Interpretation of Constitutional Rights

Available in Russian

Available for free

Author: Aleksei Dolzhikov

DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2016-4-125-151

Keywords: constitutional interpretation; constitutional justice; constitutional rights; legal methodology


Constitutionally-enacted Human rights and freedoms of the Citizen (hereafter – constitutional rights) often require clarification of their scope and limitations. Being the prerogative of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the question of interpretation of constitutional rights unites many basic problems of modern constitutionalism. This paper has the methodological aim. It initially is addressed to those who teaches and studies the general courses on the constitutional law or elective disciplines connected with protection of constitutional rights in case-law of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Beside this paper could be interesting to the participant of constitutional adjudication. In the first part of the paper the general issues of the theory of judicial interpretation and their features concerning constitutional rights are analyzed. This part of the paper due to its theoretical origin could be skipped in case of educational use only. The second part of work is devoted to the analysis of classical methods of interpretation of constitutional rights. In this regard special attention is paid on of the case-law of Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and some foreign bodies of the constitutional control which illustrates four “canons” of interpretation of constitutional rights.

Citation: Dozhikov A. (2016) Tolkovanie konstitutsionnykh prav [Interpretation of constitutional rights]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, no.4, pp.125–151. (In Russian).


Alexy R. (2003) On Balancing and Subsumption: A Structural Comparison. Ratio Juris, vol.16, no.4, pp.433–449.

Avak'yan S.A. (2007) Konstitutsionnoe pravo Rossii [Constitutional law of Russia]. In 2 vols. Vol.1, Moscow: Yurist. (In Russian).

Berlyavskiy L.G. (2013) Originalistskaya i nonoriginalistskaya kontseptsii konstitutsionnoj interpretatsii v SSHA [Originalist and nonoriginalist conception of the constitutional interpretation in the USA]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no.8, pp.101–108. (In Russian).

Betlem G. (2002) The Doctrine of Consistent Interpretation – Managing Legal Uncertainty. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, vol.22, no.3, pp.397–418.

Bhagwat A. (1997) Purpose scrutiny in constitutional analysis. California Law Review, vol.85, no.2, pp.297–369.

Blocher J. (2009) Categoricalism and balancing in first and second amendment analysis. New York University Law Review, vol.84, no.2, pp.375–439.

Bochilo A.E. (2012) Sootnoshenie kategoriy “regulirovanie” i “zashchita” prav i svobod lichnosti v resheniyakh Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii i konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii (konceptual'nye osnovy) [Relationship of the categories “regulation” and “protection” of the rights and freedoms of the person in decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the constitutional (charta) courts of subjects of the Russian Federation (conceptual bases)]. Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, no.1, pp.34–41. (In Russian).

Bydlinski F. (2006) Osnovnye polozheniya ucheniya o yuridicheskom metode [Main points on the doctrine of the legal method]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava, vol.6, no.1, pp.190 241; vol.6, no.2, pp.185–226. (In Russian).

Bydlinski F. (2007) Osnovnye polozheniya ucheniya o yuridicheskom metode [Main points on the doctrine of the legal method]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava, vol.7, pp.240–271. (In Russian).

Chemerinsky E. (2006) Constitutional law: principles and policies, 3rd ed., New York: Aspen Publishers.

Cherdancev A.F. (2012) Logiko-yazykovye fenomeny v yurisprudentsii [Logical-linguistic phenomena in law], Moscow: Norma. (In Russian).

Cross R. (1976) Statutory interpretation, London: Butterworths.

Ebzeev B.S. (2013) Chelovek, narod, gosudarstvo v konstitutsionnom stroe Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Human being, the people, the state in the constitutional system of the Russian Federation], 2nd ed., Moscow: Prospekt. (In Russian).

Edwards R.A. (2002) Judicial Deference under the Human Rights Act. The Modern Law Review, vol.65, no.6, pp.859–882.

Ely J.H. (1975) Flag Desecration: A Case Study in the Roles of Categorization and Balancing in First Amendment Analysis. Harvard Law Review, vol.88, no.7, pp.1482–1508.

Engel Ch. (2002) Das legitime Ziel als Element des Übermaßverbots. Gemeinwohl als Frage der Verfassungsdogmatik. In: Brugger W., Kirste S., Anderheiden M. (eds.) Gemeinwohl in Deutschland, Europa und der Welt, Baden-Baden: Nomos, pp.103–172.

Gasanov K.K., Stremouhov A.V. (2004) Absolyutnye prava cheloveka i ogranicheniya prav [Absolute human rights and restrictions of the rights]. Pravovedenie, no.1, pp.164–173. (In Russian).

Goldobina Z.G. (2006) Aktivizm i originalizm v deyatel‘nosti Verkhovnogo Suda i politiko-pravovoj doktrine SSHA [Activism and the originalizm in activity of the Supreme Court and the political legal doctrine of the USA]. Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, no.3, pp.81–88. (In Russian).

Gordon R. (2002) Legitimate Aim: A Dimly Lit Road. European Human Rights Law Review, vol.7, no.4, pp.421–427.

Häberle P. (1989) Grundrechtsgeltung und Grundrechtsinterpretation im Verfassungsstaat: zugleich zur Rechtsvergleichung als «fünfter» Auslegungsmethode. Juristenzeitung, vol.44, no.20, pp.913–919.

Harris Ph. (2007) An introduction to law, 7th ed., Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Herdegen M. (2004) Verfassungsinterpretation als methodische Disziplin. Juristenzeitung, vol.59, no.18, pp.873–879.

Hesse K. (1981) Osnovy konstitutsionnogo prava FRG [Fundamentals of the constitutional law of FRG], Moscow: Yuridicheskaya literatura. (In Russian).

Kochenov D. (2010) Regional Citizenships and EU law: The Case of the Aland Islands and New Caledonia. European Law Review, vol.35, no.3, pp.307–324.

Kommers D.P., Finn J.E., Jacobsohn G.J. (2010) American constitutional law: essays, cases, and comparative notes, 3rd ed., Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Kramer E.A. (2013) Juristische Methodenlehre, 4th ed., München: C.H.Beck.

Krasnov M. (2016) Tolkovaniya Konstitutsii kak ee fakticheskie popravki [Constitutional Interpretation as its actual amendments]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, no.1, pp.77–91. (In Russian).

Kravez I.A. (2003) Konstitutsiya i germenevtika: Voprosy i teorii [Constitution and hermeneutics: Questions and theories]. Pravovedenie, no.5, pp.38–49. (In Russian).

Malakhov V.S. (2010) Germenevtika [Hermeneutic] in: Stepin V.S. (ed.) Novaya filosofskaya entsiklopediya, 2nd ed., Moscow: Mysl', vol.1, pp.512. (In Russian).

Muranov A.I. (2009) Printsipial'naya dopustimost' advokatskoj monopolii v svete aktov Konstitutsionnogo Suda i Konstitutsii RF [The basic admissibility of lawyer monopoly in the light of acts of the Constitutional Court and the Constitution of the Russian Federation]. Zakon, no.4, pp.53–71. (In Russian).

Murphy A.W. (1975) Old Maxims Never Die: The “Plain-Meaning Rule” and Statutory Interpretation in the “Modern” Federal Courts. Columbia Law Review, vol.75, no.7, pp.1299–1317.

Nelson C. (2003) Originalism and interpretive conventions. The University of Chicago Law Review, vol.70, no.2, pp.519–598.

Nikiforov B.S. (ed.) (1979) Latinskaya yuridicheskaya frazeologiya [Latin legal phraseology], Moscow: Yuridicheskaya literatura. (In Russian).

Ost F. (1992) The original canons of interpretation of the European Court of Human Rights. In: Delmas-Marty M. (ed.) The European convention of human Rights: international protection versus national restrictions, Dordrecht: M.Nijhoff Publishers, pp.283–318.

Petrushev V.A. (2009) Teoriya tolkovaniya prava kak sostavnaya chast' obshchej teorii prava [Theory of legal interpretation as component of the general theory of law]. Lex Russica, vol.LXVIII, no.2, pp.410–418. (In Russian).

Reimer F. (2016) Juristische Methodenlehre. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

Rüthers B. (2015) Rechtstheorie: mit juristischer Methodenlehre, 8th ed., München: C.H.Beck.

Savin‘i F.K., von (2011) Sistema sovremennogo rimskogo prava [System of the modern Roman law]. Vol.I, Moscow: Statut. (In Russian).

Scalia A. (1988) Originalism: The lesser evil. University of Cincinnati Law Review, vol.57, no.3, pp.849–866.

Scalia A. (1989) Judicial deference to administrative interpretations of law. Duke Law Journal, vol.1989, no.3, pp.511–521.

Schauer F. (2010) Balancing, Subsumption, and the Constraining Role of Legal Text. Law and Ethics of Human Rights, vol.4, no.1, pp.34–45.

Solum L.B. (2009) Legal Theory Lexicon: Interpretation and Construction. Legal Theory Blog, February 8. Available at: (accessed 01.06.2016).

Solum L.B. (2010) The Interpretation-Construction Distinction. Constitutional Commentary, vol.27, pp.95–118.

Stück H. (1998) Subsumtion und Abwägung. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, vol.84, no.3, pp.405–419.

Sullivan K.M. (1998) Post-liberal judging: the roles of categorization and balancing. University of Colorado Law Review, vol.63, pp.293–317.

Taeva N.E. (2006) Tolkovanie konstitutsionno-pravovykh norm v Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Interpretation of constitutional provisions in the Russian Federation], Moscow: TK Velbi; Prospekt. (In Russian).

Taeva N.E. (2014) Nekotorye problemy vyyavleniya konstitutsionno-pravovogo smysla norm Konstitutsionnym Sudom RF [Some problems of identification of constitutional sense of legal norms by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation]. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo, no.12, pp.24–28. (In Russian).