Khachatryan M.S. —
To the question on the actors of public expertise
// Law and Politics. – 2018. – ¹ 6.
– P. 56 - 62.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2018.6.20913
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/lpmag/article_20913.html
Read the article
Abstract: The subject of this research is the actors of public expertise. The object of this research is the public expertise as one of the forms of interaction between the state and civil society. Having analyzes the norms of the Federal Law “On the Bases of Public Control in the Russian Federation”, the author attempts to determine the groups of the actors of public expertise, analyze the role of each of them in pursuance of the research. Relevance of the topic is defined by the need for establishing the constitutional state in Russia, which is impossible without a viable civil society, capable of constantly and actively engaging in the various activities of the state, using versatile strategies, including the public control. Public expertise is one of the major forms of citizens’ participation in the lawmaking activity of the state, which allows using the intellectual potential of the society for improving the quality of lawmaking. The scientific novelty consists in examination of the actors of public expertise as one of the key elements of its model. The author concludes that the Russian model of public expertise is based on the division of functions between the different groups of the actors of public expertise (initiators, institutors, and experts. Notably, the initiators and institutors in terms of the Federal Law “On the Bases of Public Control in the Russian Federation” are determined by means of recitation, while with regards to the public experts have been established the special requirements, and all actors that meet such requirements can obtain this status. At the same time, the citizens and nongovernmental organizations as independent actors can obtain only the status of expert, due to not featuring the list of initiators or institutors of public expertise. Although, the Section 1 of the Article # of the Federal Law “On the Bases of Public Control in the Russian Federation” claims that the citizens of the Russian Federation can participate in realization of the various forms of public control, including personally. Therefore, the author detects a contradiction, pointing at the need for expanding the list of actors of public expertise (both, initiators and institutors) by including the citizens of the Russian Federation and their associations.
Khachatryan M.S. —
Limits of legal regulation of societal control (public integrity)
// Legal Studies. – 2017. – ¹ 9.
– P. 24 - 30.
DOI: 10.25136/2409-7136.2017.9.20441
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/lr/article_20441.html
Read the article
Abstract: The research subject is the limits of legal regulation of societal control as one of the instruments of civil society. The author analyzes various opinions about this issue, considers positive and negative results of legal regulation of public integrity. Special attention is given to the need to formalize such a balance of interaction between society and state, which wouldn’t infringe the interests of the parties, and in which they would effectively function and develop. The author uses dialectical, dogmatic (formal logical), system, comparative, deductive, inductive methods and the formal-legal method. The scientific novelty of the study consists in the consideration of the issue about the limits of legal regulation of societal control from the perspective of correlation between the limits of activity of state and civil society.
The author concludes that legal regulation of public integrity can have positive results in those countries, where civil society institutions have no lasting traditions. But such regulation should have definite limits. The author concludes that the legislator should regulate only the key moments, which underlie interaction between state and civil society, i.e. a purpose, tasks and principles of activity of subjects of societal control; rights and duties of subjects of societal control and subordinate subjects; guarantees of realization of societal control and normal functioning of public authorities, which are being supervised; responsibility of both subjects of societal control and public authorities for the violation of principles and guarantees of public integrity.