The full text of the article is available only in Russian.
The paper substantiates the thesis that the distinction between proactive and the reactive rulemaking [lawmaking] becomes much more distinct and significant in crisis periods of societal development. In such periods, when social systems face huge challenges, the corresponding transformation of legal systems either follows the logic of preserving existing institutions and values (reactive law), — alternatively — goal-setting is based on lawmaking aimed at transforming the social reality (proactive law). Both proactive and reactive lawmaking can come into conflict with the existing constitution, moving society to change it by bringing it into compliance with changed goals and values or changed social realities. In this regard, the fundamental differences between proactive law and reactive law are determined, based on the necessity of introducing these understandings into the conceptual space of social legal analysis. In addition, the concept of anticipatory rulemaking, which has become widespread in Russian legal publications, is analyzed, and the irrelevance thereof to the purposes of the research in question is shown. The concept of proactive law is analyzed in more detail and depth, resulting in identification and description of two main types of this kind of rulemaking. The first type, called pragmatic proactive law, is rulemaking based on practical objectives. This type is characterized by an intention to change social reality without affecting the values of the society being reformed through development and adoption of new laws. Unlike the first one, the second type is initiated by a process of value reassessment and abandonment of old ideals in favor of new ones. The desire to restore the lost correlation between the system of values and social practices gives birth to ethico-teleological proactive law or value-based rulemaking. The transformations in legal systems during the last decade are further considered and analyzed in the context of the major challenges whose impact entails the need to choose between proactive and reactive rulemaking, and — in the instance of proactive rulemaking — gives rise to a dichotomy of the pragmatic-goal-oriented type and the value-based type. It is concluded that it is necessary to include a conceptual-and-methodological model of analysis in the toolkit of analysis of the lawmaking policy of present-day Russia, especially in evaluating the consistency of innovations with constitutional identity.
About the author:
Vladimir Przhilenskiy — Doctor of Philosophy, Professor of the Department of Philosophy and Sociology, Kutafin State Law University, Moscow, Russia
Citation: Przhilenskiy V. (2020) Pravo proaktivnoe i pravo reaktivnoe: transformatsiya natsional’nykh pravovykh sistem v usloviyakh bol’shikh vyzovov [Proactive law and reactive law: transformation of legal systems in the face of great challenges]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.29, no.5, pp.39–55. (In Russian).
Akopyan O.A., Vlasova N.V., Gracheva S.A. (eds.) (2014) Pravovye modeli i realnost’: monografiya [Legal models and reality: a monograph], Moscow: INFRA-M. (In Russian).
Alekseev N.N. (2003) Russkiy narod i gosudarstvo [Russian people and state], Moscow: Agraf. (In Russian).
Burсkhardt J. (1996) Kul’tura Vozrozhdeniya v Italii [The civilization of the Renaissance in Italy], N.N.Balashov, I.I.Makhan’kov (transl.), Moscow: Yurist. (In Russian).
De Sousa Santos B. (2002) Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization and Emancipation, London: Butterworths Lexis Nexis.
Elizarov M.V. (2009) Posledstviya “stiraniya” granits sotsial’no-pravovogo prostranstva gosudarstva v usloviyakh globalizatsii [Consequences of “erasing” the boundaries of the social and legal space of the state in the context of globalization]. Vestnik Bashkirskogo universiteta, vol.14, no.3, pp.949–951. (In Russian).
Fedotova V.G. (2005) Khoroshee obshchestvo [Good Society], Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya. (In Russian).
Fung Yu-lan (1998) Kratkaya istoriya kitayskoy filosofii [A brief history of Chinese philosophy], R.V.Kotenko (transl.), Saint Petersburg: Evraziya. (In Russian).
Górecki J. (2017) Justifying Ethics: Human Rights and Human Nature, London: Routledge.
Granet M. (2004) Kitayskaya mysl’ [Chinese thought], V.B.Iordanskiy (transl.), Moscow: Respublika. (In Russian).
Habermas J. (2001) Moral’noe soznanie i kommunikativnoe deystvie [Moral consciousness and communicative action], D.Sklyadnev (transl.), Saint Petersburg: Nauka. (In Russian).
Habermas J. (2007) Teoriya kommunikativnogo deystviya. Ponyatie ratsional’nosti (fragmenty iz knigi; per. A.B.Rakhmanova) [The theory of communicative action. The concept of rationality (fragments from the book; transl. by A.B.Rakhmanov)]. Voprosy sotsial’noy teorii: nauchnyy almanakh, vol.1, no.1, pp.229–245. (In Russian).
Hegel G.W.F. (1990) Filosofiya prava [Elements of the philosophy of right], B.G.Stolpner, M.I.Levina (transl.), Moscow: Mysl’. (In Russian).
Hondeghem A., Rousseaux X., Schoenaers F. (eds.) (2016) Modernisation of the Criminal Justice Chain and the Judicial System. New Insights on Trust, Cooperation and Human Capital, Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Khaustova M.G. (2013) Tendentsii razvitiya prava v usloviyakh globalizatsii [Trends in the development of law in the context of globalization]. Problemy zakonnosti, no.124, pp.3–15. (In Russian).
Lapin N.I. (2017) Bol’shie vyzovy v novoy Rossii i razvitie innovatsionnykh sistem ee regionov [Big challenges of new Russia and development of innovative systems in its regions]. Vestnik Tyumenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Sotsial’no-ekonomicheskie i pravovye issledovaniya, vol.3, no.3, pp.8–18. (In Russian).
Litvinova L.V. (ed.) (1972) Drevnekitayskaya filosofiya: Sobranie tekstov v 2 tomakh. [Ancient Chinese philosophy: Collection of texts in two volumes], Moscow: Mysl’. (In Russian).
Mamchun V.V., Baranova M.V. (2019) Operezhayushchee pravotvorchestvo kak forma pravotvorcheskogo riska [Advance lawmaking as a form of lawmaking risk]. Vestnik Saratovskoy gosudarstvennoy yuridicheskoy akademii, vol.128, no.3, pp.43–61. (In Russian).
Pico della Mirandola G. (1962) Rech’ o dostoinstve cheloveka [The oration on the dignity of man]. In: Istoriya estetiki. Pamyatniki mirovoy esteticheskoy mysli: v 5 tomakh [History of aesthetics. Masterpieces of world aesthetic thought: in 5 volumes], vol.1, Moscow: Akademiya Khudozhestv SSSR, pp.506–514. (In Russian).
Przhilenskiy V., Zakharova M. (2016) Which Way is the Russian Double-headed Eagle Looking? Russian Law Journal, vol.4, no.2, pp.6–25.
Przhilenskiy V.I. (2018) Gumanizm, gumanitarnye tsennosti i poiski osnovaniy sovremennoy bioetiki [Humanism, humanitarian values and the search for the foundations of modern bioethics]. Filosofskie nauki, no.11, pp.7–27. (In Russian).
Przhilenskiy V.I., Ogorodnikov A.Yu. (2016) Aksiologicheskie osnovaniya sotsial’nogo inzhiniringa: perspektivy modernizatsii rossiyskogo obshchestva [Axiological foundations of social engineering: prospects for the modernization of Russian society]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, no.4, pp.65–74. (In Russian).
Rozhdestvenskaya S.M., Klochkov V.V. (2017) Paradigma “bol’shikh vyzovov” v sisteme strategicheskogo planirovaniya nauchno-tekhnologicheskogo razvitiya [The paradigm of “big challenges” in the system of strategic planning of scientific and technological development]. Rossiya: tendentsiya i perspektivy razvitiya, no.12, pp.389–394. (In Russian).
Semenov V.E. (2014) Humaniora: genezis i prednaznachenie [Humaniora: genesis and predestination]. In: Levit S.Ya. (ed.) Gumanitarnoe znanie i vyzovy vremeni [Humanitarian knowledge and challenges of the time], Moscow; Saint Petersburg: Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ; Universitetskaya kniga, pp.54–72. (In Russian).
Shang Yang (1993) Kniga pravitelya oblasti Shan [The book of lord Shang], L.S.Perelomova (transl.), Moscow: Ladomir. (In Russian).
Toynbee A.J. (2009) Issledovanie istorii. Vozniknovenie, rost i raspad tsivilizatsiy [A study of history. The geneses, growths and breakdowns of civilizations], K.Ya.Kozhurin (transl.), Moscow: AST. (In Russian).
Toynbee A.J., Huntington S.P. (2016) Vyzovy i otvety: Kak gibnut tsivilizatsii [Challenges and answers: How civilizations are dying], E.D.Zharkov, P.Cheremushkin, Yu.Novikov (transl.), Moscow: Algoritm. (In Russian).
Tret’yakov V.T. (2007) Nauka byt’ Rossiey: nashi natsional’nye interesy i puti ikh realizatsii [The science of being Russia: our national interests and ways of their realization], Moscow: Russkiy mir. (In Russian).
Troitskaya A., Khramova T. (2018) Osnovy osnov: ekspressivnyy i funktsional’nyy potentsial konstitutsionnykh ustremleniy [Constitutional cornerstones: expressive and functional potential of constitutional aspirations]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.27, no.1, pp.54–79. (In Russian).
Vasil’eva T.A. (2019) Sud ES i konstitutsionnye sudy gosudarstv — chlenov Evropeyskogo soyuza v poiskakh konstitutsionnoy identichnosti [The Court of Justice of the EU and constitutional courts of EU member states in search of constitutional identity]. Trudy Instituta gosudarstva i prava Rossiyskoy akademii nauk, vol.14, no.2, pp.32–58. (In Russian).
Zakharova M.V. (2014) Sravnitel’noe pravovedenie: voprosy teorii i praktiki: monografiya [Comparative jurisprudence: theory and practice: a monograph.], Moscow: Prospekt. (In Russian).
Zakharova M.V. (2019) Otvety sravnitel’nogo prava na tekhnologicheskie vyzovy vneshney sredy [Answers of comparative law to the technological challenges of the external environment]. Yuridicheskoe obrazovanie i nauka, no.8, pp.33–37. (In Russian).
Moscow, Shchepkina str., 8
+7 (495) 608-69-59
+7 (495) 608-66-35