Эксперт

Сергей

Задать вопрос

Мы готовы помочь Вам.

Constitutional Court of Russian Federation is a high court which is empowered to rule on whether or not certain laws or presidential decrees are in fact contrary to the Constitution of Russia. Its objective is only to protect the Constitution (in Russian constitutional law this function is known as «constitutional control» or «constitutional supervision») and deal with a few kind of disputes where it has original jurisdiction, whereas the highest appellate court is the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

Before 1980s in the USSR the importance of judicial supervision over compatibility of legislation and executive actions with the provisions and principles of the constitution was not recognized. It was not until December 25, 1989 when Constitutional Control in the USSR Act was passed, that such «judicial review» was initiated. Accordingly, the Constitutional Supervision Committee was created. It started functioning mid-1990 and was dissolved towards the end of 1991. On July 12, 1991 Constitutional Court of the RSFSR Act was adopted. In October the Fifth RSFSR Congress of Soviets elected 13 members of the Court and the Constitutional Court de facto started functioning. On October 7, 1993 Boris Yeltsin’s decree suspended work of the Constitutional Court. According to the decree, the Constitutional Court was «in deep crisis». On December 24 another presidential decree repealed the Constitutional Court of the RSFSR Act itself. In July 1994 the new Constitutional Court Act was adopted. However, the new Constitutional Court started working only in February, 1995, because the Federation Council of Russia refused several times to appoint judges nominated by Yeltsin.

Certain powers of the Constitutional Court are enumerated in the Constitution of Russia. The Constitutional Court declares laws, presidential and governmental decrees and laws of federal subjects unconstitutional if it finds that they are contrary to the Constitution (i.e. they violate certain rights and freedoms of citizens enumerated in and protected by the Constitution).

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation consists of 19 judges, one being the Chairman and another one being Deputy Chairman. Judges are appointed by the President of Russia with the consent of Federation Council of Russia. In order to become a judge of the Constitutional Court a person must be citizen of Russia, attain the age of 40, have legal education, have length of service as a lawyer at least 15 years and have «recognized high qualification» (quotation from Constitutional Court Act) in law. The Constitutional Court consists of two chambers consisting of 10 and 9 judges respectively. The Chairman presides over one of the chambers, the Deputy Chairman presides over the other chamber. Constitutionality of laws, disputes concerning competence of governmental agencies, impeachment of the president of Russia and Constitutional Court’s proposals of legislations must be dealt with on plenary session. Besides, Constitutional Court may by its discretion submit to plenary sessions any other issue.

Конституционный Суд Российской Федерации

Конституционный Суд Российской Федерации является высшим судом, который уполномочен принимать решения о том, на самом ли деле определенные законы или указы Президента противоречат Конституции России. Его цель — только защитить Конституцию (в российском конституционном праве эта функция известна как «конституционный контроль» или «конституционный надзор») и разрешить несколько видов споров, где Суд обладает первоначальной юрисдикцией, тогда как высшим апелляционным судом является Верховный Суд Российской Федерации.

До 1980-х годов в СССР важность судебного надзора за совместимостью законодательства и исполнительных действий с положениями и принципами конституции не признавалась. Только 25 декабря 1989 года после принятия Закона о конституционном контроле в СССР, было инициировано создание такого «судебного надзора». Соответственно появился Комитет конституционного надзора. Он начал свою работу в середине 1990 года и окончил к концу 1991 года. 12 июля 1991 года Конституционный суд РФ принял Закон РСФСР. В октябре V съезд Советов РСФСР избрал 13 членов Суда, и де-факто начал функционировать Конституционный суд. 7 октября 1993 года указом Бориса Ельцина приостановлена ​​работа Конституционного суда. Согласно указу, Конституционный суд находился «в глубоком кризисе». 24 декабря другим указом президента был отменен Конституционный суд. В июле 1994 года был принят новый Закон о Конституционном суде. Однако новый Конституционный суд начал работать только в феврале 1995 года, так как Совет Федерации России несколько раз отказывался назначать судей, которых выбрал Ельцин.

Отдельные полномочия Конституционного Суда перечислены в Конституции России. Конституционный Суд объявляет законы, президентские и правительственные указы и законы субъектов Российской Федерации неконституционными, если он считает, что они противоречат Конституции (то есть они нарушают определенные права и свободы граждан, перечисленные в Конституции и которые он защищает).

Конституционный Суд Российской Федерации состоит из 19 судей, один из которых является председателем, а другой — заместителем председателя. Судьи назначаются Президентом России с согласия Совета Федерации России. Чтобы стать судьей Конституционного Суда, человек должен быть гражданином России, быть не младше 40 лет, иметь юридическое образование, иметь стаж работы адвокатом не менее 15 лет и иметь «признанную высокую квалификацию» (выдержка из Конституции). Конституционный суд состоит из двух палат, состоящих из 10 и 9 судей соответственно. Председатель главенствует в одной из палат, заместитель председателя — в другой. Конституционность законов, споры относительно компетенции государственных органов, импичмент президента России и предложения Конституционного Суда по законодательству должны рассматриваться на пленарном заседании. Кроме того, Конституционный суд может по своему усмотрению выносить на пленарные заседания любые другие вопросы.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION.

1. What do you know about the court system in the USA? The federal court systemhas three main levels: district courts (the trial court), circuit courts which are the first level of appeal, and the Supreme Court of the United States, the final level of appeal in the federal system.
2. Can you compare the court systems in Russia and the USA? Russiahas a trifurcated court system, with constitutional, ordinary, and commercial courts. The Constitutional Court of Russia is considered a separate, independent court. The district courts are the primary criminal trial courts, and the regional courts are the primary appellate  The federal court system has three main levels: district courts (the trial court), circuit courts which are the first level of appeal, and the Supreme Court of the United States, the final level of appeal in the federal system.

3.    Imagine you are a Russian judge. Speak about the advantages and disadvantages of your job.

Authority and Responsibility

Each judge exercises complete control over the conduct of cases, an advantage for any professional. She manages the calendar and referees every stage of a trial from pre-trial motions and jury selection to sentencing arguments. That power can help ensure that cases move on a timely basis but it also puts pressure on the judge to schedule, listen, and rule according to the law and with impartiality. Judges know that ultimate authority brings with it the burden of responsibility, competent administration and the possibility, however remote, of making a bad call that could cause a defendant to lose a livelihood or worse.

Job Security and Demands

Although federal judge appointments last as long as a judge cares to serve, many judges must campaign for election. Once elected, though, judges tend to be re-elected easily unless they serve in a highly competitive jurisdiction or make egregious behavioral or procedural mistakes. With this job security, judges have to guard against the myth of omniscience. Because the law is constantly changing, a judge can never assume supreme competence. He must familiarize himself with current appellate court decisions and participate in continuing legal and judicial education, not only to keep up with new precedents but also to justify the trust that has been placed in him and keep up with practicing attorneys.

Respect and Scrutiny

The gavel, the robe, the elevated bench — all set the judge apart from other parties in a courtroom. The respect due a judge — and a jury — is a necessary element of the justice system. Judges must also work, through the competent, impartial, independent and courageous practice of their duties, to justify that respect. Even after a judge retires, she represents the entire occupation. The drawback is that she is subject to public scrutiny in her personal life, as well as her professional activities. In a small community, this scrutiny can extend to unexpected situations — in church, at the grocery store or the local pizza joint — creating the expectation of uniformly ethical behavior.

Crowning Achievement or Dead End

Appointment or election to a judgeship typically crowns a career in the law. Although some trial judges may ascend to appellate or higher benches, there’s not much room at the top. Judges can always return to the practice of law if they are attorneys or teach at a law school. Other options include work as a mediator or service as a reserve or administrative judge. There are, however, few positions that carry the authority and responsibility that even a municipal judge enjoys.

4. Speak about the crime level in Russia. Do you think courts are efficient in reducing it? In 2019, the murderrate in Russia was 7 per 100,000 people, according to Rosstat (the Russian Federal State Statistics Service). According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the corresponding figure is a bit higher at 9.2. I think that courts are efficient in reducing it.
5. What is your attitude to the problem of death sentences? The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. I oppose the death penalty in all cases without exception — regardless of who is accused, the nature or circumstances of thecrime, guilt or innocence or method of execution.