Abstract
This Chapter examines the implementation of the rule of law doctrine in Russia. It focuses primarily on the judicial power of the Constitutional Court. It also undertakes a philosophical analysis of the similarities and differences between the rule of law and the legal state doctrines.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Translator’s note: sometimes the latter is also called the rule-of-law state.
- 2.
N.S. Bondar, Sudebnyi konstitucionalizm v Rossii (Judicial Constitutionalism in Russia) (2012) at 109.
- 3.
V.D. Zorkin, Konstitucionno-pravovoe razvitie Rossii (Constitutional Legal Development of Russia) (2011) at 53.
- 4.
P.D. Barenboim, Sootnoshenie doktrin verhovenstva prava i pravovogo gosudarstva kak glavnyi vopros filosofii prava i konstitucionalizma (The Interrelation of the Rule of Law and the Legal State Doctrines as the Key Issue of Legal Philosophy and Constitutionalism) (2013).
- 5.
Translator’s note: in Russian, law and right—as legal terms—are represented by the same word pravo, hence the play on words in the original.
- 6.
A.V. Dicey, “Osnovy gosudarstvennogo prava Anglii”, A Digest of the Law of England (1907) 210.
- 7.
Ye. Spektorsky, “K sporu o real’nosti prava” (On the Dispute About the Reality of Law), Yuridicheskii vestnik (1914), Vol. 5.
- 8.
Jürgen Habermaass, Raskolotyi Zapad (The Divided West) (2008) at 127–128. Noviy Mir.
- 9.
R. Rorty, Filosofiya i zerkalo prirody (Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature) (1997). Publishing House of the Novosibirsk University.
- 10.
Ye.V. Spektorsky, “Nominalizm i realizm v obschestvennyh naukah” (Nominalism and Realism in Social Sciences), Yuridicheskii vestnik (1915), Vol. 9 (1).
- 11.
Id. at 18. When Kant declared as universal such elements of cognition, which were made real not by an a priori reality of ante res and not by an inductive reality of in rebus, he was, to a certain degree, also resolving a dispute between realists and nominalists, and he did so in the spirit of conciliatory conceptualism. Id. at 5.
- 12.
A.N. Sokolov, Id, at 69.
- 13.
Infallibility from the [papal] throne (Lat.)
- 14.
G.A. Gadzhiev, Ontologiya prava (The Ontology of Law) (2013), at 237. Norma, Infra-M.
- 15.
A. Nussberger, “Vosstanovlenie Vavilonskoi bashni” in “Edinoe pravovoe prostranstvo Evropy i praktika konstitucionnogo pravosudiya”—Sbornik dokladov (“Rebuildng the Tower of Babel”, in “The Common Legal Space of Europe and the Practice of Constitutional Justice” – A Collection of Scientific Papers) (2007) at 22.
- 16.
See Bondar, supra note 2.
- 17.
V. Zorkin, “Integraciya evropeiskogo konstitucionnogo prostranstva: vyzovy i otvety”, “Edinoe pravovoe prostranstvo Evropy i praktika konstitucionnogo pravosudiya” – Sborkik dokladov, supra note 15, at 134.
- 18.
I.M. Tyutryumov, Zakony grajdanskie s raz’yasneniyami Pravitel’stvuyuschego Senata (Civil Laws with Clarifications by the Ruling Senate) (1911).
- 19.
V.V. Bibihin, Vvedenie v filosofiyu prava (An Introduction to Legal Philosophy) (2005) at 190. Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
- 20.
Robert Alexy, “Suschestvovanie prav cheloveka” (The Existence of Human Rights), 4 Pravovedenie (2011).
- 21.
Gosudarstvennoe pravo Germanii (German National Law), Vol. 1 (1994) at 12.
- 22.
Id at 14.
- 23.
S. Tsakirakis, “Proportionality: An Assault on Human Rights?”, 2 Comparative Constitutional Review (2011); Bernhard Schlink, “Proportionality” (to be printed); Moshe Cohen-Eliya, Iddo Porat, “American Method of Weighting Interests and German Test of Proportionality: Historical Roots”, 3 Comparative Constitutional Review (2011); Madkhav Kosla, “Proportionality: An Assault on Human Rights? Responding to Stavros Tsakirakis”, 5 Comparative Constitutional Review (2011).
- 24.
R. Stammler, Hozyaistvo i pravo s tochki zreniya materialisticheskogo ponimaniya istorii (Industry and Law in Terms of Materialistic Understanding of History) (2010). Comkniga.
- 25.
James M. Buchanan, The Limits of Liberty. Between Anarchy and Leviathan (1975). The University of Chicago Press, Chicago/London.
- 26.
Jürgen Habermaass, supra note 9, at 92.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gadzhiev, G.A. (2014). The Russian Judicial Doctrine of the Rule of Law: Twenty Years After. In: Silkenat, J., Hickey Jr., J., Barenboim, P. (eds) The Legal Doctrines of the Rule of Law and the Legal State (Rechtsstaat). Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 38. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05585-5_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05585-5_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-05584-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05585-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)