Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Law and Politics
Reference:

Rehabilitation of Nazism in Russian Legislation: Historical and Legal Analysis

Bagandova Leila Zakirovna

ORCID: 0000-0001-5060-9015

Leading Specialist of the Scientific and Organizational Department of the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences

119019, Russia, Moscow, Moscow, Znamenka str., 10, room 207

leyla.bagandova@mail.ru
Other publications by this author
 

 

DOI:

10.7256/2454-0706.2023.11.68846

EDN:

MGTEEH

Received:

30-10-2023


Published:

25-11-2023


Abstract: The subject of this study is the prerequisites for the development of the rehabilitation of Nazism on the territory of the Russian Federation after the collapse of the USSR, as well as the issues of regulation of this phenomenon in the history of post-Soviet legislation. The author pays special attention to substantiating the reasons for the appearance of followers of Nazism in Russia and notes that the reason for this was the sharp decline in the political, cultural, moral, economic spheres of society in the 1990s, the lack of due attention to the level of education, which affected the general intellectual and spiritual state of Russian youth. It is noted that attempts to stop the development of Nazism on the territory of the state have been repeatedly made. The novelty of the study lies in the fact that it is a comprehensive analysis of the rehabilitation of Nazism as a deviation, where both historical and legal aspects of such a phenomenon are considered. Explanations of the criminalization of the rehabilitation of Nazism, as well as the problems of the considered corpus delicti, are given. The author claims that the appearance of a new legal norm in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation has not facilitated law enforcement, since due to errors in legal technique and the construction of the norm as a whole, the lack of definitions for a clearer understanding of the actions that make up the objective side of the present corpus delicti, complicates the activities to identify and bring to justice under this norm.


Keywords:

Nazism, Reabilitation of Nazism, USSR collapse, Deviations, Extremism, Nuremberg Tribunal, Falsification of evidence, Tokyo Tribunal, Fascism, Communism

This article is automatically translated.

The collapse of the Soviet Union, the pro-Western policy of politicians in 1985-1990, aimed at a sharp liberalization of public life, had their consequences. As of March 28, 2023, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation has included 62 extremist movements in the list of organizations whose activities are prohibited on the territory of the Russian Federation, a number of which directly propagandize neo-Nazi concepts: "People's Socialist Initiative", "Misanthropic division", "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA), etc.

There have been repeated attempts in Russia to pass laws prohibiting the rehabilitation of Nazism. In 1997, two bills were submitted to the State Duma: the first "On the prohibition of propaganda of fascism in the Russian Federation" was devoted directly to the prohibition of propaganda of fascism, but it did not propose to criminalize the manifestations of such propaganda, and the second concerned the need to amend the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation regarding the consolidation of a new norm on the prevention of public use of Nazi symbols (Resolution Moscow City Duma of October 15, 1997 No. 73 "On the Legislative Initiative of the Moscow City Duma "On the draft Federal Law "On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation""). These bills, for all their relevance, however, were withdrawn by the subject of the legislative initiative.

 Attempts to criminalize the rehabilitation of Nazism after the adoption of the law on extremist activity have not stopped. Thus, in 2009, a draft Federal law was developed "On countering the rehabilitation of Nazism, Nazi criminals and their accomplices in the newly Independent States on the territory of the former USSR," and in 2013 — "On the inadmissibility of actions to rehabilitate Nazism, glorification of Nazi criminals and their accomplices, denial of the Holocaust." Only in 2014, Article 354.1 "Rehabilitation of Nazism" appeared in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Many theorists agree that neo-Nazi activity is a factor of significant political influence, however, at the same time, the criminal situation in the state as a whole may depend on it, since Nazism calls for violence.

The processes of the revival of Nazism in Russia did not begin simultaneously. The authors put forward versions that the reasons could be the poverty of a significant part of the population, the poor work of law enforcement agencies in the 1990s, the lack of democratic traditions throughout the historical path in Russia, the proximity of the provisions of Nazism and communism, etc. [1, p. 184-188]. We do not agree with all the existing doctrinal hypotheses, and therefore it seems necessary for us to independently identify and consider the prerequisites for the development of Nazism in Russia.

1. The sharply emerging ideological diversity led to the so-called "ideological permissiveness", in which ultra-right parties appeared in the political arena, propagandizing fascist and Nazi doctrines in their programs. One of the first such organizations was the national patriotic front "Memory", which turned from a historical and cultural movement of public activists into a radical anti-Semitic and xenophobic organization by the mid-1990s. Later, another ultra–right party, the Russian National Unity, emerged from it. The leader of the political association argued that the Russian nation is a consequence of the Aryan civilization, about the centuries–old struggle against the Semites and the "world Jewish conspiracy". Among the radical neo-Nazi organizations using terrorist methods of struggle were skinhead groups: "Legion "Werewolf" (liquidated in 1996), "Schultz-88" (liquidated in 2006), "White Wolves" (liquidated in 2008-2010), "New Order" (ceased to exist), "Russian Goal" (ceased to exist), etc.

2.                 The fall of the communist regime caused a kind of political vacuum, and society did not know how to dispose of it. The absolutization of human rights and freedoms, the policy of restructuring and building a new, different from the Soviet way of life happened too abruptly, people did not understand what was happening and interpreted everything in their own way. We share the position of Yu.V. Golik, who argues that the sharp absolutization of human rights and freedoms in Russia in the 1990s, against the background of their absence in such a volume in earlier periods of history, led to permissiveness, anarchy and a surge in crime, which supporters of ultra-right movements took advantage of.

3. The sharp deterioration of the socio-economic situation of Russian citizens in the 1990s increased the popularity of radical parties among the population of the country. The liberalization of the economy led to the fact that many segments of society lost their former social status and income: according to a survey conducted in early 1992, more than half of the population were dissatisfied with their lives, suffered from stress and considered their future uncertain [5, pp. 64-65]. The economic situation in the state led to the devaluation of a person as biological and social organism, as well as the principles and foundations of society. Western researchers noted that the socio-economic situation in Russia after the collapse of the USSR until the early 2000s had many similarities with the state of Germany in the period after World War I, which largely influenced the leadership of National Socialism in the Reichstag and the success of A. Hitler [6, pp. 355-368]. In this regard, the economic crisis of the 1990s had a serious impact on the dynamics of the development of public relations, including the growth of neo-Nazi movements.

4.                 Paying insufficient attention to the preservation of historical memory. The policy of liberalizing society after the collapse of the USSR was aimed at building a new society, and therefore the Soviet legacy was a thing of the past. The upbringing of a sense of patriotism in the younger generation was no longer fundamental for the state authorities, educational programs no longer meet the requirements of objective and multifaceted education. The consequence of the "educational anarchy" is that young people have not received an idea of basic values. The cultural and moral decline among young people was also influenced by the fact of the publication of Soviet secret documents, which reflected information about losses, tactical mistakes of military leaders, the relationship between Germany and the USSR in the pre-war period, but the low level of legal awareness and political literacy did not allow for an objective analysis and assessment of the events of that era. In fact, the widespread and unquestionable nationalist and Nazi ideas became quite attractive in the minds of the younger generation, since through them young people considered it possible to realize themselves. The ideological and educational vacuum did not allow them to realize the correctness of the chanted postulates. Thus, the ignoring by the state after the collapse of the USSR of the issues of education of young people, the upbringing of correct values and patriotism in them became a reason for joining the ultra-right movements.

The above reasons, in our opinion, should be considered as interrelated and mutually conditioning prerequisites for the development of neo-Nazi sentiments in Russia. It is important that at present the mistakes of the past are taken into account and are being corrected. Thus, it has become mandatory in schools to listen to the Anthem of the Russian Federation before the start of the school day, and every Monday class hours are held "Conversations about the main thing", which tells about Russia, the foundations of the constitutional system, public holidays, etc., lessons on military history are approved by a separate course. In addition, the President signed a decree on the creation of the youth movement "Big Change", the idea of which is similar to the concept of Soviet pioneer.

The appearance of the norm on the rehabilitation of Nazism in Russian legislation has also led to a number of questions regarding its correct interpretation and enforcement. The first problem highlighted by theorists is the name of the norm. The legal definition of the combination "rehabilitation of Nazism" is not fixed in Russian normative legal acts, respectively, it is unclear what the legislator meant by this. Separately, the term "rehabilitation" is contained in the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation and means "the procedure for restoring the rights and freedoms of a person unreasonably or unlawfully subjected to criminal prosecution, and compensation for the harm caused to him." Scientists express the point of view that only a specific person can be rehabilitated, but not a phenomenon, and it is necessary to replace the name of the norm with "justification of Nazism" [4, p. 47]. In our opinion, this statement is not entirely true. The term "rehabilitation" should be interpreted broadly, it is general and all-encompassing in relation to the concepts of "justification", "approval", "denial" and "restoration", therefore, the name of the norm is not as such a defect of the legislator's legal technique and fully corresponds to its content. In our opinion, the rehabilitation of Nazism should be understood as activities aimed at justifying and restoring Nazi ideology in society, as well as approving and denying crimes committed by Nazi criminals during World War II and established by the verdicts of the International Military Tribunals in Nuremberg, Tokyo and Khabarovsk.

Criminalization of denial of the facts established by the Nuremberg Tribunal is one of the most controversial issues raised when discussing the rehabilitation of Nazism. It seems to us that the establishment of criminal liability for an action of this kind is an important and necessary step by the legislator, and we do not support the opinion that this violates the provisions of Article 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation on guarantees of freedom of speech in the Russian Federation, since Part 2 of this norm explicitly prescribes the prevention of such propaganda and agitation that incites hatred or enmity and establishes superiority on a number of grounds [2, p. 170-174]. By virtue of the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the legislation is designed to prevent the manifestation of Nazism in any form (Definition of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated 23.10.2014 No. 2480-O "on refusal to accept for consideration the complaint of citizen Murashov Vladimir Alekseevich for violation of his constitutional rights by Article 6 of the Federal Law "On perpetuating the victory of the Soviet people in The Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945", Article 1 of the Federal Law "On Countering Extremist Activity" and Article 20.3 of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation"). The ECHR has repeatedly expressed the position that the justification of Nazism does not fall within the scope of the principle and freedom of speech, and in the case of Lehideux and Isorni v. France indicated that the denial of "clearly established historical facts — such as the Holocaust — is not subject to protection" under the ECHR and is an abuse of law. It also seems right to us to agree with the thesis that "it is necessary to correctly define the boundary between freedom of speech and information arbitrariness" [3, p. 44], otherwise there is a risk of encroachment on public information security by spreading destructive information.

Another problem that arises when applying part 1 of Article 354.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is the criminalization of the denial of sentences of the International Military Tribunal of the European Axis countries only for the countries of the European axis. Based on the literal interpretation of the norm, only denial of facts, approval of crimes established and convicted by the verdict of the Nuremberg Tribunal falls under its action. In our opinion, such a narrowing is unacceptable, since other tribunals, whose sentences are also extremely important for preserving historical memory and combating the revival of Nazi ideology, remain ignored. These include, first of all, the Tokyo Tribunal, which proved that Japan was waging an aggressive war against a number of countries, including the USSR, and the Far East Tribunal (Khabarovsk Trial), which became unique – it was the first trial in world history in which persons who were preparing a war using weapons of mass destruction were convicted. defeats.

An interesting and debatable question is about such a qualifying feature of this corpus delicti as the artificial creation of evidence for the prosecution. These include the creation, production of obviously unreliable evidence and distortion of reliable evidence by making changes to it. Thus, this qualifying feature can be considered a particular manifestation of Article 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The meaning of tougher penalties for this act is that it can serve as a basis for illegal criminal prosecution. The moment of the end of the act in question is the inclusion of falsified evidence of the prosecution in the criminal case, since it is at this moment that the information acquires evidentiary value. The discussion lies in the fact that only falsification of the evidence of the prosecution is criminalized, although there may also be falsification of information in favor of the acquittal of a person. In our opinion, any falsification of evidence is a socially dangerous act, in this regard, we consider it right to exclude the word "charges" from part 2 of Article 354.1, so that this qualifying feature is considered more broadly.

The Strategy for Countering Extremism in the Russian Federation until 2025, approved by Presidential Decree No. 344 of 29.05.2020 "On approving the Strategy for Countering Extremism in the Russian Federation until 2025" contains provisions that the revival of the ideas of Nazism poses a real threat to modern Russia. Criminological features of the phenomenon of rehabilitation of Nazism are considered in the only special monographic work of P.V. Golovnenkov, G.A. Esakov, I.M. Matskevich and U. Hellman devoted to the peculiarities of modern radical neo-Nazi movements and organizations in Germany, Russia and in some other countries. Currently, there are two special monographs in the Russian science of criminal law on the rehabilitation of Nazism as a crime against the peace and security of mankind. This in itself indicates the insufficiency of scientific development of this problem from the point of view of theoretical research of criminal law. In our opinion, in order to more effectively counter the threat of the revival and rehabilitation of Nazism, it is necessary to develop and adopt a Federal law, or a resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, in which the basic definitions will be fixed and the concept of "rehabilitation" regarding the considered corpus delicti will be disclosed. Thus, despite the fact that the norm on the rehabilitation of Nazism is not perfect from the point of view of its legislative regulation, its presence in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation is an important prerequisite for the preservation of historical memory and information-healthy society as a whole.

References
1. Antonyan, Y.M. (2008). Anti-scientific attempts to justify Nazism in modern Russia (pp. 184-188). Russian criminological view, 4. Moscow.
2. Bashtanikova, E.V., & Aliyeva, T.A. (2019). Actual problems of legal regulation of the fight against the rehabilitation of Nazism . Crimes against peace: a collection of scientific papers (pp. 170-174). Ed. B. V. Yatselenko. Moscow.
3. Molchanov, D.M. Information security as a priority direction of criminal policy of Russia. Criminal law. Development strategy in the XXI century. The main directions of modern criminal policy, 1, 44. Moscow.
4. Pestereva, Y. S., Pomelov, P. V. (2017). On the issue of legal defects of Article 354.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Bulletin of the Omsk Law Academy, 14(3), 47.
5. Ursul, V.I. (2008) On the question of Nazism in modern Russia. Army and Society, 3, 64-65.
6. Shenfield, S.D. (1998) Comparison of Weimar and Russia: reflections on Hanson and Kopstein. Post-Soviet affairs, 14(4), 355-368.

First Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The subject of the research in the article submitted for review is, as its name implies, the problem of rehabilitation of Nazism. The author touches upon the historical and legal aspect of this problem. The title of the work ("Rehabilitation of Nazism in Russian legislation: historical and legal analysis") needs to be clarified - it seems that Nazism is encouraged in Russian legislation (which, of course, does not correspond to reality). The name "Prohibition of activities for the rehabilitation of Nazism in Russian legislation: historical and legal analysis", etc., would be more appropriate. The methodology of the research is not disclosed in the text of the article, but it is obvious that scientists used universal dialectical, logical, historical and legal, formal and legal research methods. The relevance of the research topic chosen by the author is undeniable: "The collapse of the Soviet Union, the pro-Western course of politicians in 1985-1990, aimed at a sharp liberalization of public life, had their consequences. As of March 28, 2023, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation has included 62 extremist movements in the list of organizations whose activities are prohibited on the territory of the Russian Federation, a number of which directly propagandize neo-Nazi concepts: "People's Socialist Initiative", "Misanthropic division", "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA), etc. There have been repeated attempts in Russia to pass laws prohibiting activities for the rehabilitation of Nazism"; "Many theorists agree that neo-Nazi activity is a factor of significant political influence, however, at the same time, the criminal situation in the state as a whole may depend on it, since Nazism calls for violence. The processes of the revival of Nazism in Russia did not begin simultaneously." Additionally, the author needs to list the names of the leading experts involved in the study of the problems raised in the article, and reveal the degree of their study. The scientific novelty of the work is manifested in a number of conclusions of the scientist: "... the emerging ideological diversity led to the so-called "ideological permissiveness", in which ultra-right parties appeared in the political arena, propagandizing fascist and Nazi doctrines in their programs"; "The fall of the communist regime caused a certain political vacuum, and society did not know how to dispose of it. The absolutization of human rights and freedoms, the policy of restructuring and building a new way of life, different from the Soviet one, happened too abruptly, people did not understand what was happening and interpreted everything in their own way"; "The sharp deterioration of the socio-economic situation of Russian citizens in the 1990s increased the popularity of radical parties among the population of the country. The liberalization of the economy has led to the fact that many segments of society have lost their former social status and income..."; "In fact, widespread and unquestionable nationalist and Nazi ideas have become quite attractive in the minds of the younger generation, since through them young people considered it possible to realize themselves. The ideological and educational vacuum did not allow them to realize the correctness of the chanted postulates," "The term "rehabilitation" should be interpreted broadly, it is general and all-encompassing in relation to the concepts of "justification", "approval", "denial" and "restoration", therefore the name of the norm is not as such a defect of the legislator's legal technique and it fully corresponds to its content," etc. The scientific style of the research is fully sustained by the author. The structure of the work is quite logical. In the introductory part of the article, the scientist substantiates the relevance of his chosen research topic. In the main part of the work, the author identifies the prerequisites (causes) for the rehabilitation of Nazism in Russia, carries out a technical and legal analysis of Article 354.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, identifying relevant problems of legal technique and suggesting ways to solve them. The final part of the article contains general conclusions based on the results of the study. The content of the article corresponds to the stated subject of the study, but some provisions of the work need to be clarified. Thus, the author does not offer an original definition of the concept of "rehabilitation of Nazism". The scientist does not provide the final wording of the Article 354.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation analyzed by him, which could be reflected in the final conclusions in the final part of the work. The bibliography of the study is presented by 6 sources (scientific articles), not counting normative material, including in English. From a formal and factual point of view, this is quite enough. The nature and number of sources used in writing the article allowed the author to reveal the topic of the study, but some provisions of the work need to be clarified. There is an appeal to opponents, both general and private (Y. M. Antonyan, Y. S. Pestereva, P. V. Poshelov, etc.), and it is quite sufficient. The provisions of the work are justified to the necessary extent and illustrated with examples. There are conclusions based on the results of the study ("The Strategy for Countering Extremism in the Russian Federation until 2025, approved by Presidential Decree No. 344 dated 05/29/2020 "On Approval of the Strategy for Countering Extremism in the Russian Federation until 2025" contains provisions that the revival of the ideas of Nazism poses a real threat to modern Russia. Thus, despite the fact that the norm on the rehabilitation of Nazism is not impeccable from the point of view of its legislative regulation, its presence in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation is an important prerequisite for preserving historical memory and an information-healthy society as a whole"), however, they are general in nature, too brief and do not reflect all the scientific achievements of the author. Therefore, the conclusions formulated by the scientist need to be specified. The article must be proofread; there are typos in it. The interest of the readership in the article submitted for review can be shown primarily by specialists in the field of theory of state and law, criminal law, criminology, provided that it is finalized: clarifying the title of the work, disclosing its methodology, additional justification of the relevance of the topic of the article, clarifying some provisions of the work, specifying conclusions based on the results of the study, eliminating violations in the design of the article.

Second Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

A REVIEW of an article on the topic "Prohibition of activities for the rehabilitation of Nazism in Russian legislation: historical and legal analysis". The subject of the study. The article proposed for review is devoted to topical issues of regulating relations regarding accountability for activities aimed at rehabilitating Nazism. The author considers this issue from the historical side. The direct subject of the study was the opinions of scientists, the provisions of normative legal acts, and empirical data. Research methodology. The purpose of the study is not stated directly in the article. At the same time, it can be clearly understood from the title and content of the work. The purpose can be designated as the consideration and resolution of certain problematic aspects of the issue of the historical development of legislation prohibiting the rehabilitation of Nazism under Russian law. Based on the set goals and objectives, the author has chosen the methodological basis of the study. In particular, the author uses a set of general scientific methods of cognition: analysis, synthesis, analogy, deduction, induction, and others. In particular, the methods of analysis and synthesis made it possible to summarize and share the conclusions of various scientific approaches to the proposed topic, as well as draw specific conclusions from the materials of practice. The most important role was played by special legal methods. In particular, the author actively applied the formal legal method, which made it possible to analyze and interpret the norms of current legislation (first of all, the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). For example, the following conclusion of the author: "An interesting and debatable question is about such a qualifying feature of this corpus delicti as the artificial creation of evidence for the prosecution. These include the creation, production of obviously unreliable evidence and distortion of reliable evidence by making changes to it. Thus, this qualifying feature can be considered a particular manifestation of Article 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The point of increasing the punishment for this act is that it can serve as a basis for illegal criminal prosecution. The moment of the end of the act in question is the attachment of falsified evidence of the prosecution to the criminal case, since it is at this moment that the information acquires evidentiary value. The discussion is that only falsification of the evidence of the prosecution is criminalized, although there may be falsification of information in favor of acquitting a person. In our opinion, any falsification of evidence is a socially dangerous act, in this regard, we consider it right to exclude the word "charges" from part 2 of Article 354.1 so that this qualifying feature is considered more broadly." Thus, the methodology chosen by the author is fully adequate to the purpose of the study, allows you to study all aspects of the topic in its entirety. Relevance. The relevance of the stated issues is beyond doubt. There are both theoretical and practical aspects of the significance of the proposed topic. From the point of view of theory, the topic of the historical development of legislation prohibiting the rehabilitation of Nazism under Russian law is complex and ambiguous. The author is right that "The processes of the revival of Nazism in Russia did not begin simultaneously." Therefore, the study and generalization of available empirical data based on the generalization of data on the social interaction of citizens, etc., would help to build a unified picture of how the processes of the revival of Nazism in Russia took place. Thus, scientific research in the proposed field should only be welcomed. Scientific novelty. The scientific novelty of the proposed article is beyond doubt. Firstly, it is expressed in the author's specific conclusions. Among them, for example, is the following conclusion: "The above reasons, in our opinion, should be considered as interrelated and mutually conditioning prerequisites for the development of neo-Nazi sentiments in Russia. It is important that the mistakes of the past are now being taken into account and corrected. Thus, it has become mandatory in schools to listen to the Anthem of the Russian Federation before the start of the school day, and every Monday class hours "Conversations about the main thing" are held, which tells about Russia, the foundations of the constitutional system, public holidays, etc., lessons on military history are approved in a separate course. In addition, the President signed a decree on the creation of the youth movement "Big Change", the idea of which is similar to the concept of the Soviet pioneer." These and other theoretical conclusions can be used in further scientific research. Secondly, the author has proposed original proposals for the interpretation of current legislation. In particular, we note the following conclusion: "The appearance in Russian legislation of the norm on the rehabilitation of Nazism has led to a number of questions regarding its correct interpretation and enforcement. The first problem highlighted by theorists is the name of the norm. The legal definition of the combination "rehabilitation of Nazism" is not fixed in Russian normative legal acts, accordingly, it is unclear what the legislator meant by this. Separately, the term "rehabilitation" is contained in the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation and means "the procedure for restoring the rights and freedoms of a person who has been unreasonably or unlawfully subjected to criminal prosecution and compensation for harm caused to him." Scientists express the point of view that only a specific person can be rehabilitated, but not a phenomenon, and it is necessary to replace the name of the norm with "justification of Nazism" [4, p. 47]. In our opinion, this statement is not entirely true. The term "rehabilitation" should be interpreted broadly, it is general and all-encompassing in relation to the concepts of "justification", "approval", "denial" and "restoration", therefore, the name of the norm is not as such a defect in the legislator's legal technique and fully corresponds to its content. In our opinion, the rehabilitation of Nazism should be understood as activities aimed at justifying and restoring Nazi ideology in society, as well as approving and denying crimes committed by Nazi criminals during World War II and established by the verdicts of the International Military Tribunals in Nuremberg, Tokyo and Khabarovsk." This conclusion may be useful for practicing lawyers. Thus, the materials of the article may be of particular interest to the scientific community in terms of contributing to the development of science. Style, structure, content. The subject of the article corresponds to the specialization of the journal "Law and Politics", as it is devoted to legal problems related to the analysis of the historical development of legislation prohibiting the rehabilitation of Nazism under Russian law. The content of the article fully corresponds to the title, since the author considered the stated problems and achieved the research goal. The quality of the presentation of the study and its results should be recognized as fully positive. The subject, objectives, methodology and main results of the study follow directly from the text of the article. The design of the work generally meets the requirements for this kind of work. No significant violations of these requirements were found. Bibliography. The quality of the literature used should be assessed on an average basis. The author uses the literature presented by authors from Russia and other countries (Antonyan Yu.M., Pestereva Yu.S., Poshelov P.V., Shenfield S.D. and others). It cannot be said that a large number of works have been used. However, most likely, due to the specific research topic, which is not fully developed, such a situation in the reviewed article should be considered acceptable. Thus, the works of the above authors correspond to the research topic, have a sign of sufficiency, and contribute to the disclosure of various aspects of the topic. Appeal to opponents.
The author conducted a serious analysis of the current state of the problem under study. All quotes from scientists are accompanied by author's comments. That is, the author shows different points of view on the problem and tries to argue for a more correct one in his opinion. Conclusions, the interest of the readership. The conclusions are fully logical, as they are obtained using a generally accepted methodology. The article may be of interest to the readership in terms of the presence in it of the author's systematized positions in relation to issues of regulating relations regarding accountability for activities aimed at rehabilitating Nazism. Based on the above, summing up all the positive and negative sides of the article, "I recommend publishing"