ограничение прав и свобод человека и гражданина

Constitutional and legal bases of restriction of freedom of creativity: Goals and limits	Introduction. The diversity and transformation of relations in the sphere of the realization of the right to creative activity determine the formation of a complex mechanism of legal regulation, the elements of which should be legal restrictions. Theoretical analysis. Restrictions on the freedom of creativity are quite numerous and can be of an ethical, moral and legal nature. The ground for legal restrictions on freedom of creativity is the need to protect constitutional values, and, therefore, they are imperative and obligatory in the implementation of any creative activity. The scope and limits of legal restrictions on the freedom of creativity are not the same and depend on the stage of creative activity. A set of restrictions on the freedom of creativity is necessary when the result of creative activity – the work – becomes available for public viewing and can be perceived very ambiguously. Empirical analysis. The results of creative activity – works, as well as their creative interpretation, should not violate the rights of third parties, should not create a threat to the constitutional order, morality, health and other constitutional values, which indicates the need to limit the freedom of creativity for strictly defined purposes (part 3 of Art. 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). The main problem of determining the volume and limits of restrictions on the freedom of creativity is connected, firstly, with the lack of a fixed list of types of creativity, and secondly, with the variety of forms of creative activity and their constant increase. Results. The creative process does not need to be regulated, moreover, it is impossible to “drive” it into a legal framework and limit the author’s creative perception of the surrounding world. However, if its result – a work – is intended to be demonstrated to the public, its content, form, interpretation may affect the rights and interests of other persons (consumers of creativity), therefore, general constitutional restrictions on human rights are also applicable to freedom of creativity. This legal dilemma is a particular manifestation of the fundamental problem of achieving a balance between private and public and should be resolved on the basis of not their opposition, but their reasonable correlation and proportionality.	Izv. Sarat. Univ. Economics. Management. Law, 2023, vol. 23, iss. 3
Unrestricted human rights and freedoms: Legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Russia (1995–2022)	Introduction. The Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 in several articles provides for the right of the state to restrict the rights and freedoms of man and citizen in order to achieve certain goals. Part 3 of Article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation establishes the general conditions for the restriction of all rights and freedoms of the individual. However, this constitutional norm does not give an answer to the question of whether there are rights and freedoms of an individual that cannot be limited. Theoretical analysis. Part 3 of Article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation is a kind of “general part” of the institution of restrictions on the rights and freedoms of the individual; and in this “general part” there are no exceptions in the form of unrestricted rights and freedoms. In the scientific literature, they often refer to part 3 of article 56 when they state the existence of unrestricted rights and freedoms. In our opinion, Article 56 is of a special nature - it establishes the foundations of the state of emergency, including the rules for restricting rights and freedoms in a state of emergency. However, unlimited rights and freedoms of the individual exist – their list was formed by the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Empirical analysis. Since 1995, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in more than 40 decisions, as well as in definitions, has substantiated the presence of certain unrestricted human rights and freedoms in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The possibility of singling out this group of rights and freedoms is explained mainly by the fact that these human rights and freedoms cannot conflict with the constitutional goals of restricting rights and freedoms. Results. It is concluded that the legal positions formed by the Constitutional Court of Russia regarding the existence of unrestricted human rights and freedoms have practical consequences, primarily for the federal legislator, since they establish the framework for his / her law-making activities. These positions are the basis for developing federal laws and the basis for correcting existing federal laws. They can also be criteria for determining the constitutionality of federal laws in the exercise of preliminary or subsequent constitutional review.	Izv. Sarat. Univ. Economics. Management. Law, 2022, vol. 22, iss. 4
Proportionality as a constitutional principle of limiting human and civil rights and freedoms in the Russian Federation	Introduction. The 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation allows for the possibility of restricting rights and freedoms of individuals and establishes imperative conditions (principles) for the introduction and operation of these restrictions. One of these constitutional principles is the principle of proportionality: the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen can be limited only to the extent necessary to achieve the goals specified in part 3 of Article 55. Theoretical analysis. The principle of proportionality of restrictions to certain goals is currently declared by the constitutions of many states, and is also part of the international legal criteria for restrictions on human rights. Some conceptual issues of the content of the constitutional principle of proportionality are resolved by the Constitutional Court of Russia. In its most general form, the principle of proportionality means that: the measures (means) used to restrict rights and freedoms must be conditioned by constitutional goals; restrictive measures (means) should not be greater than necessary; restrictive measures (means) should not lead to disproportionate, excessive restrictions. Empirical analysis. The analysis of the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Russia shows that in each specific case, the Court determines the necessary measure to restrict a particular right (freedom), comparing, weighing the constitutionally recognized values (on the one hand, the rights of a certain person, on the other, the rights of other persons, the interests of the state, public interests), as well as assessing the adequacy of the legal means used to achieve any constitutionally established goal (s) of restriction. The conclusions reached by the Court regarding the proportionality or disproportion (excess) of the restriction of this or that right are binding not only for the legislator, but also in some cases for the law enforcement officer. Results. It is concluded that the implementation of the constitutional principle of proportionality of restrictions in lawmaking and law enforcement means that when establishing and applying restrictions on rights and freedoms to achieve a certain constitutional goal (goals), exclusively necessary measures (means) must be provided and used in this situation. The principle of proportionality of restrictions is one of the criteria for assessing the constitutionality of the restriction of any right or freedom, as well as one of the guarantees against arbitrary (unreasonable, excessive, unconstitutional) restrictions, since it presupposes the existence of certain boundaries (limits, frameworks, conditions) of lawmaking and law enforcement.	Izv. Sarat. Univ. Economics. Management. Law, 2021, vol. 21, iss. 1
Federal Law as a Priority Form of Consolidating Restrictions on the Rights and Freedoms of Man and Citizen in the Russian Federation	Introduction. According to part 3 of article 55 of the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation, restrictions on the rights and freedoms of man and citizen may be established exclusively by federal law. Theoretical analysis. The regulation of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen — the concretization of their content, the definition of implementation procedures, cases and methods of limitation — should be carried out by federal laws. The establishment of restrictions on the rights of individuals by federal law means that restrictions are imposed by representatives of the people; restrictions must be clearly stated in the articles of the law; restrictions through federal law become well known. Empirical analysis. The study of the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation shows that when assessing the constitutionality of restrictions on the rights of individuals, the Court confirms that they should be established only by federal law. In addition, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation imposes certain requirements on the content and quality of the federal law, enshrining restrictions on human rights. In particular, the federal legislator is obliged to comply with the criteria of necessity and proportionality of the restriction of the rights and freedoms of citizens to constitutionally significant goals. Basic international human rights instruments also require that restrictions on human rights are established by law. Almost every federal law currently in force, governing a particular law (or freedom), contains restrictions on this right (freedom). In some cases specified in the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the establishment of restrictions on rights and freedoms is also possible with other regulatory legal acts. Results. It is concluded that the consolidation of restrictions on the rights and freedoms of an individual in the federal law should guarantee clarity, certainty, uniformity in understanding, common knowledge, stability of existing restrictions. The legislative regulation of restrictions on the rights and freedoms of an individual is a guarantee against arbitrary restrictions.	Izv. Saratov Univ. (N. S.), Ser. Economics. Management. Law, 2019, vol. 19, iss. 4