts creates high risks for the security and privacy of data and the lack of digital literacy will contribute to this, while others believe that the future belongs to virtual courts and online dispute resolution.

The article examines the issues surrounding the definition of the concept and establishment of the content of specific types of legal guarantees that ensure the implementation of mechanisms for fulfilling tax obligations in the context of digitalization. The purpose of the article is to substantiate the relevance of studying legal guarantees for fulfilling tax obligations in the digital age, as well as to define the concept of such guarantees based on their value in ensuring the development of digital taxation. As a result of the conducted research, the following types of legal guarantees for implementing such mechanisms are outlined: the powers of tax authorities ensuring the fulfillment of tax obligations, which are evolving in the conditions of digitalization; high-quality tax legislation regulating the digital mechanisms for fulfilling tax obligations; uniform judicial practice and the formation of legal positions by courts on issues concerning the fulfillment of tax obligations in the era of digitalization; the mechanism of trust relations between taxpayers and tax authorities, which in the digital age is based on the application of tax compliance procedures and mediation as an alternative way to resolve tax disputes. With respect to each of the guarantees, the author analyzes their content and formulates the main problems and prospects for implementing tax and legal norms governing specific aspects of legal assurance of tax obligations during the digital period of tax relation development.

-

-