Vol 3, No 11 (2019)

We present a review of the 3rd international scientific and practical conference “Tambov legal readings named after F.N. Plevako”. The conference program included the work of the plenary session, six sections, united in three sessions: “Historical and legal problems of the Russian statehood development” together with the section “State construction theory and practice”, “State policy of combating crime”, also “Problems in the sphere of ensuring national security and law and order: specifics, threats, priorities, counteraction”, “Legal regulation of property relations: ensuring the balance of private and public interests” together with the section “Current issues of civil, arbitration, administrative process of enforcement proceedings and advocacy”, as well as the “round table” “Legal science and education: traditions and prospects of development at the present stage”, organized jointly by the Theory of State and Law Department, International and European Law of the Academy of Law and Management of the Federal Penitentiary Service. The conference was attended by scientists, researchers, teachers of educational institutions, practicing lawyers, including representatives of the judicial community, advocacy, law enforcement agencies, other public authorities, local administration, non-profit organizations.

We consider the views of Russian scientists (I.A. Ilin, N.M. Kor-kunov, N.I. Lazarevskiy, I.L. Solonevich, L.A. Tikhomirov) regarding the form of government in Russia in the late 19th – early 20th century and the prospects for its development. The author states the merits of pre-revolutionary lawyers in creating a classification of government forms and in substantiating the features of the distinction between monarchical and republican forms of government, which modern theorists have not been able to fully implement. In pre-revolutionary jurisprudence there was no unity of opinion about the form of government established in Russia after the Manifesto of October 17, 1905. The researchers divided into two groups: one of them was made by scientists who considered the state system “the original Russian state order”, but only updated. According to another group, Russia has become a constitutional monarchy. I.L. Solonevich and I.A. Ilin made predictions about the inevitable collapse of the communist regime, so their thoughts were turned to the people who will remain on the ruins of the USSR and who will have to start a new state construction. At the same time, they proceeded from the fact that the Russian people have a sense of order, stability and great powerness. It is emphasized that all the analyzed scientists’ points of view paid great attention to the distinction between the concepts of absolute and autocratic monarchy, proving that absolutist arbitrariness and autocracy are not the same.

We consider the issue of counteraction of Republic of Kazakhstan prosecution authorities to violations in the land legislation sphere. In this manner, the current reforms to improve the social and economic well-being of citizens in the Republic of Kazakhstan have affected such a burning sphere of public relations as the land issue. It is noted that other values, in particular spiritual and material goods, pale before the right to own the private property institution. It is stated that the existing demand for land and the lack of equal opportunities to obtain them contributes to the emergence of corruption risks. The role of the state course coordinator is legally assigned to the supreme supervisory body of the Republic of Kazakhstan – the Prosecutor General’s office. The inspections carried out by the prosecutor’s office in the activities of local executive bodies reveal numerous law violations, allowed when granting land for individual housing construction, failure to comply with the procedure for issuing land, the use of various schemes to bypass queues. However, the state does not have sufficient land resources to meet the needs of even those who are already in line. In view of what any methods for achievement of the purposes, including bribes of officials, arbitrariness and unauthorized captures of the earth are applied. We offer the ways of counteraction and prevention of the considered crimes in the sphere of land use.

We raise the topic of the social services current system, the place and importance of nonprofit organizations in it. It is noted that the tendency of social services nonprofit sector transfer to the population with the subsequent reimbursement of expenses from the budget. We analyze various barriers of nonprofit organizations participation in the social services provision in the context of which it is proposed to provide an advance mechanism for reimbursement of nonprofit organizations for the social services provision. The importance of the social services standard is emphasized, its content is revealed and an attempt is made to reveal the legal nature of the standard of social services. We note the content of the standard established by the federal legislation; also we draw attention to the fact that the procedure approval for the social services provision by social service providers is attributed to the powers of public authorities of the subjects of the Russian Federation. We present the analysis of the social services provision standard in the Tambov Region by forms of social services approved by the order of Social Protection and Family Policy Department of the Tambov Region dated April 1, 2016 no. 463-ф. The points requiring adjustment from the point of view of legal technique are revealed, and also other offers on modification of the specified regulatory legal act are specified. As a result, we conclude that the social services standard, firstly, expresses the amount of social assistance guaranteed by the state, secondly, it is an exhaustive set of requirements for the service itself, allowing to plan activities and resources, and, thirdly, it is a set of requirements for quality control of social services and protection of the rights and legitimate interests of their recipients.

We consider some issues of correlation between the theory of public law and civil law in the aspect of legal regulation of relations in the sphere of public private partnership. We analyze the definition of the concept of the agreement on public private partnership, we comprehend the issues of interaction and legal status of the participant of public private partnership, on the basis of the analysis of certain normative-legal acts of the subjects of the Russian Federation and their comparison with the budget legislation, we draw conclusions about the public nature of agreements in the field of public private partnership. We illustrate statistical information on the development of public private partnership in the subjects of the Russian Federation, identify a number of factors that determine the positive effect of interaction between the participants of public private partnership, to which we refers to the development of the institutional environment in the field of public private partnership, the quality level of legal support, improving the experience of implementing public private partnership projects. It is stated that the development of the Institute of public private partnership is essential for the economy of the country as a whole and for regions and municipalities in particular. At the same time, it is impossible to conclude public agreements without the will of the state represented by the relevant authorities. In addition, mentioning the role of private interest, it is noted that in the case of the subjects of the Russian Federation, private partners enter into relations enshrined in the laws of the subjects of the Russian Federation, where the possible forms of participation of the subject in public private partnership are clearly defined, which in a sense limits the freedom of private partners.

We investigate the state coercion legal nature, the implementation problems of the latter in administrative proceedings. We illustrate the positions of legal scholars regarding the views on the actual basis of the use of state coercion measures. It is emphasized that the recognition of an offense as the only factual basis for the application of state coercion measures will be valid only in the case of the application of legal liability measures, while prevention and protection measures assume the presence of other legal facts. We analyze the issues of state coercion in the light of their normative consolidation in the Code of administrative procedure of the Russian Federation. Also we investigate characteristic features of coercion in administrative proceedings. We point out on the coercion specificity in the sphere of administrative proceedings as a form of law enforcement activity, the implementation of which is entrusted to the judiciary. The problem of more precise systematization of state coercion measures in administrative proceedings is raised. We consider the actual basis issues for the coercive measures use from different positions. The necessity of studying the measures of legal coercion is determined. In addition, it is indicated that the implementation of administrative procedural coercion measures in administrative proceedings is aimed primarily at restoring the violated procedural order and is restorative in nature.

We investigate the development problem of professional representation in the arbitration proceedings of the Russian Federation. We believe that the professional representatives participation in the arbitration process has a very positive impact on the efficiency and quality of proceedings which is carrying out by the arbitration courts. It is stated that the need for professional representatives is primarily due to the special (economic) nature of disputes considered by arbitration courts, the participation in which persons who do not have the appropriate education and knowledge, on the one hand, as a rule, does not contribute to the effective protection of their rights, on the other – delays the consideration of cases. Thus, the Arbitration procedure code of the Russian Federation will be amended in autumn 2019, concerning the requirement of compulsory higher legal education for representatives of the parties in civil and arbitration cases. The amendments provide that in addition to lawyers, they can only be persons with a higher legal education or a degree in law. The exception is cases subject to consideration by magistrates or district courts. It is concluded that the presence of higher legal education in the near future becomes a mandatory requirement for representatives in disputes considered by the arbitration courts of the Russian Federation.

Through the prism of the priorities of Russian national security and social values, given the crime situation, the state branch of the legislative framework, enforcement practices and reform processes in conjunction with completed and implemented national plans against corruption, we made an attempt to define the boundaries of issues of counteraction to such a phenomenon as “corruption” in strategic and other documents, using elements of retrospective analysis. We reveal the aspects concerning how “yesterday and today” the corruption problem positioned/positioning in the political and legal and, in particular, in the criminal-legal contexts? Is it seen as a major challenge or threat to national security? In close interrelation with the considered problem the separate directions of activity in the economic security sphere and economic growth maintenance are touched. As a consequence, we focus attention on the problem of corruption in relation to the regional cross-section. In conclusion, we give a brief overview of some kind of legislative reforms results, which allowed today the subjects of combating corruption to radically improve the work in this direction. At the same time, the issues of expected new changes in the legislation, which will have an impact on the development of law enforcement practice, were touched upon in an aspect-wise manner.