№ 12 (2023)

A democratic legal state is featured by a judicial system capable of effectively protecting the interests of citizens and organizations. In historical and legal studies, it is crucial to study how its main institutions were formed and developed. The study seeks to define the peculiarities of the legal and organizational foundations underlying the RSFSR Supreme Court’s creation and its subsequent development in modern Russia. This goal can only be reached by completing the following tasks:

– To provide an overview of the historical and legal aspects of the activities of the domestic higher courts;

– To describe the legal acts governing the structure of the highest judicial instance, both in the RSFSR and in modern Russia;

– To explore how the competencies of the Supreme Court of the RSFSR and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation have been evolved.

This study analyzes the activities of the highest judicial bodies using a structural and functional approach; the historical and legal method and the analysis method are used to determine the scope of the highest courts’ authority and their significance at different stages of development. Through the analysis of the legal framework, a legal assessment is given to the activities of the Supreme Court of the RSFSR, and it is also concluded that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation is its successor, since both courts in different historical eras were the highest judicial instance, whose function was to supervise lower courts and ensure uniformity of judicial practice.

The article substantiates that under the influence of modern geopolitical challenges, the importance of information security as one of the key areas of ensuring the national security of the Russian Federation is increasing. The purpose of the study is to theoretically substantiate the role of judicial authorities in the formation of the information security system of the Russian state in the conditions of modern geopolitical threats and technological challenges.

The need to achieve the stated goal led to the formulation and solution of the following scientific tasks: the study of the legal nature of information security and its place in the structure of national security; analysis of current geopolitical and technological challenges and threats to the national security of the country in the information sphere; determining the role of judicial authorities in the information security system, including in the digital environment.

Within the framework of this study, a set of methods of scientific cognition was applied, including philosophical, general scientific and private law (formal-legal, comparative-legal, interpretation), which made it possible to achieve the goal and implement the tasks set.

According to the results of the study, it is proved that ensuring information security in the context of the activities of judicial authorities should be considered in two dimensions: ensuring information security within the judicial system itself; the activity of judicial bodies in the administration of justice aimed at the adoption of individual law enforcement acts, together with legal acts that create the most comprehensive legal regulation of legal relations in the field of ensuring national information security.

The conclusion is made about the special contribution of the judicial authorities in ensuring the national interests of the Russia in the information sphere.

The article deals with the problematic issues of determining the content of the legal relationship on pledge of obligatory rights. The author raises the question of whether between the pledgor and the pledgee arises a mandatory legal relationship different from the main obligation. Based on the analysis of scientific doctrine and current legislation, the author concludes that the legal relationship between the pledgee and the pledgee is a complication of the main obligation, and not a separate obligation. The article also considers separate rights and obligations of the pledgee and the pledgee.

The article highlights key aspects of research-to-practice project “Conciliation in civil and administrative procedure” conducted by the Chair of civil and administrative procedure. Professors of the Chair analyse results of the projects, identify challenges and assign goals for a future reference period.

The authors of the article analyse the work on the organization of the mediators’ interaction with the courts and the practice of applying the mediation procedure in court cases in face-to-face and online formats. The advantages of the model, in which the mediator’s duty is organized in the courts on a permanent basis, are revealed.

The article analyzes the powers of the court to initiate conciliation procedures in court proceedings, analyzes the right of a judge to appoint a conciliation procedure on his own initiative. The regularities that allow to identify the relationship between the activity of judges in offering mediation procedures to the parties and the successful decision-making by the parties in favor of conducting a conciliation procedure are revealed.

The article analyzes the problems of judicial mediation. Proposals have been made to create and legislate an algorithm for the interaction of the mediator and the court during the conciliation procedure after the initiation of proceedings in the case. The authors of the article consider the possibility of using the institution of suspension of proceedings in connection with the use of conciliation procedure. The problem of the mediator’s lack of a special procedural status is analyzed, which deprives him of the opportunity to participate in the proceedings on the case and complicates the process of interaction with the judge.

The authors formulated the main tasks set for the implementation of research-to-practice project “Conciliation in civil and administrative procedure” in the next reporting period.

The article raises the question of the dependence of the implementation of the principles of criminal policy (principles of justice, differentiation and individualization of criminal responsibility) on the regulation and application of norms on non-criminal acts. The purpose of the work is to assess the impact of non-criminal criminal acts on the implementation of such principles of criminal policy as justice, differentiation and individualization of criminal responsibility. Research objectives: 1) to determine the dependence of the principles of justice, differentiation and individualization on the regulation of non-criminal criminal acts; 2) to determine the dependence of the principles of justice, differentiation and individualization on the application of norms on non-criminal criminal acts.

The paper draws the following conclusions.

The effectiveness of the implementation of the principles of criminal policy (principles of justice, differentiation and individualization of criminal responsibility) depends not only on the processes of reasonable criminalization (decriminalization), penalization (depenalization), trends in the qualification of crimes, but also on the regulation and application of norms on non-criminal criminal acts.

To implement the principles of justice, differentiation of criminal responsibility, it is necessary to strive to achieve a balance of interests of the individual and the state. The result of its achievement should be the definition of such areas protected by criminal law, the security of which is restored by positive post-criminal behavior, as a result of which a person should be exempt from criminal liability, provided that there are no signs of other elements of a crime in his actions.

To ensure the implementation of the principle of justice, it is advisable to supplement Articles 127, 226 and 229 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with a basis for exemption from criminal liability, the material condition of which should be appropriate positive post-criminal behavior.

Add a note to Article 127 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: “A person who voluntarily released a person deprived of liberty is released from criminal liability if his actions do not contain other elements of a crime.”

Add a note to Articles 226 and 229 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: “A person who voluntarily surrendered the items specified in this article is exempt from criminal liability under this article if the theft of these items was committed from illegal owners without the use of violence.”

Problem statement. The present research stems from acknowledgement by several specialists regarding “analogy of statute” and “analogy of law” application in Private International Law of the Russian Federation. The author considers this proposition as contradictory to article 1186-2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and conflict of laws essence.

Goals and tasks of the research. The main goal of the research is to substantiate inapplicability of “analogy of statute” and “analogy of law” in Private International Law of the Russian Federation. The indicated goal presupposes following tasks, i. e. to reject applicability of article 6 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in conflict of laws framework; to prove substantial inappropriateness of “analogy of statute” for choosing applicable law and to show direct application of the closest connection principle in case of conflict of laws rules absence.

Methods. Methods of the research embrace general scientific and particular scientific. The first are represented by general tools of logic, including analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction and analogy, as well as systemic approach; comparative legal method plays key role among the second.

Results, brief conclusion. The main conclusion of the research is that conflict of laws framework is not aware neither of “analogy of statute”, nor of “analogy of law” as utilized by the Civil Law. In conflict of laws, the closest connection principle, as general gap-filling conflict of laws rule according to article 1186-2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, steps up as sole conflict of laws instrument when it is impossible to choose applicable law on the basis of existing conflict of laws rules stipulated by international treaties of the Russian Federation, Civil Code of the Russian Federation, other statutes or customs acknowledged in the Russian Federation.