Available in Russian
CONTENTS
THEORY OF CONSTITUTIONALISM
IMAGINARY CONSTITUTIONS: FROM USEFUL FICTION TO DESTRUCTIVE UTOPIA
In the context of the rapid changes in the modern world associated with globalization, informatization, and the revision of ethical standards of mass behavior, legal theory faces a number of problems — the loss of consensus in understanding global constitutionalism, growing disagreements regarding its values and principles, and unclear prospects for the future. What was previously defined as a social ideal is disappearing — a system of ideas about a perfect legal system that is both rational, fair, and effective and capable of serving as a guideline for legislators. This normative vacuum is designed to compensate for the theory of imaginary constitutionalism — those ideal projects of the constitutional system, the competition of which reflects the rivalry of various ideologies, regions, and political trends for the image of the future global legal order. From these positions, it becomes possible to conduct a comparative study of imaginary constitutions in the coordinates of space, time, and the meaning of existence; in the categories of value, content, and procedural parameters; in systems of information encoding in images, symbols, and the language of their texts; in mechanisms of representation in public legal consciousness; as well as in the degree of influence on changes in real constitutionalism in the present and its transformation in the future. The result of this study is a conclusion about the defining role of the constitutional imagination as a mechanism for the cognitive construction of legal reality in conditions of increasing information and normative uncertainty, when the current state of affairs ceases to suit, and the future remains uncertain. This role is manifested in the flexibility of the structure and the diversity of social functions of imaginary constitutionalism, which can act as a form of ideological justification for the legitimacy of the legal system, an incentive for constitutional modernization from the perspective of changing social reality, become its brake or a justification for constitutional retraditionalization, and finally, fulfill the tasks of a radical social utopia leading to the destruction of the supporting foundations of modern constitutionalism. This is what makes imaginary constitutionalism the sphere of developing competing social ideals, ethical and legal norms, and legal policy, and its theorists the designers of the constitutional forms of the future.
LAW, JUSTICE AND LOCAL GOVERNANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL JUDICIAL PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT TO LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT IN RUSSIA: CURRENT TRENDS IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE
The Federal Law on the General Principles of the Organization of Local Self-Government within the Unified System of Public Authority, adopted one year ago, marked a new stage of municipal reform in many constituent entities of the Russian Federation and, in this connection, renewed interest in the constitutional nature of the right to local self-government as an object of judicial protection in general and constitutional adjudication in particular. The multiplicity of actors exercising rights in the sphere of local self-government, despite the existence of a single and universal instrument of constitutional judicial protection in Russia — a complaint on violation of constitutional rights — predetermines a differentiated approach to protecting different categories of rights in the sphere of local selfgovernment that vary in their legal nature. The article proposes a classification of these rights as objects of judicial protection depending on their normative content, the categories of persons who hold these rights, the legal relationships within which the rights are exercised, the addressees of the rights (the obligated party in the relevant legal relationships), as well as the subject matter and method of judicial protection. This classification scheme enables a systematic comparison of models for protecting the right to local self-government in different legal systems where this right is constitutionally recognized. The article presents a comparative analysis of the Russian and German models of constitutional judicial protection of the right to local and communal self-government, considering differences in the constitutional interpretation of both the subjects and the substance of this right. Particular attention is devoted to the Russian constitutional judicial practice in 2025 and 2026 concerning the protection of the rights of municipalities and local self-government bodies within the system of public authority relations. The article also examines the prospects for constitutional conflicts arising from municipal-territorial reforms in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Additionally, the analysis focuses on the specific features of protecting the rights of municipal office holders, as well as the constitutional issues connected with the exercise of their special legal status and constitutional guarantees when they are subjected to administrative or constitutional legal liability.
EXPERIMENT IN CONSTITUTIONAL EVOLUTION
CONSTITUTIONAL FOUNDATIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF EXPERIMENTAL LEGAL REGIMES IN FRANCE
This paper examines the institution of experimental legal regimes as a mechanism for implementing evidence-based policy, offering an analysis of French regulatory experiences. It reviews general scientific approaches to experimental regulation, drawing on the works of R. Fisher, D. Campbell, J. Stanley, E. Duflo, and A. Banerjee. Particular focus is placed on the reception of the J-PAL Laboratory’s methodologies within French institutions, which shifted the discourse on legal experimentation from political assumptions to rigorous mathematical and empirical justification. The study traces the historical development of this institution in France, specifically addressing the resistance to social experimentation rooted in the Jacobin concept of a “single and indivisible Republic” and Rousseau’s “general will.” Furthermore, it explores the role of the French Constitutional Council and Council of State in establishing criteria that allow for temporary deviations from the principle of equality, subject to mandatory evaluation of pilot project results. The gradual integration of experimental principles into social regulation is illustrated through the Veil Law on voluntary termination of pregnancy, the application of criminal procedure in overseas territories, and higher education management. Special attention is paid to the 2003 constitutional reform, which enshrined the right to use experimental legal regimes in the French Constitution. The article provides a detailed analysis of the regulatory framework under Article 37.1, using specific case studies to identify both successful and failed implementation practices. The study concludes that the French model of experimental legal regulation constitutes a legally structured mechanism for testing new governance solutions, combining normative flexibility with constitutional safeguards. The author argues that the system’s effectiveness is bolstered by specialized administrative “entry points” like “France Experimentation”, which ensure that successful pilots are integrated into the national legal framework through a structured generalization process. The research demonstrates that the admissibility of such regimes depends on their limited subject matter and duration, the existence of a legitimate public purpose, compliance with the principle of equality, and the mandatory subsequent evaluation of results.
LAW AND MEDICINE
THREE APPROACHES TO REGULATING ACCESS TO HEALTH DATA FOR SECONDARY USE: THE EXPERIENCE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, THE UNITED STATES, AND CHINA
Access to health data is a necessary condition for the functioning of the healthcare system and the development of medicine. Health data are primarily personal data, the legal regime for the protection of which imposes its own limits on the free transfer of such data. States have different approaches to the legal regulation of personal data and health data in particular, which, accordingly, form different solutions to the task of enhancing access to health data both for medical practitioners and for other agents in the related fields. This research paper reviews three main approaches to the regulation of personal data, represented by three jurisdictions: the European human-centric approach, the business-centric approach of the United States and the state-centric approach of China. The research paper aims to identify the distinctive features of the implementation of these three approaches to regulating the availability of health data for secondary use by third parties. Therefore, the study analyzes the legal meaning of health data formed by social practice in the legal tradition of the state and the institutional conditions of the healthcare and health insurance systems. The human-centric approach of the European Union is built around the goal of protecting human rights to privacy, so new mechanisms for enhancing access to data are developed without exemptions from the personal data protection regime. The business-centric approach of the United States is the result of the health insurance system as firstly an environment of competition between private companies, and only secondarily a system of organizing access to medical services. The competitive component hinders the development of mechanisms for access to health data that presupposes an environment of trust and common interests. The state-centric approach of China considers personal data as a resource for achieving current goals set by the government. Therefore, mechanisms for access to health data are developed and set in operation with state engagement and/or under state control. Each of the approaches under review brings its own costs for organizing access to health data. The analysis leads to the conclusions about the obstacles to enhanced access to health data which can be avoided when developing mechanisms of this kind in Russia.
CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE
THE TYPOLOGY OF CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS’ ORDERS TO CREATE LEGISLATION
Constitutional courts may address the legislator with a requirement to amend legal regulation in order to remedy a violation of the constitution (orders to enact legislation). However, the fate of such a requirement depends not only on the legislator, but also on the court itself: on how categorical it is, how specific it is, and how reasonable the timeframe for compliance is — in other words, on whether its “configuration” proves adequate to the particular circumstances of the case and to the objectives pursued by the court. Successfully addressing this task is hardly possible without an understanding of the parameters along which orders to enact legislation can be configured. This study is devoted to developing a typology of constitutional-judicial orders that reflects the diversity and constitutional significance of these parameters. Drawing on the legal systems of Germany, Canada, Italy, Russia, South Africa and other countries, the author demonstrates how constitutional-judicial orders to en act legislation are formulated, implemented, and ignored, and why this occurs. The article shows how bodies of constitutional justice may refine their orders to legislators (by identifying the specific legal act requiring correction; the range of issues to be resolved; possible modes of compliance; or even the precise wording of a norm that will apply temporarily), and examines the benefits and risks associated with each method of specification. The study also explores how constitutional courts impose temporal limits on legislators for complying with their orders and how legislatures respond to such limits. On the basis of both successful and unsuccessful precedents, a checklist is developed which, if followed, may enhance the effectiveness of temporal constraints. The proposed typology of constitutional-judicial orders not only systematizes their various forms but also evaluates each of them. It is argued that significant drawbacks are inherent both in the most abstract orders and in the most detailed ones, as well as in those that impose temporal limits and those that do not. Accordingly, the typology presented here is intended to assist in selecting the most appropriate configuration of a constitutional-judicial order in each particular case, so as to achieve the most precise and timely elimination of constitutional defects by the legislator. It also creates a basis for developing criteria to assess the quality of constitutional-judicial orders to enact legislation and their potential enforceability, thereby bringing us closer to addressing the problem of ineffective implementation of acts of constitutional justice.
LIBER AMICORUM
T. G. MORSHCHAKOVA AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY
This article, timed to coincide with Professor T. G. Morshchakova’s anniversary, explores her contribution to the field of legal psychology. The author charts the evolution of her work in this direction, from isolated ideas within a broad body of work on judicial theory dating back to the 1970s to a developed theory of the psychology of constitutional proceedings that emerged by the late 2000s. Specifically, she highlights aspects of her teachings such as the psychological origins of procedural regulation and the psychological “pitfalls” of collegiality, and identifies similar problems that arise during decision-making in small groups. The author seeks to connect her observations with the normative regulation of judicial activity, both at the level of the Constitutional and general courts, identifying aspects within it that are inconsistent with the findings and recommendations of psychological science. Reference is made to research conducted by Morshchakova in the late 1980s, which explored the relationship between the legal consciousness of law enforcement officers and their predicted effectiveness of legislation. A detailed analysis is provided of the pages of her memoirs that touch on the development of legal psychology in the USSR. A conclusion is reached regarding the contribution of “talented individuals” to the development of Soviet jurisprudence, who often secretly opposed the official viewpoint. The psychological connotations of written hearings in constitutional jurisdiction bodies are discussed. On the one hand, drawing on Morshchakova’s work, it is concluded that they are inherent to the consideration of cases in constitutional courts. However, the risk of “document hypnosis” is identified, whereby judges, without hearing the parties’ arguments, deprive themselves of an important source of information necessary for making a balanced and informed decision. Overall, the article highlights the extraordinary personality of the article’s heroine and the contribution she made to the development of the independence of the judiciary in the 1990s and subsequent years.
PRAXIS
“A PROCEDURAL UNTOUCHABLE?”: THE CASE ON THE POSSIBILITY OF CHALLENGING A COURT PRESIDENT’S INACTION IN ADMINISTRATIVE COURT PROCEEDINGS
Judicial independence is a foundational constitutional guarantee. Its purpose, however, is not to place every aspect of court activity beyond legal control, but to protect judges in the adjudication of particular cases. Outside the adjudicative function, a court continues to operate as a public institution, and the president of a court acts as a public official exercising administrative and managerial authority. This distinction makes the scope of judicial review over the president’s administrative action or inaction a matter of constitutional significance. This article examines the constitutionality of an approach that excludes from judicial review the actions and inaction of a court president taken outside the adjudication of a particular case and related to the administration of the court. The analysis of Russian judicial practice shows that courts of general jurisdiction treat the president of a court, even when acting not as a judge deciding a case but as an official managing the work of the court, as falling outside the category of public actors whose decisions, actions, or inaction may be challenged under Chapter 22 of the Russian Code of Administrative Court Proceedings. As a result, a citizen who petitions the president of a court on matters concerning court administration retains only a formal right to petition, while being denied judicial protection against the official’s failure to provide a substantive response. The article argues that this interpretation of the Code of Administrative Court Proceedings fails to account for the dual legal status of the court president. It improperly extends the constitutional guarantees of judicial independence to the sphere of court administration, creates legal uncertainty, and confers an unjustified privilege on a particular category of public officials. The article concludes that procedural law should be interpreted in constitutional terms to allow judicial review, under Chapter 22 of the Code, of administrative and managerial actions or inaction of a court president that are unrelated to the adjudication of a particular case, affect a citizen’s rights or legally protected interests, and are not subject to any other judicial procedure for review.
LEGAL NATURE OF THE SEIZURE OF PROPERTY ACQUIRED THROUGH CORRUPTION.
ANALYSIS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION JUDGMENT DATED ON OCTOBER 31, 2024 NO. 49-P
The author proceeds from the thesis that anti-corruption lawsuit nowadays is becoming the most effective and, at the same time, the least developed legal means of combating corruption offenses and minimizing the impact of such offenses. According to legal scholarship and practical experience, two approaches to determining the legal nature of the so-called civil confiscation are most likely: a measure of civil (including tort) liability or a measure of public (including constitutional) liability. The first approach is primarily supported by disposition of this legal institution in the branch of legislation — its mention in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation; the second approach is supported, in particular, by the specifics of the legal relations preceding its application — the violation of anticorruption legislation by a public official. Based on the parameters of this legislative measure, awarded by the court on the anti-corruption claim of the prosecutor against public official (member of his family), it is concluded that the second approach is correct, still also imperfect. To support this, the author cites and analyzes particular points from Resolution No. 49-P of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (October 31, 2024), which calls this measure a “special form of legal state coercion,” as well as its practice in certain other categories of cases. This is not altered by the fact that, according to current legal regulations, the measure in question is implemented in the form of civil claim proceedings. Meanwhile, this conclusion has not only theoretical, but also practical implications, since correct legal qualification of this legal institution significantly affects further normative development as well as application by prosecutor office and courts of its particular structural elements. In particular, this means that constitutional requirements for measures of public liability and public coercion in general (proportionality, legal certainty, presence of guilt, prohibition of retroactive effect, etc.) should also be applied to the legal mechanism under consideration.
THE SUPREME COURT OF SRI LANKA’S DECISION OF 16 JUNE 2025: A MILESTONE IN THE HISTORY OF BUDDHISM OR A LEGAL ERROR?
On 16 June 2025 the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka issued a landmark ruling requiring state authorities to issue identity cards with a special designation to women who have been ordained as nuns (bhikkhunis). Many commentators consider the ruling a turning point in the history of Buddhism, which will result in the restoration of the female order and a reorientation of Buddhist teachings toward gender egalitarianism. The Supreme Court of Sri Lanka used two sets of arguments: the first involves recognizing ordination as bhikkhunis as valid within the religious order; the second involves refusing to apply canon law with reference to the concept of public order. The second set of arguments is not explicitly stated, but it is the most important and has the most transformational potential. In fact, the Court placed the principles of gender non-discrimination enshrined in the Constitution above the canonical provisions regarding the ordination of women. This implies not only that, in the event of a conflict between the two sets of rules, the principles of non-discrimination must take precedence over the canonical provisions, but also that these principles must guide the interpretation of those provisions. The question of restoring the female order is relevant not only for the Theravāda tradition, which is widespread in Southeast Asian countries, but also for Tibetan Buddhism and, consequently, for its Russian branch, represented in Buryatia, Kalmykia, the Altai Republic, and Tyva. The first paragraph of this article examines the history of the Theravāda female order, which ended with its disappearance, attempts to restore it at present, and the controversy over the legitimacy of these attempts. The second paragraph summarizes the aforementioned ruling of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka; the third paragraph reviews the reactions to this ruling by Buddhist organizations, Buddhologists, and lawyers. The fourth paragraph presents the author’s comments on the ruling.