Judicial constitutional control In Russia and foreign countries: models, significance and specificity
Introduction. Constitutional review is the cornerstone in maintaining the constitutional order, ensuring compliance with the rule of law and protecting individual rights in the state. Differences in models of constitutional review globally highlight its complexity and uniqueness. This factor necessi...
Uložené v:
| Vydané v: | Гуманитарные и юридические исследования Ročník 11; číslo 3; s. 545 - 550 |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autori: | , |
| Médium: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | English Russian |
| Vydavateľské údaje: |
North-Caucasus Federal University
01.11.2024
|
| Predmet: | |
| ISSN: | 2409-1030 |
| On-line prístup: | Získať plný text |
| Tagy: |
Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
|
| Abstract | Introduction. Constitutional review is the cornerstone in maintaining the constitutional order, ensuring compliance with the rule of law and protecting individual rights in the state. Differences in models of constitutional review globally highlight its complexity and uniqueness. This factor necessitates a comparative study to reveal the specific mechanisms used in different legal systems. The article examines the models, significance and features of constitutional control In Russia and a number of foreign countries, determines the nuances of their functioning, as well as issues of interaction between the elements of constitutional control models.
Materials and Methods. During the comparative legal analysis, the practice of functioning of constitutional control In Russia, the USA, Germany, Austria, France, Canada and Australia was studied. The primary sources were national constitutions, legislation, as well as landmark judicial decisions in several states. Secondary sources of research are scientific literature: monographs, periodical articles and expert analytical documents. A mixed approach facilitates a thorough examination of the structure and functions of constitutional review bodies in a broader political and legal context.
Analysis. The study examines various models of constitutional review, in particular, the European (centralized Kelsen model), adopted In Russia, Germany and Austria, is compared with the American model (decentralized model of constitutional control in the USA), the hybrid (mixed) systems of Canada and Australia, which have regional features and combine elements of the American and European models, as well as the French model with its quasijudicial bodies of constitutional control. The comparative analysis is carried out according to several criteria, while covering the problems faced by systems of constitutional control.
Results. A comparative study reveals various paradigms of constitutional control. Their examination determines to what extent the independence of the institutions of constitutional review critically affects the effectiveness of the work of constitutional review bodies, and which models demonstrate vulnerability from political influence. The need to ensure greater autonomy for constitutional review bodies and facilitate access to constitutional mechanisms is emphasized. The multifaceted nature of constitutional review is highlighted and an opinion is expressed on the possibility of further improving the institutions of constitutional review. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | Introduction. Constitutional review is the cornerstone in maintaining the constitutional order, ensuring compliance with the rule of law and protecting individual rights in the state. Differences in models of constitutional review globally highlight its complexity and uniqueness. This factor necessitates a comparative study to reveal the specific mechanisms used in different legal systems. The article examines the models, significance and features of constitutional control In Russia and a number of foreign countries, determines the nuances of their functioning, as well as issues of interaction between the elements of constitutional control models.
Materials and Methods. During the comparative legal analysis, the practice of functioning of constitutional control In Russia, the USA, Germany, Austria, France, Canada and Australia was studied. The primary sources were national constitutions, legislation, as well as landmark judicial decisions in several states. Secondary sources of research are scientific literature: monographs, periodical articles and expert analytical documents. A mixed approach facilitates a thorough examination of the structure and functions of constitutional review bodies in a broader political and legal context.
Analysis. The study examines various models of constitutional review, in particular, the European (centralized Kelsen model), adopted In Russia, Germany and Austria, is compared with the American model (decentralized model of constitutional control in the USA), the hybrid (mixed) systems of Canada and Australia, which have regional features and combine elements of the American and European models, as well as the French model with its quasijudicial bodies of constitutional control. The comparative analysis is carried out according to several criteria, while covering the problems faced by systems of constitutional control.
Results. A comparative study reveals various paradigms of constitutional control. Their examination determines to what extent the independence of the institutions of constitutional review critically affects the effectiveness of the work of constitutional review bodies, and which models demonstrate vulnerability from political influence. The need to ensure greater autonomy for constitutional review bodies and facilitate access to constitutional mechanisms is emphasized. The multifaceted nature of constitutional review is highlighted and an opinion is expressed on the possibility of further improving the institutions of constitutional review. Introduction. Constitutional review is the cornerstone in maintaining the constitutional order, ensuring compliance with the rule of law and protecting individual rights in the state. Differences in models of constitutional review globally highlight its complexity and uniqueness. This factor necessitates a comparative study to reveal the specific mechanisms used in different legal systems. The article examines the models, significance and features of constitutional control In Russia and a number of foreign countries, determines the nuances of their functioning, as well as issues of interaction between the elements of constitutional control models. Materials and Methods. During the comparative legal analysis, the practice of functioning of constitutional control In Russia, the USA, Germany, Austria, France, Canada and Australia was studied. The primary sources were national constitutions, legislation, as well as landmark judicial decisions in several states. Secondary sources of research are scientific literature: monographs, periodical articles and expert analytical documents. A mixed approach facilitates a thorough examination of the structure and functions of constitutional review bodies in a broader political and legal context. Analysis. The study examines various models of constitutional review, in particular, the European (centralized Kelsen model), adopted In Russia, Germany and Austria, is compared with the American model (decentralized model of constitutional control in the USA), the hybrid (mixed) systems of Canada and Australia, which have regional features and combine elements of the American and European models, as well as the French model with its quasijudicial bodies of constitutional control. The comparative analysis is carried out according to several criteria, while covering the problems faced by systems of constitutional control. Results. A comparative study reveals various paradigms of constitutional control. Their examination determines to what extent the independence of the institutions of constitutional review critically affects the effectiveness of the work of constitutional review bodies, and which models demonstrate vulnerability from political influence. The need to ensure greater autonomy for constitutional review bodies and facilitate access to constitutional mechanisms is emphasized. The multifaceted nature of constitutional review is highlighted and an opinion is expressed on the possibility of further improving the institutions of constitutional review. |
| Author | Bekirova, F. S. Gabrilyan, R. R. |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: F. S. orcidid: 0000-0001-9373-8415 surname: Bekirova fullname: Bekirova, F. S. – sequence: 2 givenname: R. R. orcidid: 0000-0001-9938-5809 surname: Gabrilyan fullname: Gabrilyan, R. R. |
| BookMark | eNo9kMtqwzAQRbVIoWmbP-jCH1C7etmyuyuhj5RAobRroccoqDhSkOxF_r52UgIDw5w7cxnuDVqEGAChe4IrJnjHHinHXUkwwxXFlFesIs0CLS_0Gq1y9hrXoqWMM7xE8DFab7zqCxNDHvwwDj6G8zik2BebUHyN05EqVLCFiwn8LkzqOMke8lOxjxb6_FDkiXvnjQoGTrv5AGYGfjjeoSun-gyr_36Lfl5fvtfv5fbzbbN-3paG1KIpWWusxsxa7BpSd-Ba23BLOlpPvzpHdEOYBkEocGWUsNYpAV2tadsC15SwW7Q5-9qofuUh-b1KRxmVlycQ006qNHjTg2QAGoMWzGDMa8KUxaLlre4UYDPV5MXPXibFnBO4ix_B8pS2nHOVc65yTlsySRr2B8u8eD0 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| CorporateAuthor | North-Caucasus Federal University North-Caucasus State Academy |
| CorporateAuthor_xml | – name: North-Caucasus State Academy – name: North-Caucasus Federal University |
| DBID | AAYXX CITATION DOA |
| DOI | 10.37493/2409-1030.2024.3.16 |
| DatabaseName | CrossRef DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef |
| DatabaseTitleList | CrossRef |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| EndPage | 550 |
| ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_3eeb0eb73c004513ad07848b9ae0ce0c 10_37493_2409_1030_2024_3_16 |
| GroupedDBID | AAYXX ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS CITATION GROUPED_DOAJ |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c1576-38cdb03dd0f6159ef8d64d1925430ff1b613be712e4aca7ddfa7e95b288e4b213 |
| IEDL.DBID | DOA |
| ISSN | 2409-1030 |
| IngestDate | Fri Oct 03 12:51:50 EDT 2025 Sat Nov 29 03:21:30 EST 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 3 |
| Language | English Russian |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c1576-38cdb03dd0f6159ef8d64d1925430ff1b613be712e4aca7ddfa7e95b288e4b213 |
| ORCID | 0000-0001-9373-8415 0000-0001-9938-5809 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://doaj.org/article/3eeb0eb73c004513ad07848b9ae0ce0c |
| PageCount | 6 |
| ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_3eeb0eb73c004513ad07848b9ae0ce0c crossref_primary_10_37493_2409_1030_2024_3_16 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2024-11-01 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2024-11-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 11 year: 2024 text: 2024-11-01 day: 01 |
| PublicationDecade | 2020 |
| PublicationTitle | Гуманитарные и юридические исследования |
| PublicationYear | 2024 |
| Publisher | North-Caucasus Federal University |
| Publisher_xml | – name: North-Caucasus Federal University |
| SSID | ssib057823430 |
| Score | 2.27298 |
| Snippet | Introduction. Constitutional review is the cornerstone in maintaining the constitutional order, ensuring compliance with the rule of law and protecting... |
| SourceID | doaj crossref |
| SourceType | Open Website Index Database |
| StartPage | 545 |
| SubjectTerms | constitution constitutional control constitutional court constitutional review interpretation of constitutional norms judicial constitutional review judicial law-making law enforcement activities models of constitutional review |
| Title | Judicial constitutional control In Russia and foreign countries: models, significance and specificity |
| URI | https://doaj.org/article/3eeb0eb73c004513ad07848b9ae0ce0c |
| Volume | 11 |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVAON databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals issn: 2409-1030 databaseCode: DOA dateStart: 20140101 customDbUrl: isFulltext: true dateEnd: 20241231 titleUrlDefault: https://www.doaj.org/ omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssib057823430 providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1LS8QwEA4iHryIouL6IgePZrdt0ibxpuKil0VEYW8hT_DSlX34-51J69KbF6Gn0Jb0m9D5JpmZj5CbOkkg0XXNQpEkE-BDmI7RsaaOZZC6Slb7LDYhZzM1n-vXgdQX5oR17YE74CYcniyik9znVijcBnBqQjltY-Hhwr8vsJ5BMAUrCXu0c5GFRsBjaYZaWl3dHJdC88l2EALESoz5GOXOB35p0L4_-5npITnoCSK97yZ2RHaWm2MSsXgCN7epX_Sn-3kLj_aZ5vSlpW8bmJSltg00dXqbNAtBYCx8R7PizeqWYr4GZgehsfO9WGqJA8DGT8jH9On98Zn1AgnMlxAnMK58cAUPgDMQEx2TCo0IwNlq-PaUSge-2kVZVlFYb2UIycqoa1cpFYWrSn5KdttFG88IBd7gG7CO43USvqmsEjZKPIZJ0RelGxH2C4_56vpgGIgfMpwG4TQIp0E4DTdlMyIPiOH2XuxinQfAtqa3rfnLtuf_8ZILso-z6uoHL8nuermJV2TPf68_V8vrvGx-AJyHxdg |
| linkProvider | Directory of Open Access Journals |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Judicial+constitutional+control+In+Russia+and+foreign+countries%3A+models%2C+significance+and+specificity&rft.jtitle=%D0%93%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5+%D0%B8+%D1%8E%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5+%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F&rft.au=F.+S.+Bekirova&rft.au=R.+R.+Gabrilyan&rft.date=2024-11-01&rft.pub=North-Caucasus+Federal+University&rft.issn=2409-1030&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=545&rft.epage=550&rft_id=info:doi/10.37493%2F2409-1030.2024.3.16&rft.externalDBID=DOA&rft.externalDocID=oai_doaj_org_article_3eeb0eb73c004513ad07848b9ae0ce0c |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=2409-1030&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=2409-1030&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=2409-1030&client=summon |