The main directions of implementation of constitutionalization of law and order in the context of identifying, minimizing and eliminating constitutional risks and potential threats are considered. Based on the analysis of normative and doctrinal sources and jurisprudence, the author highlights the primary importance and the role of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the realization of its provisions in the structure of the constitutional and legal mechanism applied to secure the rule of law. The concept is defined and the main constitutional risks, their types and categories are determined; the basic directions of realization of constitutionalization of law and order are developed. The problems of ensuring the supremacy and direct action of the Russian Constitution during constitutional reforms are highlighted. Attention is drawn to the need for thoughtful and consistent implementation, while such transformations are reasonably considered in the legal doctrine as a constitutional risk. It is summarized that the constitutionalization of the law and order should be carried out in the context of timely detection and effective elimination (minimization) of constitutional risks. Minimizing constitutional risks and neutralizing potential threats predetermine the real opportunities for a qualitative embodiment of the idea of the constitutionalization of the rule of law in general.
The relevance of the study is determined by the fact that, on the basis of a newly discovered document from a private archive, an attempt has been made to consider the little-studied topic — the serfs’ “search for liberty” in the 1820s and reaction to it by both local authorities and higher state institutions. Officially, by the law of 1815, peasants were forbidden to seek liberty; they were recognized as serfs, regardless, under which census the landowner had recorded them. In practice, as confirmed by the analyzed document, the serfs’ search for liberty continued; both local and central authorities continued to receive petitions at least until the codification of the imperial legislation in the early 1830s. The analyzed document is a report of the Orenburg gubernia prosecutor Garbovsky addressed to the Minister of Justice of Russia D.I. Lobanov-Rostovsky (1826), which contains a statement of the facts of the case. Alongside with standard language of official correspondence, the document contains some phrases which indicate that there are elements of personal correspondence in it, the correspondent somewhat overstepping the boundaries official letter. The report testifies that peasants of the Buzuluk uezd of the Orenburg gubernia I. Ivanov and F. Petrov demanded to gauge the legality of their continued serfdom, but the Buzuluk uezd court dragged out proceedings. Garbovsky petitions for speedy investigation and there is a resolution, apparently in the Minister’s hand, that the Simbirsk and Kazan gubernia prosecutors should provide materials related to the legal status of the relatives of the “seekers for liberty” that were necessary for the correct solution of the case. The brevity of the document and lack of further correspondence on the issue does not allow any conclusion on how the case was resolved. However, the fact itself of appealing to the minister in connection with the peasants’ “search for liberty,” as well as admission of the petition by the lower authority and by the head of the imperial justice department speaks for itself.
The rule of law is a special state of social relations. The law enforcement block of the state mechanism is primarily responsible for maintaining law and order. This publication examines precisely the constitutional legal order. It also examines the role of the internal affairs bodies (as a key law enforcement agency) in ensuring law and order. The norms of the Basic Law contain the initial foundations and predetermine the system and features of the functioning of all executive authorities (including internal affairs bodies). Subsequently, the norms of the Constitution of the Russian Federation are concretized in sectoral legislation.
Though the Silk Road has long fascinated writers and archaeologists, its northern-most branch has been comparatively neglected in ancient and modern times. This timely volume about the route between the Volga and Kama Rivers Regions and the classical world, rectifies this imbalance. It provides a reader of literary sources regarding trade between these two regions, written by Greek and Roman authors, but also a catalogue of the archaeological remains of transit trade in the Volga and Kama Rivers Regions. As such, it contains a more rounded view than all previous accounts, as it does not only rely on Classical, literary perspectives on this trade network, but is able to examine its effects on both groups of traders. It also carefully traces how these trade relations changed over time as the societies at both ends of it constantly evolved, treating this subject over the course of thirteen hundred years, from the sixth century B.C. to the seventh century A.D. The value of this book lies in the fact that the comprehensive and thorough archaeological, and textual, analysis will allow a more precise and complete examination of the main mechanisms of trade and economic relationships between societies which occupied different levels of socio-economic and political development.
