Available only in Russian
Brazil, Canada, Georgia, India, Ireland, Latvia, New Zealand, Russia, Switzerland, USA
POLITICAL DIMENSION OF A CONSTITUTION
Rosalind Dixon, Tom Ginsburg
The article is available for free download
Constitutional review, and constitutions more broadly, have been analyzed as providing political insurance for parties who risk declining power. This article develops a typology of risks against which insurance may be useful, and explains how each has its own distinctive institutional implications. It suggests that political elites may seek insurance against three distinct risks – to their power, person, and policies – and that each form of insurance implies somewhat different constitutional choices in terms of the jurisdiction, staffing, and access to courts.
One of the side effects of the application of plurality voting systems is the distortion of the proportionality between the votes cast for the party and the number of seats in parliament that the party receives as a result of the elections. However, the use of the proportional representation in democratic countries with a multi-party political system is closely linked to the institutions of coalition governments and coalition agreements.
This article considers the trend of increasing the direct state financing of current activities of political parties in Russia. The chronological scope of the study covers the period from 2004, when the direct public funding of political parties was introduced, to 2017. The factors that caused the increase in state funding are examined, and its impact on the party system is determined. The author’s conclusions are based on an analysis of information resulting from audits of consolidated financial statements of political parties, as well as other data posted on the website of the Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation.
CONSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY: DISCUSSION CONTINUES
This article continues a series of Russian-language publications devoted to the judicial doctrine of constitutional (national) identity, which began to appear extensively after 2016 due to the adoption of a number of judgments of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.
The axiological dimensions of constitutional phenomena are today receiving ever more significant meaning and sharpness. It would seem that the prevailing understanding that constitutional values serve the universal integrative basis for societal and international cooperation and characterize the general measure of evaluating the legal quality of public policy is undergoing trials. When considered as the quintessence of the distinctive character of a people that is endowed in a higher formal legal cloud, constitutional values become not basic, but legitimate, meaning that in the first place it takes a functional ring – as a politically reasonable legal expression of the existence of a national culture.
The article deals with the burden of proof in Russian and American constitutional litigation. It discusses the legal nature of evidential burden, examines its allocation between the parties, and determines the significance of the presumption of constitutionality in shifting the burden of proof from the government to the citizen, and vice versa. The author claims that within the framework of judicial review of legislative actions, there is a limited mechanism for the distribution of the burden of producing evidence.
REGLAMENTATION OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
This article is dedicated to issues of legislative regulation of the place of public events. The concept of “acceptability” of a place for holding a public event is considered, as well as the principle of proportionality, which is necessary to maintain a balance between the right to freedom of assembly and the rights and freedoms of others. The main object of analysis is the restriction of the right to freedom of assembly by establishing a legislative ban on holding public events in certain places.
Book review: Van Reybrouck D. Against Elections: The Case For Democracy. London: The Bodley Head, 2016.
The book that is the object of this review introduces an idea that the appointment of representative organs by means of sortition is a more democratic procedure than elections. The author starts his reasoning with an intensive critique on the current situation of representative institutions in democratic countries.