Legality of University' Students Behavior

Sokolova Marina Vladimirovna ORCID: 0000-0002-1579-2464 PhD in History Docent, the department of Socio-Humanitarian Disciplines, Vladimir Branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation 600017, Russia, Vladimirskaya oblast', g. Vladimir, ul. Gor'kogo, 59 rags33marina@yandex.ru Other publications by this author     Listratov Ivan Vadimovich ORCID: 0000-0002-0791-7271 Student, Department , Vladimir Branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration 600017, Russia, Vladimirskaya oblast', g. Vladimir, ul. Gor'kogo, 59 listratoff25@yandex.ru

Petrosyan Dmitrii Il'ich PhD in Philosophy Docent, the department of Socio-Humanitarian Disciplines, Vladimir Branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation 600017, Russia, Vladimirskaya oblast', g. Vladimir, ul. Gor'kogo, 59 ilyich87@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

The complex structure of public life objectively determines the need for legal regulation of interactions between subjects arising in all its spheres, as a result of which the norms of law become one of the leading regulators of public relations. Consciously-volitional socially significant behavior of individuals or their collectives, provided for by legal norms and capable of generating certain legal consequences, is called legal behavior [14. – p. 13]. Legal behavior, according to K.T. Valiulin, is determined by social, psychological and legal components [2. – p. 17].

In the legal literature, it is noted that any act of legal behavior to some extent depends on the consciousness, will and desire of a person [15. – p. 68]. In this regard, the legal behavior of young people as a subject of legal relations, characterized by significant specifics, is always of great interest for analysis. The peculiarities inherent in this socio-demographic group are largely related to the lack of legal consciousness of the majority of young people, their active assimilation of legal values existing in society and the gradual elimination of the gap between theoretical concepts and practical experience. Considering the peculiarities of the legal consciousness of youth, A.A. Zhigulin emphasizes that "the transitive period of the formation of its subjectivity is characterized by the transitional nature of the status of young people in all spheres of life, including in the legal sphere, which is why momentary needs and interests arise, the reflection of which enhances the labile nature of legal consciousness" [8. – p. 32]. A similar approach can be found in the studies of E.S. Zhidyaeva, P.S. Samygin and S.I. Samygin [9. – p. 72].

In addition to the instability and transitivity of legal consciousness as a separate factor affecting the legal behavior of young people, many authors highlight the value-legal order that has actually developed in society [11. – p. 126]. It seems that the models of legal behavior of representatives of the younger generation can also be largely determined by the socio-cultural space surrounding them, which includes education, public bodies, public associations of various levels, etc.

Legal behavior is also determined by the peculiarities of the process of socialization of students. From the point of view of a number of researchers, the main agent of socialization of youth is the education system ^{[3; 4; 12; 13]}. The basis is laid at the level of school education, and legal socialization continues for university students as part of their studies at a higher educational institution [1. – pp. 8-14].  Of great interest from the point of view of the formation of professional legal culture are the studies of A.M. Drozdova and A.V. Klochkova, which focuses on the legal socialization of lawyers in the process of obtaining higher education ^{[7; 10]}.

In December 2021, 515 1st – 4th year students of the Vladimir branch of the RANEPA were interviewed by the questionnaire method. The sample consisted of 33% of boys and 67% of girls studying in various specialties represented at the Academy: law (27.6%), legal support of national security (7%), judicial and prosecutorial activities (6.4%), state and municipal administration (16.7%), economics, management and personnel management (29.5%), customs and economic security (12.8%).

Students were asked to express their opinion on the permissibility of violating the requirements of regulatory legal acts (Figure No. 1). The results obtained allow us to draw positive conclusions: the overwhelming majority of young people consider it necessary to comply with all laws under any circumstances (81.5%). Some students violate those laws whose prescriptions do not comply with the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (14.9%). A similar proportion of respondents (13.4%) are of the opinion that the "reason" for non-compliance with a particular regulatory act may be its irrationality or injustice. At the same time, there are more representatives of this point of view among students of managerial and economic specialties than among students of legal specialties. A clear minority of young people consider it possible to violate the law if it does not cause serious harm to others (6.7%). Students are the least likely to agree that it is possible to violate legal regulations in order to realize their own interests (2.4%). In addition, a small proportion of students believe that laws can be violated if no one finds out about the offense committed, or if minor liability is provided for the violation, or it is possible to avoid responsibility altogether (2.8%, 3.3% and 1.4%, respectively). In general, we can state a high level of law-abiding development among representatives of student youth, which does not depend on their age or the direction of professional training, which allows us to draw conclusions about the general attraction of young people to models of a legitimate type of legal behavior.

Figure 1 – Is it permissible to break the laws

As part of the survey, in order to form a more detailed picture, students were also asked to assess the admissibility of certain types of offenses. During the transition to private aspects, the overall picture has not changed – in relation to each of the illegal acts listed in the questionnaire, the absolute majority of young people inclined to the unacceptability of their commission.

The list of options included the following acts: the use of physical violence to protect their interests, tax evasion, alcohol consumption in public places, driving under the influence of minor alcohol, the use of profanity in public places, systematic lateness to work, non-compliance with anti-form restrictions, prostitution and petty theft.

The smallest contrast with respect to the permissibility/inadmissibility of commission noted by students is such illegal acts as drunk driving, prostitution and petty theft – only a few consider them permissible. It seems that this fact can be explained by the sharp contradiction of these offenses to the principles of public morality, established moral values, causing significant harm to public relations, significant potential danger to the individual, society and the state, as well as the most severe sanctions both from the state enforcement apparatus and from society.

At the same time, the use of profanity in public places, non-compliance with covid restrictions, as well as alcohol consumption in public places cause the least rejection among students. According to these offenses, the proportion of students who consider it permissible to commit them, provided that negative consequences are not caused, can reach up to 30%.

The main reasons for committing illegal acts are shown in Figure No. 2. Analyzing these reasons, it can be concluded that for almost half of the students acting as subjects in the relevant legal relations, offenses are the result of a combination of circumstances (47.1%). A significant proportion of young people (37.3%) claim that the reasons for violating the law for them were their own unreasonableness and ignorance of the current legislation, and there is no significant relationship between this reason and the profile of the education they receive. Slightly less is the percentage of students who indicate vital necessity as the reason for committing an offense (35.2%). About a quarter of students violated the law under the influence of feelings and emotions, and every tenth committed an offense "for the company", i.e. under the negative influence of other people. The smallest proportion of respondents – 6.7% – noted that their misconduct was caused by the influence of alcoholic beverages.

Figure 2 – Reasons for committing illegal acts

Attention should be paid to the factors that underlie the legitimate model of legal behavior of young people and warn them against committing illegal acts, this information is presented in Figure No. 3. The absolute majority of students (82.2%) distinguish knowledge of the law and understanding of the degree of responsibility for its violation among such factors. More than half of the representatives of the student youth (66.9%) adhere to lawful behavior due to personal attitudes formed in the process of socialization. More than a third of students (39.5%) do not want to create a bad reputation about themselves, and in the areas of training, the largest proportion of those choosing this option is noted among students in the specialty 40.05.04 Judicial and prosecutorial activities. This fact may be explained by the presentation of serious requirements to the personality and reputation (which, among other things, are directly fixed in federal legislation) for a person applying to take a judicial position or to enter the service of the prosecutor's office, as well as to indicate the awareness of this circumstance by students. M.A. Gusarova draws attention to similar features of the legal behavior of students of specialized areas of training in her work [5. – pp. 109-139]. More than a quarter of young people (27.6%) do not commit offenses, as this is contrary to the prevailing norms of morality in society. Some students are deterred from illegal behavior by the negative reaction of others, and the censure from parents and relatives naturally has a greater impact compared to the condemnation of friends and acquaintances (19.7% and 10.9% indicate, respectively). A similar study by A.V. Demidova and A.A. Dyzheva [6. – p. 93] presents a slightly different alignment between the factors that deter a person from committing crimes. Personal attitudes and moral norms clearly dominate this group of respondents, but this is still indicated by a smaller number of students than in the survey at the Vladimir branch of RANEPA. Knowledge of the law in the study of A.V. Demidova and A.A. Dyzheva is not the dominant factor, only every fifth respondent indicates this.

Figure 3 – For what reason students do not commit illegal actions

Like other subjects of legal relations of any kind, representatives of students have to face violations of their rights and legitimate interests in various fields. In such cases, young people can demonstrate various models of legal behavior, the main ones are shown in Figure No. 4. A small proportion of students (7.2%) always turn to specialists for help. Every tenth student (11.2%) counts solely on their own strength when there is a need to protect the right and obtain legal information. A fifth of young people resort to the help of specialists only in the most difficult situations. For the relative majority of students, behavior in the situation under consideration depends on the complexity of the question (38%).

Figure 4 – How often do students turn to specialists to protect their rights and obtain legal information?

The overwhelming majority of students do not face difficulties in obtaining legal information, however, 32.5% of respondents indicate their existence (Figure No. 5).

Figure 5 – Have students encountered difficulties in obtaining and applying legal information?

As can be seen from Figure No. 6, among the difficulties encountered, more than half of the students (56.9%) note unsuccessful attempts to find the required information. The second most important difficulty was the inability to find the necessary practical recommendations (36.6%). Every fourth person faces problems understanding legal terminology due to its complexity for people who do not have sufficient specialized knowledge. More than a quarter (28.7%) point to the high cost of specialist consultations. In addition, 14.8% of students facing difficulties in obtaining legal information do not know at all how and to which specialists they can turn for help.

Figure 6 – What difficulties did students face in obtaining and applying legal information?

From Figure No. 7, it can be seen that in many life circumstances, representatives of student youth prefer not to take any measures to protect violated rights for various reasons. 37% of respondents in this group do not protect their rights and legitimate interests, because it requires a lot of time and effort. One in five refuses to defend the right, fearing the onset of undesirable consequences. Approximately the same proportion (19.2%) of young people refrain from protection, considering the actions aimed at it useless and unable to bring the desired results. 17.6% are convinced that the evidence base capable of ensuring a favorable outcome of the process of protecting the right, as a rule, is absent or insufficient. Moreover, 8.4% of students do not protect their rights and legitimate interests due to the fact that they do not know where they can turn to achieve this goal.

Figure 7 – Reasons why students do not protect violated rights

An important element of the analysis of legal behavior and legal awareness of students is also the characteristic of the level of trust in law enforcement agencies designed to protect the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of man and citizen. Students were asked to assess their attitude to law enforcement agencies such as the court, the prosecutor's office, the Investigative Committee, the police and the FSB, using the settings "I fully trust", "I probably trust", "I probably don't trust" and "I don't trust at all". The results obtained indicate a fairly high level of general trust in law enforcement agencies on the part of the younger generation – in relation to each structure, the choice of positive attitudes significantly prevails. The court enjoys the greatest trust of students: 35.5% of respondents fully trust the judicial authorities, 46.2% choose the "Perhaps I trust" attitude, and only one in ten respondents assesses their trust in the court through negative attitudes. It should be noted that, despite the fact that the Prosecutor's Office, the Investigative Committee and the FSB are inferior to the court in generalized indicators, the existing gap is insignificant.

The police enjoy the least trust of young people in comparison with the above–mentioned structures - 24.4% of respondents fully trust their activities, while every fourth student surveyed characterizes their level of trust in the police negatively.

Based on the conducted research , the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. As before, a fairly high percentage of illegal actions occur as a result of ignorance of the law.

2. Quite often the reasons for illegal actions are psychological in nature, when it happens under the influence of feelings or emotions. This can also include violation of the law "for the company".

3. The future profession influences the model of legal behavior of young people. To the greatest extent, students studying in the specialty "Judicial and prosecutorial activity" think about the formation of a positive reputation.

4. Every fifth respondent does not defend their rights, as they consider it a useless and unpromising occupation.

5. A whole block of questions in defending their rights is related to the legal incompetence of respondents. Students are either poorly oriented in the sources of obtaining legal information, or do not understand where they can apply for this information.

6. There is a high level of distrust of the police. The widespread dissemination of negative information about police officers in news content and the network space creates deliberately negative expectations of the population.