Abstract: The subject of the study is the turnout of citizens to vote and the legal consequences associated with it. The problem lies in the different understanding of democracy, namely, what is meant by the majority of votes when making a political decision. There are three approaches: the decision should be considered adopted if the majority of citizens eligible to vote for it; the decision should be considered adopted if the majority of those who took part in the voting voted for it and at least fifty percent of citizens from the total number of citizens eligible to vote participated in the voting; the decision should be considered adopted if the majority of citizens who took part in the voting voted for and the percentage of citizens who voted out of the total number of citizens eligible to vote does not matter. The main conclusions of the study are: the electoral legislation distinguishes between two approaches to determining the turnout of citizens – the number of citizens who came to vote and the number of citizens who voted; the expression of will during voting can be active and silent (the silent expression of will of citizens, i.e. non-participation in voting, is not always indifferent, but can take into account the assessment of the political situation in the time of a particular vote); to determine the impact of the turnout of citizens on the reliability of determining the will of the people, first of all, it is necessary to distinguish between the actual and predicted turnout of citizens; by itself, the turnout of citizens does not affect the reliability of determining the will of the people (the reliability of determining the will of the people (the reliability of the will to make a political decision), as well as the turnout of citizens (the reliability of the will to participate in voting) is influenced by the conditions of voting, which must be guaranteed.

Abstract: The subject of this study is the constitutional assurance of the validity of the will of the people when voting, as well as the theoretical and practical problems that arise in this case.
In resolving this issue, the key is the problem of determining the nature of the will and the will of the people. The scientific problem raised concerns the correlation of the will of the people with its expression, as well as the establishment of a constitutional and legal connection between democracy and the expression of the will of the people. In practical terms, the scientific problem posed is manifested in the existence of a threat to the constitutional system in the form of the possibility of reflecting the distorted will of the people in the constitutionally significant voting results.

The author suggests proceeding from the non-contractual nature of the general volitional act of the people in direct forms of democracy, which is understood as a political decision taken by a majority of votes in the absence of an agreed (unanimous) expression of the will of all citizens (the theory of real democracy). In contrast to this approach, the theory of the social contract proceeds from the contractual nature of the general volitional act of the people, which is understood as a social contract based on the agreed (unanimous) will of all citizens (the theory of ideal democracy). It is concluded that due to the non-contractual nature of the general volitional act of the people, the legal consequences of making a political decision should apply to all citizens of the state, including both those citizens who expressed their will against such a decision and those citizens who did not express their will.
The novelty of the proposed provisions lies in the differentiation of the will and the will of the citizen, as well as the differentiation of the will (the general will of the people) and the will of the people (the general will of the people).

Abstract: The subject of the study is democracy and approaches to its definition through the prism of revealing the will of the people, as well as issues of the implementation of democracy in constitutional and legal reality. The author examines in detail the necessary and sufficient conditions for the implementation of democracy on the basis of three approaches. The first approach defines democracy as the participation of all (the people) in public administration. The second approach is widespread in jurisprudence and expresses the totality of a different set of legal conditions and procedures, as well as relationships regarding the delegation of power from the people to the public administration. The third approach, which has appeared quite recently in science, is a kind of synthesis of the first two, but is focused on the result of procedural aspects of democracy.
  The thesis concept is based on the following political and legal postulates of understanding democracy, state power and elections: 1) the objective regularity of any state power is its desire to continue to possess it; 2) a democratic state is more effective than an undemocratic one, since it has legal institutions that allow limiting the usurpation of state power by any one political force; 3) a democratic state differs from an undemocratic one by the possibility of changing political power nonviolently through elections, the result which is not predetermined in advance.
By virtue of the first postulate, in the electoral systems of states, there is a possibility of seizing and retaining state power in violation of democracy by distorting the will of the people, since the state authorities of the previous composition, acting as organizers of the elections, are interested in maintaining the status quo.
In this connection, a comprehensive mechanism is needed to limit the possibility of usurpation of state power during elections at the stages of organizing voting, summarizing its results and establishing the results of elections (referendums).

Abstract: Accurate determination of the place of preliminary investigation indicates adherence to the principle of legality in criminal proceedings and the achievement of goals on the protection of rights and lawful interests of the affected parties, as well as on protection of individual from wrongful and unfounded accusations and restrictions of their rights and freedoms. Science addresses the general questions pertaining to determination of the place of preliminary investigation, but does not give due attention to realization of discretionary powers of the higher investigating authority to determination of the place of preliminary investigation. The article reveals the essential conditions for application of such power by the investigating authority, and analyzes case law for compliance with these conditions. The conclusion is made that legislation does not contain clear and specific rules for determination of the place of preliminary investigation, including the territorial jurisdiction of advocating for the election or extension of pre-trial detention. The author describes the flaws in legal regulation associated with the possibility of determination of jurisdiction of a case in administrative proceedings, by means of law enforcement decision prior to the emergence of legal situation (for example, before  submission of a request for the election or extension of pre-trial detention) by lowering the rank of investigating authority, for example to district level. From the practical perspective, elimination of such flaws should facilitate the proper application of the corresponding legal norm, as well as accurate determination of the place of preliminary investigation.