News and SocietyEconomy

Subjects of the federation and the general constitutional space. Some aspects

At a recent meeting of the Advisory Council of the Chairmen of the Constitutional Courts of the Subjects of the Russian Federation in Kazan, Deputy Chairman of the Constitutional Court Sergey Mavrin said that the subjects of the federation, more precisely, the constitutional justice of the republics, in effect, ensure the unity of the constitutional space in our country. Quite a controversial statement, true, not devoid of a certain logic. And for what reasons.

According to the adopted legislative norms, the constitutional statutory courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation are a legal institution that allows to take decisions in the field of constitutional law directly at the regional level. Since the launch of the judicial reform in the Russian Federation, there are already eighteen such institutions, mostly in the national republics.

At the Kazan meeting, it was stressed that the regional authorities should cooperate with the federal Constitutional Court to solve the core issues, as well as problems related to the social protection of the population. In this case, it turns out that Mr. Mavrin indirectly speaks about the absence of a single Russian constitutional space and, what is even more significant, a clear functional delimitation between courts of different levels.

According to the accepted logic, subjects of the federation have the right (but not the obligation) to create statutory courts that determine the constitutionality of all regional legal acts, including legislative ones. In this case, the local constitutional courts are automatically included in the general system of judicial power, but do not directly obey the Constitutional Court of Russia. That is, the subjects of the federation get the right to create their own internal constitutional space, only formally conforming to the all-Russian principles of constitutionalism. This is very similar to the restriction of the sovereignty of the entire state, but not to the expansion of the federal rights of the regions of the Russian Federation. And, as we understand, this is a reform of the judicial system, but not a new federal model of the Russian state.

Hence another problem arises: it is a discrete administrative device. Different types of subjects of the Russian Federation have unequal federal rights with different, functionally blurred powers, economic potential and political significance. Thus, if we proceed from the norms of international law, it turns out that the subjects of the federation are unequal. The principle of equality of territorial subjects is violated. In this sense, the appeal of the deputy head of the Constitutional Court to the formation of a common constitutional space is quite logical and justified, both from a legal and a political point of view. Another question: what to do if there is a constitution, and there is no constitutionalism?

Similar articles

 

 

 

 

Trending Now

 

 

 

 

Newest

Copyright © 2018 en.birmiss.com. Theme powered by WordPress.