Alexandr Borisovich Lisjutkin
Professor of the Department of theory of state and law of the Saratov State Law Academy, doctor of legal sciences, professor
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Annotation: the article analyzes the problem of truthfulness and reliability of abstract-theoretical constructions used in legal science and practice. Formulation of this problem is due to the transformation of legal science and practice in the post-Soviet period, accompanied with significant dynamics of the categorical apparatus, which was developed in the Soviet law science. Analysis of scientific and empirical facts allows to claim that this dynamics is expressed in essential increase in number of paradoxical judgments and false conclusions. The article raises the question of the causes of this trend in the law science. Study of misconceptions has led to a conclusion that it is expedient to develop a methodology for assessing conformity of the universal concepts introduced into the scientific-empirical circulation with the principles of truth and reliability, indicating the peculiarities of the modern political and legal reality. Certain aspects of application of formal-logical and theoretical-empirical criteria of achievement of truthfulness and reliability of legal knowledge are revealed.

Keywords: truth, authenticity, methodology, method, technique, abstract-empirical concept, legal knowledge, scientific-cognitive evaluation standards, formal logical form, expression of legal knowledge, ontology of knowledge, law science, legal practice.

Mihail Petrovich Fomichenko
Professor of the Department of constitutional and international law of the All-Russian State University of Justice, doctor of legal sciences
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Annotation: the article deals with a number of constitutional provisions and their inconsistency with the mentality of the peoples who make up the Russian multinational civilization, as well as with the inconsistency of the state policy with the fundamental constitutional principles. The main reasons for the current situation are noted, including the following: doubts of the Russian society about the purity of the mechanism of the adoption of the Basic Law of the Russian Federation; an accelerated introduction into life of the multinational Russian people of the “new” principles of achieving the goals they do not quite understand; a lack of a necessary level of constitutional consciousness. An optimum directions of the solution of the considered questions are formulated and more perspective ways of an exit from the developed situation are defined. It is argued that a real matrix for the life of the Russian society should be a monolithic cohesion of its multinational people (the Russian nation) – the only source of power in the Russian Federation; that a focus on strengthening the existing modern constitutional structures that support the livelihoods of the Russian Federation as a single social organism, and a search for new ideological and conceptual components of modern Russia capable to ensure its rapid ascent and development, will have a positive effect only with an integrated approach.

Keywords: Constitution, constituent power, constitutional-legal regulation, people, nation

Julij Vladimirovich Stavropol’skij
Candidate of sociological sciences, associate professor
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Annotation: the subject matter of the scientific article is connected with the fact that armed crime exists in Japan, but in extremely small amounts. The fact is that the Japanese procedure for issuing licenses for weapons is markedly severe. The current Japanese arms legislation of 1958 begins by saying that no one has the right to possess a firearm or a sword. The aim of the work is to investigate the reasons for the success of the Japanese law enforcement agencies. The results of the study show that throughout history the culture of mass possession of weapons in Japan has not developed. The novelty of the publication is that, first, the all-encompassing power of the police is for the first time recognized as one of the reasons for the effectiveness of the Japanese system of gun control, and secondly, for the first time it is highlighted that the Japanese police is armed with firearms only in 1946. The Japanese police replace a black belt in judo and a police baton for firearms.

Keywords: Japan, weapon, license, firearm, suspect, illegal.

Tat'jana Alexandrovna Bezmaternyh
Deputy director, associate professor of the Department of liberal arts & socio-economic disciplines of the Rostov Institute (branch) of the All-Russian State University of Justice in Rostov-on-Don, candidate of pedagocial sciences
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Vasilij Dmitrievich Grachev
Professor of the Department of liberal arts & socio-economic disciplines of the Rostov Institute (branch) of the All-Russian State University of Justice in Rostov-on-Don, doctor of philosophical sciences, professor
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Bagavdin Magomedovich Magomedov
Director of the Rostov Institute (branch) of the All-Russian State University of Justice in Rostov-on-Don, candidate of legal sciences, professor
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Annotation: the article is devoted to the evolution of the direction and content of law in Russia in early XXI century. One demonstrated changes in the content of law in the coordinates of the morality – law in the culture of Russia. It is shown that the fascination of legislators with a “written”, differentiated law, unwillingness to recognize as law what is beyond the official state social control leads to a decrease in number of citizens supporting the introduced and existing legal norms. It is noted that the historically developed and still existing dual understanding of law (law as legislation and law as justice) in modern Russian society complicates an effective functioning of the legal reality, and the topic of justice in law comes to the fore. The authors have formulated some proposals of theoretical and practical nature, aimed at rebalancing the rights from formal legislation to legitimate justice.

Keywords: evolution, law, morality, justice, legal reality, legal culture, legal mentality, legal orientation, formal law, “written law”, “drama” of law, legal sphere management.

Larisa Petrovna Volkova
Professor of the Department of state and legal disciplines of the Volga Institute (branch) of the All-Russian State University of Justice in Saratov, doctor of legal sciences, associate professor
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Annotation: the article deals with some urgent issues concerning an administrative-legal status of court bailiffs. Different approaches to understanding an administrative-legal status are described, elements of its structure are provided. One remarks an uncertainty of the legal status of court bailiffs, due to a lack of clarity and completeness of legislative consolidation of its fundamental elements: goals, objectives, directions of activities, as well as the fact that many directions of activities of the court bailiff service have "evaded" the legal regulation of a fundamental legislative act. Scientific novelty of the research consists in elaboration of proposals to optimize the legislative regulation of the administrative-legal status of the court bailiff service, as well as in a theoretical justification of the administrative-legal status as its purpose, tasks and competence, established by the state, defining its use in the general system of public administration and functioning as a subject of administrative relations in the internal and external environment.

Keywords: administrative-legal status, legal situation, court bailiffs, activity of court bailiffs, powers of service of court bailiffs.

Roman Evgen'evich Zatona
Associate professor of the Department of procedural law of the Don State Technical University, associate professor of the Department of administrative law and criminal-legal disciplines of the Rostov State University of Railway Engineering, candidate of legal sciences
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Annotation: the relevance of the article is determined due to the importance of using special knowledge in various types of court proceedings, experience of law enforcement practice in law-making activities in the course of development of the norms of the Russian procedural legislation, as well as the need to form a legal culture of an expert and a specialist. The purpose of the article is to analyze the concepts of “expert”, “specialist”, “special knowledge”, “special information”, to identify and consider the theoretical and applied features of special knowledge of an expert and a specialist, adopted in the Russian legislation, judicial practice and science. Realization of the stated objective was achieved with the help of general scientific (dialectical, analysis, synthesis) and private-scientific (formal-legal, comparative-legal) methods. The author concludes that the determination of the procedural status of an expert and specialist should take into account not any special knowledge (information) as such, but professionalism of a person, expressed in one’s competence.

Keywords: expert, specialist, competent persons, special knowledge, expertise.

Grigorij Stepanovich Goncharenko
Associate professor of the Department of theory and history of state and law of the Rostov Institute (branch) of the All-Russian State University of Justice in Rostov-on-Don, candidate of legal sciences, associate professor
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Annotation: the article touches upon certain aspects of historical stages of corruption formation and development. Based on the legislative norms and scientific approaches, the author considers corruption as a serious socio-political problem, as a sign of instability of society, which is the basis for the formation of a system of corruption crimes in the country. The article provides an author’s assessment of the theoretical and practical provisions, explores some of the reasons for the lack of a common scientific position about the attribution of specific criminal law offences to corruption that does not allow us to interpret the notion of “corruption” in general. The paper substantiates the author’s approach to the definition of corruption-oriented crimes, considers proposals for the development of criminal-legal regulation combatting corruption.

Keywords: corruption, historical period, institutions of state power, corruption crimes, corruption-oriented crimes, national legislation, scientific research.

Magomedgadzhi Jusupovich Jusupov
Associate professor of the Department of criminal-procedural law of the North-Caucasian Institute (branch) of the All-Russian State University of Justice in Makhachkala, candidate of legal sciences
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Gusejn Bagavdinovich Magomedov
Director of the North-Caucasian Institute (branch) of the All-Russian State University of Justice in Makhachkala, candidate of legal sciences
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Annotation: the article provides a comparative legal analysis of a prosecutorial discretion in the criminal process of Russia and Georgia. In the course of the modernization of the post-Soviet criminal process in Russia and Georgia, completely opposite conceptual approaches to determining the role of the prosecutor’s office in criminal proceedings have been implemented. After the reform of 2007, the Russian prosecutor almost lost the power to exercise a criminal prosecution in pre-trial proceedings, although legally this function for a prosecutor is still valid. He still maintains the powers of supervision over implementation of laws in pre-trial stages of criminal process. Georgia has borrowed the American model of broad prosecutorial discretion in criminal prosecution, while maintaining the Soviet criminal procedure technology of preliminary investigation. The Georgian prosecutor’s office, being the sole and full-power criminal prosecution body, has broad discretionary powers in its implementation. Georgia has completely abandoned the Soviet model of the prosecutor’s office as a supervisory body and the prosecutor’s office performs the function of general supervision over the implementation of laws, the prosecutor’s powers are limited to the criminal law sphere. And the Russian model of the prosecutor’s office is based on primary implementation of a function of the general supervision of execution of laws by all and everywhere. The rest of the post-Soviet countries did not accept the concept of broad prosecutorial discretion in criminal prosecution, but did not abandon the prosecutorial procedural leadership of a pre-trial investigation. In connection with the ongoing search for an optimal model of criminal proceedings it seems to us to be relevant to study the Georgian experiences in the introduction to the legislation of an institution of the prosecutor’s broad discretion in criminal proceedings.

Keywords: criminal procedure of Georgia, prosecutorial discretion, criminal prosecution, alternative to criminal pr