Русский
EnglishCite this article as:
Golovkova A. Y. Accessibility and Effectiveness of Mechanisms for the Judicial Protection of Constitutional Rights and Freedoms as the Rule of Law Indicators. Izv. Saratov Univ., Economics. Management. Law, 2019, vol. 19, iss. 3, pp. 335-343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18500/1994-2540-2019-19-3-335-343
Accessibility and Effectiveness of Mechanisms for the Judicial Protection of Constitutional Rights and Freedoms as the Rule of Law Indicators
Introduction. The mechanisms for the judicial protection of citizens’ constitutional rights and freedoms by means of constitutional and administrative proceedings are analyzed in this article, taking into account the federative specifics of the Russian Federation. Theoretical and empirical analysis. The principle of accessibility of the rights protection mechanisms as the rule of law indicator is revealed through an analysis of the system of constitutional control bodies in the Russian Federation, the results of their completion process, as well as through an analysis of the alternative mechanism for the constitutional rights protection by the courts of general jurisdiction if there are no constitutional (statutory) courts in particular subjects of the Russian Federation. The principle is also revealed via comparative analysis of the admissibility criteria and requirements for citizens’ appeals to constitutional justice bodies and courts of general jurisdiction in order to protect their constitutional rights and individual organizational requirements. Besides, the article considers another indicator of the rule of law – the principle of the effectiveness of the mechanisms for the constitutional rights and freedoms protection – through the analysis of the legal force of decisions of the constitutional justice bodies and courts of general jurisdiction for the applicant, as well as their influence on other persons within the legal relations; the possibility of revision; the feasibility of court decisions, depending on the specifics of their content and the impact on the resumption of the case and the revision of decisions of other courts, that initially gave grounds for implementation of the judicial protection mechanisms for constitutional human rights and freedoms by means of constitutional and administrative proceedings. Results. Furthermore, the article set forth the main problems citizens face while implementing mechanisms for the judicial protection of their constitutional rights and freedoms. The author suggests some options for the solution of these problems.
1. Zor’kin V. D. The rule of law and the meeting of civilizations. Zhurnal konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya [Journal of Constitutional Justice], 2008, no. 1, pp. 2–9 (in Russian).
2. In the case of verifying the constitutionality of clause 5 of part two of article 371, part three of article 374 and clause 4 of part two of article 384 of the RSFSR Criminal Procedure Code in connection with complaints by citizens K. M. Kulneva, V. S. Laleeva, Yu. V. Lukashov and I. P. Serebrennikov. Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 02.02.1996 no. 4-P. Rossiiskaya gazeta [Russian newspaper], 1996, no. 31 (in Russian).
3. Checklist for assessing compliance with the rule of law, adopted at the 106th plenary meeting of the Venice Commission (paragraph 54 Studies on direct access to constitutional justice) (Venice, March 11–12, 2016). Available at: http://www.venice.coe.int (accessed 10 April 2019) (in Russian).
4. In the case of the interpretation of certain provisions of Articles 125, 126 and 127 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 16.06.1998 no. 19-P. Rossiiskaya gazeta [Russian newspaper], 1998, no. 121 (in Russian).
5. About the Authorized court of Sverdlovsk region. Law of the Sverdlovsk region of 06.05.1997 no. 29-OZ. Oblastnaya gazeta [Regional newspaper], 1997, no. 69 (in Russian).
6. On refusal to accept complaints of a citizen of Polovtsev Igor Nikolayevich to violation of his constitutional rights by the provisions of Articles 50 and 79 of the Charter of St. Petersburg, Articles 15, 18, 20, 29, 30 and 37 of the Law of St. Petersburg “On the Statutory Court of St. Petersburg” as well as certain provisions of the Federal Constitutional Law “On the Judicial System of the Russian Federation”, Federal Law “On the Bodies of the Judicial Community in the Russian Federation” and the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Status of Judges in the Russian Federation”. Defi nition of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 02.02.2006 no. 20-О. ATP «Consultant» [electronic resource] (in Russian);
7. Brezhnev O. V. The Code of Administrative Justice of the Russian Federation on the delimitation of jurisdiction and the peculiarities of interaction between the courts of general jurisdiction and the bodies of constitutional justice. Administrativnoe i munitsipal’noe pravo [Administrative and municipal law], 2015, no. 6, pp. 626–633 (in Russian).
8. On the case of verifi cation of the constitutionality of certain provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 1, paragraph 1 of Article 21 and paragraph 3 of Article 22 of the Federal Law “On the Prosecutor’s Offi ce of the Russian Federation” in connection with the request of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Affairs of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 11.04.2000 no. 6-P. Rossiiskaya gazeta [Russian newspaper], 2000, no. 82–83 (in Russian).
9. Statistics on appeals to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Konstitutsionnyi Sud Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Site]. Available at: http://www.ksrf.ru/ru/Petition/Pages/StatisticDef.aspx (accessed 10 April 2019);
10. Decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Konstitutsionnyi Sud Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Site]. Available at: http://www.ksrf.ru/ru/Decision/Pages/extsearch.aspx (accessed 10 April 2019);
11. According to the complaint of citizen Dudnik M.V. on violation of her constitutional rights, clause 2 part 3 of article. 43 of the Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation”. Defi nition of the Constitutional Court of the RussianFederation of 21.12.2000. Konstitutsionnyi Sud Rossiiskoi Federatsii. Postanovleniya. Opredeleniya. 2000 [Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Regulations. Defi nitions. 2000]. Moscow, 2001, pp. 558–561 (in Russian).
12. About the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Federal constitutional law of 21.07.1994 no. 1-FKZ. Rossiiskaya gazeta [Russian newspaper], 1994, no. 138–139 (in Russian).
13. On amendments to the Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation”. Federal constitutional law of 03.11.2010 no. 7-FKZ. Rossiiskaya gazeta [Russian newspaper], 2010, no. 253 (in Russian).
14. On amendments to the Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation”. Federal constitutional law of 04.06.2014 no. 9-FKZ. Rossiiskaya gazeta [Russian newspaper], 2014, no. 127 (in Russian).
15. Nesmeyanova S. E. Konstitutsionnyi sudebnyi process v Rossii [Constitutional litigation in Russia. 2nd ed.]. Moscow, 2018. 204 p. (in Russian).
16. Ben’yaminova S. A. The right to constitutional legal proceedings as an element of the legal status of a citizen. Actual Problems of Russian Law, 2018, no. 10, pp. 143–150 (in Russian).
17. Brezhnev O. V. The principle of accessibility of constitutional justice: the content and guarantees. Actual Problems of Russian Law, 2018, no. 5, pp. 57–64 (in Russian).
18. On the issue that arose after the adoption by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on April 5, 2005 of Resolution no. 7 “On Amendments and Addenda to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 14, 2000 no. 35 ''On certain issues arising in the consideration of cases related to the implementation of the rights of persons with disabilities guaranteed by the Law of the Russian Federation “On the social protection of citizens exposed to radiation as a result of the disaster at the Chernobyl Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 21.12.2005 no. 26 Rossiiskaya gazeta [Russian newspaper], 2005, no. 293 (in Russian).
19. Gadzhiev G. A. Category “purpose” in constitutional legal proceedings. Aktual’nye probleme teorii i praktiki konstitutsionnogo sudoproizvodstva. Vyp. 2 [Actual problems of the theory and practice of constitutional legal proceedings. Iss. 2]. Kazan, 2007, pp. 41–51 (in Russian).
20. According to the petitions of the citizens of Abramov Dmitry Alexandrovich, Vetlugaev Vladimir Anatolyevich, Dolgunov Sergey Nikolaevich, Kazachenko Elena Alekseevna and Pechkov Viktor Petrovich about the explanation of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of October 17, 2017 no. 24-P. Defi nition of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 13.03.2018 no. 586-O-R. Rossiiskaya gazeta [Russian newspaper], 2018, no. 75 (in Russian).
21. On the application of the norms of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation when courts consider applications, submissions for review on newly discovered or new circumstances of court decisions that entered into force. Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 11.12.2012 no. 31. Rossiiskaya gazeta [Russian newspaper], 2012, no. 295 (in Russian).
