Essay on what the principle of equality before the law means. Electronic notebook by Dmitry Zyazin: Essay. A persistent sense of absurdity

• Zaidova Manarsha Usmakhanovna, teacher
• Dagestan State University National economy

• EQUALITY
• PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW
• LAW
• CRIMINAL CODE
• CRIME

The article discusses some of the problems that arise when applying the principle of equality of all before the law. The principle of equality of all before the law is one of the five basic principles of criminal law of the Russian Federation.

• Problems of ordering and conducting forensic psychiatric examinations in cases of application of compulsory medical measures
• Pre-Soviet period of development of criminal law in Russia
• Problems of ordering and conducting forensic psychiatric examinations in cases of application of compulsory medical measures
• Problems of criminal liability for disclosing the secret of adoption

One of the basic principles of Russian criminal law is the principle of equality of all before the law. It is enshrined in Article 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and states that persons who have committed crimes are equal before the law and are subject to criminal liability regardless of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, property and official status, place of residence, attitude to religion, beliefs , membership in public associations, as well as other circumstances.

This is a fundamental constitutional (Article 19 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation) principle of the life of Russian society, the structure and functioning of the rule of law state, it underlies all branches of law and the legal system of Russia as a whole. Article 19 of the Constitution proclaims universal equality before the law and the court, enshrines guarantees of this equality by the state, one of the manifestations of which is the criminal legal protection of this equality. The Constitution also prohibits any form of restriction of the rights of citizens on the basis of social, national, racial, linguistic or religious affiliation.

Equality of citizens before the law is manifested in the establishment of the same grounds and limits of criminal liability, the same grounds for exemption from criminal liability and punishment, the same grounds and conditions for extinguishing the legal consequences of a criminal record. “At the same time,” as A.V. rightly points out. Naumov, - this principle does not mean their equal responsibility and punishment, i.e. equal limits and content of criminal liability and punishment. And this difference may lie, for example, in the gender or age of the person, and in his official position. So, for example, the death penalty cannot be applied to women, unlike men (this punishment also cannot be applied to men over the age of sixty-five and to persons who committed a crime under the age of eighteen - Article 59 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

As noted in the literature, the principle of equality of citizens before the criminal law inherently carries certain contradictions: “the law, on the one hand, makes absolutely the same requirements and establishes the same measures of criminal liability (within the sanction of the article of the Criminal Code), and on the other hand, it “, taking into account the personality of the offender and other specific mitigating circumstances, allows for the possibility of imposing a punishment below the lowest limit or even exempting from criminal liability and punishment.” Like other principles of criminal law, the principle of equality of citizens before the criminal law contains, as it were, “two sides of the same coin”, two groups of requirements that are closely interrelated, mutually presuppose and complement each other, and also correct each other to a certain extent. These requirements, on the one hand, demonstrate the qualitative originality and independence of this principle, and on the other hand, its dialectical connection with the principles of justice, humanism and expediency. So, in Art. 57 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides that life imprisonment is not assigned to women, as well as to persons who committed a crime under the age of eighteen, and to men who have reached the age of sixty-five by the time the court pronounces the verdict. However, this does not mean the exclusion of criminal liability of this category of persons, but ensures differentiation of criminal liability. These restrictions do not affect the assignment of punishment to other categories of persons who have committed crimes, corresponding to the nature and degree of social danger of the crime, the circumstances of its commission and the identity of the perpetrator, does not infringe on their rights and therefore are not discriminatory.

There are some exceptions to this rule established in the law itself. Part 4 art. 11 of the Criminal Code provides for a special international legal procedure for resolving the issue of criminal liability of diplomatic representatives of foreign states and other citizens who enjoy immunity if they commit a crime on the territory of the Russian Federation. The Constitution also lists categories of persons (President of the Russian Federation, Deputies State Duma, Members of the Federation Council, judges), for whom a special procedure has been established for holding them accountable. The law does not provide for their release from criminal liability, but provides for a special procedure for bringing them to criminal liability, taking into account a certain procedure established by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

N.F. Kuznetsova considers the establishment of an unreasonably broad framework of parliamentary immunity provided for in the Law on the Status of a Deputy of the Russian Federation, which has no analogues in world legislation, to be contrary to the principle of equality of citizens before the law. Since the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the legislation on elections provide the right to be elected to deputies to citizens, including those with a criminal record for committing a crime, the mandate of a deputy of the State Duma becomes especially attractive for persons against whom criminal cases are ongoing, including for serious crimes ( in the cities of Nizhny Novgorod, Tula, Leninsk - Kuznetsk). The press has published entire lists of State Duma deputies with outstanding and unexpunged criminal records. The author rightly points out that “deputy immunity is intended to protect people’s representatives from various kinds of illegal pressure, and not at all so that they acquire immunity from criminal liability,” in this regard, it is proposed to change the Law on the status of a deputy.

According to N.F., the preconditions for violating the principle of equality of citizens before the law are created. Kuznetsova, also provided for by the Law “On the Status of Judges in the Russian Federation”, the lifelong election of judges. Pursuing a similar goal to the above mentioned - protection from pressure on the judiciary, in practice this situation in many cases leads to virtual impunity for judges guilty of committing crimes against justice, and contributes to the corruption of judges.
I. Marogulova also believes that in the current situation, “in particular the existence of unlimited legal immunity, when it is impossible to bring to criminal responsibility a culprit who covers up his illegal activities with the mandate of a deputy, it is impossible to translate into reality the principle of equality of citizens before the law. This principle automatically becomes a declarative cliche.”

Thus, the principle of equality of citizens before the law is one of the fundamental, important principles not only of criminal law, but also of the entire legal system of the Russian Federation. The principle of equality of citizens before the law is also one of the important conditions for the establishment of a rule of law state and civil society, contributing to the realization of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen. “Only through recognition, respect and ensuring the implementation of the broadest human rights and freedoms can we move along the path to progress. The state is precisely necessary for the guaranteed implementation of these rights and freedoms.”

Bibliography

1. "The Constitution of the Russian Federation" (adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993) (taking into account the amendments introduced by the Laws of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation dated December 30, 2008 N 6-FKZ, dated December 30, 2008 N 7-FKZ, dated February 5, 2014 N 2 -FKZ, dated July 21, 2014 N 11-FKZ)
2. Kuznetsova N.F. Problems of qualification of crimes: Lectures on the special course “basics of qualification of crimes” - M. 2007.
3. Marogulova I.L. “On the humanization of Soviet criminal law” // Problems of improving Soviet legislation. Proceedings. Vol. 47
4. Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated October 21, 2008 No. 638-О-О “On the refusal to accept for consideration the complaint of citizen Igor Evgenievich Gorlov about violations of his constitutional rights by Article 57 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as his petition for clarification of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of February 2, 1999 No. 3-P".
5. Rayanov F.M. Theory of the rule of law: monograph. – M.: Yurlitinform, 2014.
6. Russian criminal law. Course of lectures: in 3 volumes. T.1. General part/A.V. Naumov. – 4th ed., revised. And additional – M.: Wolters Kluwer, 2007. – 736 p.
7. "Criminal Code of the Russian Federation" dated June 13, 1996 N 63-FZ (as amended on December 19, 2016)

1) I just read the statements of various authors proposed as an essay topic, and chose the topic of jurisprudence (why?), which is closest and most understandable to me.

2) The author touches on (raises) the following problems: equality of citizens before the law, the operation of the principle of the rule of law (which is characteristic feature rule of law), factors ensuring equality of citizens, law and order in the country.

3) This problem is very relevant today for the entire world community and, of course, for our country. (Why?) The principle of equality, according to which all members of society should be placed in the same conditions, has always been and remains one of the most important ideals of a fair social order.

4) J. D'Alembert believes that true equality of people in society can be ensured only if they obey the same laws for everyone without exception (retelling the author's point of view in his own words).

5) I support the author’s point of view, since the principle of equality means the officially recognized equality of citizens (subjects) before the state, law, and court. This principle presupposes equality of rights, freedoms and duties of citizens of one state, regardless of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, property and official status, place of residence, attitude to religion, beliefs, membership of public associations, as well as other circumstances. And also the impossibility of the existence of special laws and courts for the privileged classes and social groups(presenting your point of view, argumentation).

6) Due to these provisions, the majority of legal scholars consider the principle of EQUALITY OF ALL BEFORE THE LAW to be one of the most important principles of a democratic rule of law state and the basis for the normal functioning of a civilized society (argumentation with references to other authorities).

7) The Constitution of the Russian Federation guarantees equality of rights and freedoms of man and citizen before the law and the court. Unfortunately, the history of our country and other countries is replete with examples of officials using the law for their own purposes. I would like to see all this implemented in practice in our country in the near future. real life(use of social science course concepts + examples and references to one’s own social experience and life practice).

8) In conclusion, I would like to note that only in conditions of strict application of the principle of the rule of law in the country can we talk about a civilized society. Only when all government bodies, officials and citizens are subject to the law, when everyone must subordinate their behavior to the laws, without violating them or abusing their rights and powers, when there is no difference in rights between those who rule , and those who are governed, it is possible to talk about the realization of true equality of citizens (conclusion).

Are we all equal before the law?

July 7, 2002
On the air of the Ekho Moskvy radio station, Sergei Yuriev is a Doctor of Law, Vladimir Martynov is a lawyer.
The broadcast is hosted by Natella Boltyanskaya.

N. BOLTYANSKAYA 20 hours 6 minutes, you are listening to “Echo of Moscow”, Natella Boltyanskaya is at the microphone. And today we have on air our old acquaintance, deputy head of the Mir law office, Vladimir Martynov, hello.
V. MARTYNOV Good evening.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Sergei Yuryev, Doctor of Law, as far as I understand, honorary lawyer, did I understand correctly?
S. YUREV Yes.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Hello.
S. YURIEV Good evening.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA And the topic of our conversation today is, in fact, quite sad; we are talking about whether we are all equal before the law and how equal we are all before it. Our pager is 974-22-22 for Echo of Moscow subscribers, don’t forget to introduce yourself. And in fact, the question is to a certain extent rhetorical: are we all equal before the law? It implies “no.” But then the next question arises: how unequal are we before the law? Who will be responsible?
V. MARTYNOV Sergei Sergeevich, perhaps the first.
S. YUREV Thank you. The topic of today's dialogue is very interesting, and this question can be answered in different ways. From a philosophical point of view, one can talk about whether there is equality in the world at all, and how it relates to human identity. Scientists even coined the term “positive discrimination” to ensure real equality of certain social groups. But as has already been said, there is a clear answer to the question of whether we are all equal before the law, and the answer is no, we are not equal, and I think we need to talk about the reasons for this.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA About the reasons and how, so to speak, how this actually happens. Why are we not all equal before the law? Because if a traffic cop stops you, and you are armed with, say, serious documents, then he simply won’t contact you, right?
S. YURIEV You know, just about the traffic cop, not so long ago I had to go by car on a fairly long business trip, and the first question of the traffic police officer who stopped us for inspection was this: “Who are you?” After reviewing the documents, we moved on. It’s clear that we didn’t violate anything, it was a scheduled check, but you definitely noted that this is “Who you are” - social status. Social status is the first thing that determines the attitude of the law in a broad sense towards a person.
V. MARTYNOV Unfortunately, I must intervene, and apparently, Sergei, I will certainly agree with you that yes, indeed, a person’s social status determines the attitude of the law towards him, and often the attitude of this person towards the law. But from my point of view, we should be equal before the law, regardless of social status. This is my personal point of view, and I can prove it and convince it. We are not equal before the law, but we must be equal before it. And if only because this is what the fundamental law of our state defines.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA But you see, what a thing, the fact is that if we remembered the same situation with the traffic police, this is, perhaps, such an “advanced” phenomenon that the maximum it can cost is some kind of, so to speak, monetary cost. Already, however, they say it can’t.
V. MARTYNOV Natella, maybe I’m an idealist, but I believe that the question of this traffic police representative, which was asked to you, Sergey, was not legal, unauthorized and illegal, because who you are should not matter to him .
N. BOLTYANSKAYA If you behave correctly on the road.
V. MARTYNOV Even if you behave incorrectly on the road, this should not matter to him either, unless you enjoy the appropriate immunity.
S. YUREV With a special signal, for example.
V. MARTYNOV Well, yes. It’s just who you are, this question puzzles me, I would say.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Indignation, I would say.
V. MARTYNOV I would say yes, indignantly. It doesn't matter who I am, I'm going and I haven't violated anything. You have the right to stop me in certain cases, determined by the official instructions and relevant laws and regulations. They left me, they checked my driver’s license, and I drove on.
S. YURIEV Vladimir, everything is correct, but, unfortunately, we have to admit that, firstly, although we have a lot of good things written in our Constitution, we have not built a rule-of-law state in Russia. And this question is who you are, you know, it’s like our eagle, a double-headed coat of arms, one head to the east, the other to the west. And this kind of Eastern mentality, when if you are a master or a bye, then you are right, after all, it is in the blood of many of our employees.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA You understand that this proves one single thing, that the laws in our country are written in such a way that they are freely interpreted by those who seem to have the right to do so. Interpret the law as in the very proverb that the drawbar, as I turn, so it turns out. I was wrong?
V. MARTYNOV I do not agree. The law in our country is written exactly as it should be written; it can only be interpreted by the Supreme Court or, for example, the Constitutional Court. It cannot and should not be interpreted or interpreted by a local police inspector, it should not be interpreted by a traffic police officer on the road, he must execute it.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Vladimir Vladimirovich, let’s not be disingenuous and clearly recognize the following situation: that, of course, among those who find themselves victims of an overly curious traffic police inspector on the roads, there are people, of course, who have patience, time to seek the truth and explain to this very traffic cop that It's none of your business, guy. But there are people who don’t have this time, and for the majority, it turns out, it’s more convenient to come to terms with this inequality, somehow either, so to speak, play with documents, or stick, excuse me, a lamb in a piece of paper and go on about their business. And it turns out that it is virtually impossible to fight, to break out of this vicious circle, no?
S. YURIEV In general, you are right, because a person always thinks what is more profitable for him. Not even in the sense of monetary reward or loss, but more profitable in terms of benefit in a specific situation. And it is quite obvious that, since we are talking about the traffic police, it is indeed easier to bow out somehow or use some other means of achieving agreement. And quickly leave for your business.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Yes, but again, returning to the assessment of this situation, in this particular case the person is risking money. Here is another example for you not so long ago, I was completely amazed by this example, he told us Chief Editor"Novaya Gazeta" that an 18-year-old boy who joined the army was sent to serve in Chechnya in violation of all laws. The boy died, his mother, with great difficulty, with the help of Novaya Gazeta, received 50,000 rubles. The amount, sorry, is not very serious as compensation, although what kind of compensation can we even talk about? But here you go, there are laws that say that young, unexamined guys should not be sent to a combat area.
V. MARTYNOV It’s impossible, it’s prohibited.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA This law is being violated, i.e. There are those who can, with the help of their parents, their perseverance or money, ensure that this law is fulfilled, but there are people who cannot, and as a result, they are all, they can no longer do anything, because they die, right? What should I do?
V. MARTYNOV In this situation, the only way is to protect your rights through the court and in court. Unfortunately, in general, courts do not always react to violations of laws the way a right, impartial and fair court should react. As interpreters of the law, it’s not without reason that I’m talking about district inspectors; I currently have 6 criminal cases in progress, absolutely of the same type. In all these six criminal cases, one district inspector came to one specific store in our capital and took it from there medical books.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Why?
V. MARTYNOV In order to check these medical books.
S. YUREV Are they fake?
V. MARTYNOV Yes, aren’t they fake?
S. YURIEV This version.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Has anyone else seen these books?
V. MARTYNOV No, there are books, books appeared in the most interesting way, one book in 6 criminal cases. Because every other day, two days, and a week later, the inspector came to the store, to the same store, and drew up the so-called voluntary extradition protocols. In accordance with these protocols of voluntary issuance, supposedly the sellers, employees of this store, each time gave the inspector their medical book, which he had already confiscated a week ago, do you understand? I am now proving in court and my fellow lawyers are proving, and at the preliminary investigation in court they were proving that from the very beginning the inspector, the local police officer, did not have the right to confiscate these books, since checking the sanitary and epidemiological legislation of the Russian Federation is within the competence of the State Sanitary and Epidemiological Supervision bodies, and not the police. Any references to the Law on the Police, to the Law on Operational-Investigative Activities, etc., they are not valid, since it is written that the State Sanitary and Epidemiological Supervision can check these books, the State Sanitary and Epidemiological Supervision can draw up acts, can bring administrative liability, but not the police. And the district police officer says: “No, I can.”
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Pager message “What are you talking about? it arrived a little earlier than you started telling the story about medical books - again you have main character traffic police inspector, and I'll start from the other end. A man who pompously declared that he was the guarantor of the Constitution, in violation of the Constitution, was exempted from responsibility for a host of offenses and crimes he committed.”
V. MARTYNOV It’s hard for me to say. Apparently, we are talking about the first president of Russia, Boris Yeltsin, but he has been released. By the way, let's start, let's now return to the law again. The law says guilt must be proven. This phrase that was heard there now, because of this and because of that, he was released from many violations committed by him. Give me specific facts of violations, give me a normal process that would prove the fact of these violations. And we will continue to talk. But, by the way, he was exempt from such liability; in any case, in accordance with the law, a law was passed on this topic. I don’t want the district inspector to interpret the law the way he wants at one time or another, so that the interpretation of the law does not depend on whether, as you said, they gave him a lamb in a piece of paper or not, on whether he got enough sleep during this day or didn't get enough sleep. Let him obey the law. Perhaps I’m an idealist, I agree with that famous saying, or rather, quote from the movie “The meeting place cannot be changed,” a thief must sit. I agree with this phrase. But I want the thief to sit in accordance with the law. For if a thief sits in violation of the law, then we will all find ourselves there, all of those who fulfill the law, and those who do not fulfill it, and those who want to live according to the law, and those who live according to concepts, we will all find ourselves in the same place if the law is not enforced against any member of our society.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA And what should we do, Sergei Sergeevich?
S. YURIEV Volodya, you are right, but when I listened to your reasoning, and before that Natella said, after all, the quality of the laws leaves much to be desired. We participate in legislative activities as experts, many of us, and we see that in many cases the opinions of experts are ignored and laws are adopted hastily. And the deputies themselves admit this. Let's talk about this: you gave an example with a local inspector who confiscated medical books - a very typical example for Moscow. But the law on police interprets the powers of the police so broadly that it is not a sin for a district police officer to use that broad interpretation of the law.
V. MARTYNOV You know, Sergei, in this particular case, I specifically sat down and studied the law on the police, every line. And when we examined these cases both in court and during the preliminary investigation, I asked the district police officer to show me, here is the law in front of you, show me which line of the law you were guided by. They can't do this.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA You know that let’s not delve into legal terminology. The question is that there are, so to speak, two directions of situations in which people find themselves unequal before the law. One direction is when laws work for someone, but don’t work for someone, and the other situation is when someone is subject to responsibility, and someone is not subject to responsibility. Although, in general, we can say that this is about the same thing. But there are two traditional Russian questions: what to do and who is to blame?
S. YURIEV Well, we can immediately name who is to blame, we’ll probably immediately name the authorities, yes, the authorities are always to blame for everything that happens in the state. The second culprit is the people themselves who allow themselves to be treated this way.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA You know, Sergei Sergeevich, I consider myself a fairly law-abiding citizen, in any case, I’m afraid to cross the road even at a red light, lest I be left without my head. The law I come across most often is media law. And for many years I have been hearing the same wording from a colossal number of people, that there is no more democratic law than the law on media in force in Russia. It is precisely the fact that he is democratic, apparently, that allows him, so to speak, from all, one might say, points of possible undermining. Is not it?
S. YURIEV Any law can be violated, not only the most democratic, but also the most undemocratic, and even one after which people die as a result of this violation.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Here Dima turns to Vladimir Martynov with the words: “You are an idealist, this does not make it any easier for anyone. Your idealism is dangerous, because... gives rise to extremism in the life of society.” Wow. This is apparently due to the fact that the thief should be in prison.
V. MARTYNOV I'm in in this case, thank you for these words, I must say that my idealism does not give rise to extremism in society, if only because I believe that the law on extremism, which has been talked about so much recently, must also be implemented. Follow the law. Do you remember why our dissidents were sent to mental hospitals and prisons? When they came out to Pushkin Square with the banner “Fulfill the Soviet Constitution,” the year is 1968, if I’m not mistaken.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Almost on Krasnaya, no?
V. MARTYNOV In my opinion, to Pushkinskaya.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Perhaps there is perhaps an inaccuracy here.
V. MARTYNOV “Follow the Constitution” people went to mental hospitals for this. Now I’m such an idealist who says follow the adopted laws. And by the way, quite recently, as you say, Sergei, some laws were adopted hastily. For how long the Criminal Procedure Code has been discussed from all sides, discussed, etc., right? How many years 10, in my opinion, at least.
S. YURIEV Like the law on the legal profession and the Criminal Procedure Code.
V. MARTYNOV Well, now we will talk about the Criminal Procedure Code. The Criminal Procedure Code was discussed, Natella, 10 years old. Spears were broken, everything that was possible, all their statements were inserted into this law, etc. The law came into force on July 1, 2002, i.e. a few days ago. But in May 2002, and it was adopted on May 15, in my opinion, in the last reading and passed through the Federation Council, but at the end of May a bill was passed to introduce 70 amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Well, what can I say?
V. MARTYNOV Nothing.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA There is, I don’t know, a law on deferring military service for students of some universities, however, according to major cities From time to time in Russia, at least in Moscow, they write a lot about this, they conduct raids during which people are simply taken away, and then it is not always possible to restore the status quo, it is not always possible to restore the rule of law. What to do?
V. MARTYNOV Moreover, as far as I know, the police say that they did not take anyone to the military registration and enlistment office, and the military registration and enlistment office says that they did not take anyone from the police to their place. And people end up in the same Chechnya.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA What should we do, Sergei Sergeevich?
S. YURIEV This is, of course, a rhetorical question, right? My colleague Martynov said that we need to go to court. Sometimes going to court will not help, because the court will take two or three months to consider the case or schedule it for hearing. And I, of course, would like to talk here and mention, firstly, public policy. After all, if this happens, it means that public policy.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA So it is beneficial for the law to be broken?
S. YUREV This is state policy.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA To whom?
S. YURIEV Who benefits? Well, obviously, it benefits those who behave this way.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Can you list them on your fingers?
S. YUREV I think there won’t be enough fingers.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Name?
S. YUREV By name? I can name some.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Yes, please.
S. YURYEV Now, if we don’t talk about those cases that you talked about, I can just give another example, much more, maybe, well, not much, very serious, when the tax police falsified a document of the government of the Russian Federation, entered knowingly false information into it in relation to the current legislation of the Russian Federation, as a result of which inspections began to be carried out on all enterprises ensuring the safety of air traffic in Russia, and people began to be brought illegally to criminal liability. And so the whole world shuddered when it learned about the tragedy on July 2, when our plane crashed, but we can get the same situation in Russia. And we can name people who are the heads of the Federal Tax Police Service, these are the heads of the Ministry of Taxes and Duties, these are the heads of the Penza Department of the Federal Tax Service, this is the deputy prosecutor of the Penza region, who subsequently signs all these documents. And things have already reached the point that all the heads of state air traffic control enterprises turned to the presidential administration, the Security Council, the government, the State Duma, and the Federation Council.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA So what?
S. YURIEV Since the appeal was at the end of June, the legal deadline is a month for a response.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Pager question: “Is a citizen of the Russian Federation obliged to carry a passport with him and what is the procedure for presenting it at the request of the police?”
S. YURIEV The question is relevant.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA The question is extremely relevant today.
V. MARTYNOV In the Regulations on Passports, as far as I remember, there is no obligation for a citizen to carry a passport with him. This time. I must say that you can check a person’s passport only if he is suspected of committing an illegal act.
S. YUREV Yes, according to the law on police.
V. MARTYNOV You just can’t approach a person like that, again to the question of interpretation of the law. I, not being a police officer, do not have the right to approach her of my own choice, so I liked the girl, I approached her and decided to check her passport, I do not have the right to do this. The law on police clearly states in which cases a police officer has the right to check a passport or identity document.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA You moved to another topic.
V. MARTYNOV Citizen. No, I don't have to. If you are asked for your passport, first ask on what basis you are, Comrade Sergeant, Captain.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA And after that you are guaranteed those same three hours of detention.
V. MARTYNOV Yes, absolutely right. On the issue of interpretation of the law.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA So, it turns out, we have another question. How can you fight if you are trying to realize your civil rights how to deal with negative consequences their implementation? Make it so that you, as a result of the fact that you ask the sergeant, by what right does he ask you for your passport, as a result, so that you do not end up detained for three hours? Explain to the traffic cop that it’s none of his business, excuse me, who you are in private life, and at the same time not stand for the rest of your life on the road, on the side of the road. It turns out that our fork is vile.
V. MARTYNOV Unfortunately, Natella, we do not have an advertising program, so I do not have the right and opportunity to give the telephone number of our law office, and I will not give it, I said that I will not do this. But in principle, you need to find a good, intelligent lawyer, from my point of view.
S. YUREV And conclude an agreement with him, yes.
V. MARTYNOV And start litigation.
S. YURIEV So that when your passport is checked, immediately, that means, say, here’s my lawyer, call him, right?
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Funny.
V. MARTYNOV Why is it funny?
N. BOLTYANSKAYA And because, excuse me, please, but most people who have the financial ability to hire a lawyer, they very rarely have a situation where their passports are checked.
V. MARTYNOV And it all depends on the mass participation.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA So what?
V. MARTYNOV If, say, 100 people enter into such an agreement with me, what, at a ruble a month, for example, I say, will it be expensive?
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Yes, accepted. If everyone is given weapons, the state will have to comply with the laws, Andrei believes.
V. MARTYNOV I even in those days when I wore shoulder straps, and you know that this happened in my life.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA It was.
V. MARTYNOV Even then I was not a supporter of a general ban on the sale and carrying of weapons. I believe that a person should have the right to defend himself. But having received a weapon, he must bear corresponding responsibility for his actions. Although now Sergei Sergeevich will probably tell me, how will we behave if the shooting starts in lines for something? Thank God there are no queues.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA But cases of mass gatherings of people in modern Russia are not isolated and it is not excluded, absolutely not excluded, that during these mass gatherings of people shooting could begin, right?
V. MARTYNOV In those cases when they say that the presence of weapons in a person will increase, I mean, an ordinary citizen, will increase the number of crimes, I always ask another question: what weapon is used to commit the most murders in our country?
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Kitchen knife.
V. MARTYNOV Correct.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Correct, right?
V. MARTYNOV No one has banned them yet, thank God. Yes, and I can carry a kitchen knife with me.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA As many as you like.
V. MARTYNOV As much as you like, and even when a police officer sees him, he won’t do anything to me.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA You are simply legally literate, and if a person, leaving home in the dark or returning home from work with a pocketful of salary in the dark, puts a kitchen knife in his pocket, he is caught with this knife, then you will be tortured to tumble and prove that you are not a camel, am I wrong?
V. MARTYNOV The law must be implemented.
S. YURIEV Dear colleagues, it seems to me that Natella, in life she very correctly asks what to do, how to be, that’s why, etc. People call and ask the same thing.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA All questions are related precisely to this.
S. YURIEV Still, you know, we probably shouldn’t delude ourselves. I have already said that we do not have a rule of law state. And we should behave adequately in this situation; unfortunately, we do not have officials of any rank, not citizens who elect such deputies there and tolerate such officials; they are at that stage of development of our society when we, unfortunately, are faced with these facts. And you can, of course, fight all your life with the traffic cop who stopped you, or with the policeman who demanded your passport, and someday, perhaps, you will even be rehabilitated, as those who were shot in 1937 were rehabilitated in 1953.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Yes, absolutely right.
S. YURIEV Do you understand?
V. MARTYNOV Did it become easier for them?
S. YURYEV Did this make them feel better? Therefore, for example, I, as not only a scientist, but also a practicing lawyer, would never advise my client to tell a police sergeant that he is this and that, doesn’t know the laws, and I won’t show you my passport.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Okay. Tell me one more thing. Here you are sitting in front of me, practicing lawyers. How much population do we have in the country today?
V. MARTYNOV 140 million.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA 140 million. It turns out, in general, a rough division, it should be 70 to 70, there should be a lawyer for each person, right?
S. YUREV Why?
V. MARTYNOV Better than 140 million lawyers.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Ah, 140 million lawyers is perhaps too much. No, it turns out that the question arises: since it is possible to resolve issues of inequality before the law with the help of an intelligent lawyer, which many of us are not, then it turns out that every citizen should have a lawyer at his disposal. It is clear that this is unrealistic, in our country it is unrealistic.
S. YURIEV This is real.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Well, Sergey Sergeevich, how is it?
S. YURIEV This is real.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA When you watch, I don’t know, a policeman, who is chasing grandmothers away from the metro, selling, I don’t know, bread or something else, it is clear that none of these grandmothers have the opportunity to fight this policeman, because that each of them is breaking the law. So?
S. YURIEV Yes, due to some kind of necessity, extreme necessity, as the Criminal Code says.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA By necessity. There are a lot of such examples. Here I am, again, looking at the pager: “What to do, there is every reason to believe that the decisions of the district court and the Moscow City Court on a transport accident are of an ordered nature. I have to pay $5,000 even though it's not my fault. I was also told that going to the Supreme Court is useless because... it will not pass the input filter.” This is a message from Valery. What can you say?
S. YURIEV It’s hard, of course, to answer a specific case. I think so, at one time I saw a painting by one artist called “Until the last cartridge.” A soldier standing in a trench with spent ammunition, he had one cartridge and a bayonet left. This means I prefer to fight to the last bullet for rights and legitimate interests.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA The message on the pager, in my opinion, is a very sensible message: “Why do you always criticize only the authorities, if, according to your words, any citizen, in order to save his own time and nerves, is ready to commit several crimes at once, such as: incitement to receive bribes, bribery and concealment of official crime? This is a question from Sergei.
V. MARTYNOV So this is also what I’m saying: if we want the government to carry out the laws written by it, if we are talking about legislative branch, then citizens must comply with this law. Yes, indeed, it is easier to pay such a mini-bribe on the road and move on. Yes, it’s really easier, even when you’re at fault, then there’s really nothing to talk about, yes, and if you’re not at fault, then it’s easier to pay than to prove that it’s not so. But you can, as Sergei Yuryev said, you can fight until the last bullet.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Price issue?
V. MARTYNOV Where this cartridge ends up, a bullet from this cartridge will eventually be fired at that enemy or into one’s forehead.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA To my head, I answer immediately and simply unambiguously. Pavel from Tomsk, believes that it is some kind of nonsense to send traffic cops or police officers to a lawyer, “they should know about my rights without this, but this, as I understand, is impossible.” What do you think?
S. YURIEV In general, the listener is right, unfortunately, he is right, but this is a fact. We have a lot of people who wear shoulder straps, they don’t even know the legislation according to which they must work.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Sergei Sergeevich, again, we have gone through a vicious circle and returned to the next turn of the spiral. On the one hand, if every possible lawbreaker knows that any person he encountered in the process of his own violation of the law can perfectly call Vladimir Vladimirovich, Sergei Sergeevich, Ivan Ivanovich or Pyotr Petrovich, they will have a greater risk, they will think before trying to hint at a bribe or trample on the rights of the one with whom they are dealing. On the one side. But on the other hand, it turns out that for the majority of our fellow citizens this is also unprofitable, because it is a long and tedious trial.
S. YURIEV Bureaucratic procedure.
V. MARTYNOV You know, just now one comparison occurred to me, which, in general, is very typical for this situation. If a potential, so to speak, lawbreaker, a representative of the authorities, knows that a person can turn to a lawyer, and further in the text, as you said, and someone made such an argument, if a bandit knows that his potential If the victim has a gun in his pocket, then maybe he will be careful not to attack this victim. With the same gun in the pocket, a possible victim has the opportunity to turn to a smart, knowledgeable lawyer.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA You know, if you remember, for example, the history of MMM and the history of, say, government bonds, you can probably conclude that the state, so to speak, from the height of its own capabilities, did the same. So?
S. YUREV Yes, of course.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA But around, at least Mavrodi, there were attempts to subject him to the law. Mrs. Solovyova spent some time, so to speak, in places not so remote.
S. YURIEV Four years.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Agree, it exists. And, excuse me, please, the very state that did the same thing is not responding in any way, right?
V. MARTYNOV Why, it answers.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA What?
V. MARTYNOV With our money.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Bravo, Vladimir Vladimirovich, wonderful, simply amazing. But you must admit, responding with our money and responding with our own freedom or some difficulties in our own biography are two different things, right?
V. MARTYNOV Very different.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA And what now? So what should we do now? It turns out that initially the question that we are discussing has no answer. That is, the answer is an unequivocal no, no one is equal before the law, and there is no such equality, there has never been and there never will be.
V. MARTYNOV At one time, Sergei Yuryev gave me one figure that I had not thought about before, and then it shocked me after he told me it. Sergey, remember, you told me how many votes the Constitution of the Russian Federation under which we live by was adopted?
S. YUREV Yes, yes, 25%.
V. MARTYNOV If it’s not difficult, run through this calculation, it’s very short.
S. YURIEV Well, yes, I really don’t remember, we probably had this conversation a long time ago, but in fact, this is a well-known fact. The Constitution of the Russian Federation was adopted by 25% of the total number of persons entitled to vote in elections. Some people didn't come.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA What is it to prove that no one cares?
S. YURIEV Yes, to many, to the majority. AND good phrase classic, but every nation has the government it deserves. Here we have what we deserve as a result. Another thing is that people who care should consolidate and defend their rights and interests.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Pager message “I have printouts of laws and regulations that are violated every day. What kind of certification do these printouts require in order to present them to the same traffic cops, police officers, or other people you may encounter in the process, in an attempt to exercise your rights, that are mentioned many times today?”
S. YUREV This is a small legal consultation, in particular, apparently, the official document is the one published in the official press.
V. MARTYNOV Yes, if you make extracts here, then no certification is needed, but I would advise you to refer to official publications. This is the “Rossiyskaya Gazeta” or Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, where this is officially published. All kinds of these consulting programs, they help the work, but cannot be the basis for demands.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA You know, if you read imported novels, American, for example, crime novels, there is such a formulation when the trial begins, “citizen so-and-so against the state of such-and-such” or “state of such-and-such.”
S. YURIEV On the contrary. Most often, the state is against.
V. MARTYNOV State versus individual.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA State versus individual?
S. YUREV Yes.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Please tell me, is a precedent even possible in our country when a person tries to present his claims to the state? And most importantly, when are these claims satisfied? If we recall a story that was probably 15 years ago, maybe a little less, there is a known fact when a citizen who was late for a plane and suffered greatly as a result won a decent amount of money from Aeroflot as compensation. In my opinion, this is a one-time occurrence.
S. YURIEV In general, the fight against the state is, of course, a legal exclusive, this is understandable. At the same time, despite the fact that we now criticize the state and criticize society, we cannot help but say that both society and the state are different from the society and state that we had 10-20 years ago. This is a fact, we can’t get away from this, this is a plus. Regarding your question, I have dealt with this kind of stuff myself. Well, first of all, for example, arbitration courts in 68% of cases, unlawful acts of tax authorities in relation to taxpayers were invalidated, i.e. two-thirds. Different conclusions can be drawn here, but two-thirds of taxpayers defended their legitimate interests against the state. Second, just the other day, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta officially published the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, according to which one of the Russian citizens was recognized as a victim of unlawful actions of the state, and he was awarded compensation in the amount of, in my opinion, 3,000 euros for late payment to this citizen those sums of money that he should have received as a participant in the liquidation of the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Yes, there really was such a story.
S. YURYEV And I know that the European Court has a large number of lawsuits filed by Russian citizens against the state. That is, again, this elementary truth is that you need to defend your rights with the help of qualified specialists in all areas. Whether it's lawyers or doctors, if you have a headache, yes.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Sergei Sergeevich, at the beginning of August 1998, one character we already mentioned today in our program uttered the following phrase: “There will be no default.” Then what happened happened. Many people were hurt by this. There is information that among the victims there are people who were simply forced to take their own lives. Please tell me, do you think it is possible to sue this man, who at that time was not just in office, he was in the position of guarantor of the Constitution?
V. MARTYNOV In what state is this the third question.
S. YUREV You can always go to court. No one has canceled or taken away our right to go to court. And we can go to court. Question two, you asked well, because here there really are always two points: the right to appeal and the possibility of winning, i.e. achieving that result. This is where we need to figure it out. In general, I have a special, so to speak, attitude towards all these people who ruled. I always remember Plato’s words that many leaders, he didn’t say that, of course, but many kings, those in power, they believe that they have deeply mastered the knowledge of government. While under their control states fall apart and sink, as he says, like ships in the abyss.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Okay.
V. MARTYNOV Yes, but by the way, as for filing a claim in court against this to a specific person, apparently, if we are talking about criminal liability, and about civil liability too, I remind you of the law on the immunity of the first president of Russia. The court won't accept it.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA What if you sue not a specific person, but the Russian state?
S. YURIEV Russian Federation yes.
V. MARTYNOV You have to think and you have to try.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA If there are two practicing lawyers sitting in front of me, if I come to each of you as a private individual with an attempt to file such a claim, will you advise me or advise me not to do this?
V. MARTYNOV You and I will sit down together to study the documents and see what can come of it. Recently, as a practicing lawyer, a woman came to me and asked me how she could file a claim for recognition as an heir to the House of Romanov. I advised her not to file this claim for now.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA I see. Not long ago there was a story related to a Muscovite who sued the head of Mosenergo. In this situation, I would not even consider specific personalities. There are a lot of slippery moments, but the citizen put money in the bank, the bank burst as a result of default, the person suffered financially, there is no money. What can he do in such a situation?
V. MARTYNOV Add yourself to the list of creditors of this bank.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA And forget about this money for the rest of your life, right?
V. MARTYNOV Yes. I would like to remind you that, in general, the state only in certain cases bears some responsibility for the activities of the bank. But in principle, there can be 100,000 creditors, and each of them put something there, in this bank. If the state did not somehow guarantee the actions of this bank, then how can it be held responsible for it? Risk.
S. YURIEV Entrepreneurial risk.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Okay. By the will of sad circumstances, you found yourself in a medical institution, where, in your opinion, you were given the wrong treatment or you were denied some, so to speak, medical drugs. What should you do in this situation?
V. MARTYNOV I can say that one of my colleagues from our law office is now defending the interests of a woman who sought and received help in one particular medical institution, which is very often advertised, including on the Ekho Moskvy radio station, I don’t call it specific institution, and in this case it goes trial, since this person was provided with, to put it mildly, unqualified medical care, as a result of which the person became practically disabled.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Okay, one more phenomenon. The person is again in difficult situation, and, unfortunately, this is a common occurrence, and when doctors recommend that, for example, he bring some medicines in order to make it easier for him, they immediately explain that he must formalize this bringing with papers, because according to current legislation, a medical institution does not have the right to demand these same medications if the medical institution itself does not have them.
V. MARTYNOV has no right to demand or use medications. But in general, the institution also does not have Medicine X, but it used it. They will ask him, this institution, where they got it from.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Pager message “It seems to me that if you, the presenter, come with a claim to your guests, they will sit down with you to clean the parabellum and explain how to use the last cartridge for its intended purpose,” says Sergei. “The state has much more grounds to file a claim against a private person who is going to make claims against the state. The wrong example was chosen to oppose the state. Over the years of young reformers, the private citizen has managed to leave a legacy as it should.”
V. MARTYNOV I must say, excuse me, first of all, yes, indeed, both Sergei and I know how to use weapons, they taught us this, this time.
S. YURIEV I even got first place in the shooting department.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA That is, if something happens, will you explain to me?
V. MARTYNOV Yes.
S. YURIEV But we will not fight.
V. MARTYNOV Not a parabellum, but a Makarov pistol. As for the second, it all depends on what kind of private person.
S. YURIEV What social status, right? On the issue of equality.
V. MARTYNOV There are people who really followed and the state makes reasonable claims against them, and there are people who worked normally and have every right to make claims against the state.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Well, you know, about people who worked normally, a lot of questions immediately arise.
V. MARTYNOV Natella, you, me and my colleague.
S. YURIEV Already three.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Yes, there are few of us. And the worst thing is that we are apart. “Please explain a specific case. The cargo arrived at customs, and customs decided that it was processed incorrectly. Then it turned out that customs was wrong. While all this was being sorted out, it took a month and a half. Who should pay for cargo storage? - asks Tatyana.
V. MARTYNOV Customs definitely.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Can you prove this to her with help?
V. MARTYNOV Courts.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Or parabellum?
S. YURYEV I think that competent customs officers will resolve it themselves if they don’t want complications.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA “Please tell me who to contact if the house is in poor condition? We live in a state apartment." Who is guilty?
V. MARTYNOV What does a house in poor condition mean? The planned major repairs are not being carried out, is the entrance dirty? Now, if the entrance is dirty, then, first of all, you need to turn to yourself. The roof leaks accordingly to the organization that is working on this house.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Well, another question today is that we are talking about compensation for lost savings for many Russian citizens, and these citizens are graded depending on their age. What about those people who, due to their age, are not yet subject to the law on compensation, but have already lost something? And excuse the harshness, they may simply not live to see this compensation happen. Where should they go, also to court?
S. YURIEV Theoretically, you can go to court. I can say that it is unlikely that this claim will be satisfied. As a practitioner.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA That’s the point, it turns out that even if we assume that any person who encounters violations of the law in his own practice will go to a professional lawyer and try together with him to achieve restoration of his rights, then there is no guarantees that the judicial system that exists today in our country will give him such an opportunity. I'm right?
V. MARTYNOV Of course, you are right. There are no judicial guarantees, and you yourself know, Natella, only State Insurance provides a guarantee, yes, at one time, it was said? And that's not always the case.
S. YUREV Well, this is probably a joke.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Well, okay, jokes are jokes.
V. MARTYNOV There can be no guarantees.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Your rights were violated, you felt, so to speak, unlawfully offended, you turn in all circles, go through all the circles of hell, and as a result the case drags on, but no result occurs.
V. MARTYNOV Sooner or later, if the law is observed, as we have already talked about, then this result will come. In particular, it happened for that citizen of the Russian Federation who filed a claim against the state.
S. YURIEV In the European Court.
V. MARTYNOV In the European Court, he reached the European Court, i.e. he fired the last round we were talking about, and that round hit the target.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA One more question: in your opinion, how many chances does each of the Russian citizens have to ensure that this last cartridge still hits the target? Sergey Sergeevich?
S. YURIEV It seems to me that such chances are quite significant.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Well, if we take, so to speak, the total number of possible requests as 100%, what percentage have a chance?
S. YURYEV Natella, I can’t answer what percentage. The point is that there should always be a legal assessment of a particular case.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Please excuse me for being harsh, I even became hoarse from horror. I want to ask you a probably unpleasant question. Here you are again sitting in front of me, practicing lawyers. With all my wonderful attitude towards you, to a certain extent it is beneficial for you that people whose rights are violated turn to you. And then, can you remember the old and rather cynical joke about a young lawyer who comes to his dad, an old lawyer, and says: “Dad, I won the case that you worked on for 20 years.” And he says to him: “Idiot, this business fed us for 20 years and could have fed us for the same number of years.”
S. YUREV So what’s the problem? The problem is that there is a theory that lawyers benefit from having certain clients?
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Not only the presence of certain clients, but the presence of that very machine that runs idle and does not produce any results.
S. YURYEV You know, of course, a lot depends on each person, including if you are a lawyer, he also thinks something about himself and about his clients, and about the situation you are talking about. In my opinion and my personal attitude, I am never interested in dealing with such problems. And in my opinion, it is much more interesting, more profitable, not even in a monetary sense, but in a social sense, to engage, for example, in concluding contracts, preparing large agreements for, say, the construction of Sheremetyevo-3, etc., i.e. positive, do positive things.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA And you are right, yes. Vladimir Vladimirovich?
V. MARTYNOV I would say that Sergei and I are both practicing lawyers working in slightly different areas, because Sergei Yuriev is interested in the area that he just talked about - contract law, tax law to some extent, etc. I mainly specialize in issues of the Criminal Code, in its, so to speak, classic version, from the word “criminal”. I am not interested in working for many days, years, months, with the same person. I prefer to finish this particular task quickly, rather than drag it out over years and months. In a country with 140 million people, unfortunately, there will always be a segment of the population whose rights are violated in criminal proceedings.
S. YURIEV Today, a million people, approximately a million, are in prison. These are official numbers.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA And can we say that the rights of each of them have been violated? If we talk about the number of people who should be in the same cell at the same time, about the conditions of detention, about primary and secondary tuberculosis?
V. MARTYNOV From what we know, if not just a million, then somewhere around 700 thousand people, at least these rights have been violated to one degree or another.
S. YURIEV And then a colleague said that even if a person committed an illegal act, a crime, he must be convicted according to the law, and for this we need lawyers who will provide him with qualified legal assistance.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Pager question: “Who exactly do you think the new Criminal Code was adopted for?”
V. MARTYNOV Let's start with the fact that we are talking, apparently, not about the Criminal, but about the Criminal Procedure. The Criminal Code was adopted in 1996, the Criminal Procedure Code is now. I can say that it was accepted, it slightly smoothed out those absolutely incomprehensible and unjustified negative traits the Soviet Code of Criminal Procedure, according to which we lived until recently.
S. YUREV That is, the Code of a punitive type.
V. MARTYNOV He has been accepted for you and me.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA And probably the last question that we have time to discuss today. Please tell me, does it make sense for people who daily encounter, perhaps encounter, violations of the law in relation to their own person, I don’t know, to try to eliminate their own legal illiteracy? Before they contact a lawyer?
V. MARTYNOV There is a lot of legal literature; I myself go to the store almost every day and wonder what new products there are. Recently I read an excellent phrase in a semi-advertising essay by a Ukrainian lawyer. This phrase sounds like this: when you need to contact a lawyer, even when you think that you may have some difficulties in the future, then you need to contact a lawyer. And refusing a lawyer during a preliminary investigation or during a court hearing is tantamount to suicide.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Sergey Sergeevich?
S. YUREV I believe that it is advisable to read legal literature.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA But it’s pointless.
S. YURIEV You need to be well-versed, yes, but the most important thing is that you need to be systematic in this knowledge, then it will be useful. If people simply take a book and pull something out, it turns out even worse than if they didn’t read at all.
V. MARTYNOV After all, you can read a medical encyclopedia, but this will not make you a doctor.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Practicing doctor, yes. Well, I thank our guests. I remind you that in our studio there is a lawyer, deputy head of the Mir law office, Vladimir Martynov, Doctor of Law, Chairman of the Presidium of the Interregional Bar Association “Mezhregion”, Sergei Yuryev. In fact, all this is sad, good gentlemen.
V. MARTYNOV As it is.
N. BOLTYANSKAYA Indeed, it’s sad. Draft Order of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation "On amendments to the Procedure for admission to training in educational programs higher education- residency programs approved by order of the Ministry of Health of the Russian […]

Rakhmatullina Aisylu Khayretdinovna

Scientific supervisor Elena Yurievna Sosnina

MOBU SOSH village. Krasny Zilim, Arkhangelsk district

“The true equality of citizens consists in their being equally subject to the laws” (J.D. Alembert)

The statement I chose for writing the essay by the French scientist-encyclopedist who lived in the 18th century, widely known as a philosopher, mathematician and mechanic, Jean Leron D'Alembert, relates to jurisprudence. Jurisprudence is a science that studies the legal system of society, its elements, and their interaction.

common topic, touched upon by D'Alembert in his statement - equality. Equality of all before the law, as one of the leading principles of a fair social order.

I believe that D'Alembert in his statement is talking about the formula of equality - equal submission to the law. Is D'Alembert right in asserting that the subjection of all to the law equally is the main condition for true equality? Of course you're right! But is it feasible? Humanity has been striving for social equality for many years. After all, “inequality” has existed since the emergence of society. It was as a result of unequal access of people from different social groups to such benefits as money, power, prestige that inequality arose. Ideologists of past years offered different “recipes” for ridding society of inequality, but they were all utopian. There must be proportionality of the situation on the basis of legal equality, that is, both oligarchs and ordinary people must be equal before the law. In a civilized state, the main point of support for a citizen is the law, which is the same for everyone - from the president to the garbage man.

The problem of true equality of citizens in subjection to the law, posed by the author in the 18th century, is still relevant today. IN modern world it is very difficult to talk about equality of absolutely all citizens before the law and the court

Laws apply equally to those who make them and who has the supreme power

Why are officials in power allowed to adjust articles of the Constitution of the Russian Federation for their own personal enrichment? Article 41 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation states: “Every citizen has the right to free medical care...”. At this time, most medical services paid.

Article 43 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation: “Everyone has the right to free education...”. But officials of the State Duma of the Russian Federation condemn the bill on partial paid education at school. If this bill is adopted, then rich people will pay for a decent education, but the poor cannot afford it.

For abuse of power and official powers, which caused particularly large damage to the state, Syurdyukov and Vasilyeva “got away with everything”, and a minor teenager from the village. Olenye, who stole a table for 3,200 rubles, faces 6 years in prison.

How would a person occupying a high position in society behave if there were real equality in our time? He would look at the law ten times before breaking it. And for the gentlemen who stole people's money, it is necessary to apply complete confiscation of property. Stole? Give it back!

To achieve true equality, provided that the law is equally subject to law in our country, it is necessary that all citizens, and the younger generation in the first place, should have equal starting opportunities in education, health, and employment. As long as the measure in society is enrichment, and the elite closes in enrichment, history, starting with Ancient Greece, showed what happens to such a state. It loses in competition, and then loses its place in civilization.

One cannot but agree with the opinion of the author D’Alembert. It is equality before the law that ensures true equality, that is, respect for the rights and human dignity of all citizens, regardless of their social status. Now we are striving to build a rule of law state where power is limited by law. Therefore, upon reaching the age of 18, I will join the ONF, where people are given the opportunity to talk about the pain points of the state, the republic, namely the equality of all before the law.

BIBIOGRAPHICAL LIST:

1. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/D’Alembert,_Jean_Leron

2.http://referatzone.com/load/referaty/pravovedenie/pravovedenie_ponjatie_i_sushhnost/59-1-0-2447

3. Sokolov Y.V. Civil studies: tutorial for 8th grade students, their parents and teachers. M.: 1998

4.The Constitution of the Russian Federation. St. Petersburg Victoria Plus LLC 2012

5. Constitution of the Russian Federation. St. Petersburg Victoria Plus LLC 2012

(J. d'Alembert)

It’s amazing how accurately Jean Lenore d’Alembert, a French encyclopedist, mechanic, mathematician and educational philosopher, characterizes rule of law. It is in this type of state that the rule of law is like an axiom in mathematics

The philosopher touches on very important topics, among them: equality of citizens before the law, the principle of the rule of law.

This topic is still relevant today. The majority of the country's population stands for democracy, for equality, for the destruction of such strong social stratification. Everyone craves one thing: equality. Often on television, journalists say that official N, his children, his wife, no matter who, were not sent to prison for a crime, but were given a suspended sentence, while ordinary citizens do not believe in justice, everyone understands who has the money, That's the strength. The principle of equality is an ideal modern society. The law should line everyone up in one line, not by height, starting with the most influential.

J. d'Alembert believes that true equality of citizens lies, first of all, in equality before the law. If everyone is in the same conditions and obeys the same laws, then justice will prevail.

I completely agree with the author of the statement. The principle of equality - fundamental principle constitutional status of the individual, meaning the legal equality of citizens before the law and the court. All people are equal in their rights and freedoms, and the state provides them with equal rights regardless of race, nationality, language, social origin, etc. IN modern history Russia cannot have laws that would give privileges to certain sections of society (excluding special categories of citizens (incapacitated). It is not without reason that they say: “The law is the same for everyone.”

The Constitution of the Russian Federation guarantees equality of rights and freedoms of man and citizen before the law and the court, but this is not always the case. It is enough to remember “Oboronservis” to understand how unfair the law can be. Evgenia Vasilyeva was accused of embezzling more than 350 million rubles, she denied her guilt, and it took the court about 10 months to pronounce a verdict. She was sentenced to 5 years in a general regime colony. However, already on the 34th day, Evgenia Vasilyeva was released on parole. Naturally, all this caused a wave of criticism and indignation. After all, people have been seeking parole for less serious crimes for years. “The division of investigation and legal proceedings into two levels - “elite” and “for the rest of the people” - strikes at the authority of the judicial and law enforcement system and undermines the country’s citizens’ faith in justice,” Ella Pamfilova, Commissioner for Human Rights in Russia, commented on the event. Where equality, where is equality, where is democracy?

Of course, a previous situation of this magnitude is rare, but we ourselves are faced with similar events every day. On tests in physics, we receive multi-level tasks: excellent students are given an advanced level, and the rest are given an average level. For “average” students, this is a normal phenomenon, which they evaluate positively, but excellent students sometimes feel offended, because their “B” is comparable to the “A” of an average student, and they could also get a 5. On tests in economics, we are also seated in rows: 1 row for guys with average knowledge, 2 - for guys with good knowledge and 3rd row for those who have increased level knowledge. And some students have a fear that they will be seated in row 1 instead of 2 or 3, thereby demonstrating that they are not very high level academic performance. It is impossible not to note the positive impact of this method: there is an incentive to be better, but in politics this is impossible. If from the point of view of sociology and philosophy equality is not the main decisive feature, then in political science the principle of equality is fundamental.

In conclusion, I would like to say that a civilized society is possible only if it is strictly followed and obeys the law. We are all people, we are all equal. There should be no difference between those who rule and those who are ruled. Only in this case is the absolute supremacy of both the law and the principle of equality possible. However, this is already clearly a highly developed civilized society, which, I think, is impossible, in other words - a higher mind, intangible matter.

Mobilization of law is a phenomenon that allows us to understand why, in situations that are completely identical at first glance, people in one case solve the problem between themselves, and in another they prefer to call the police or go to court. Why is a fight that occurs in the kitchen usually resolved by mutual apologies, and Street fight, even between acquaintances, is much more likely to cause police intervention?

The Institute for Law Enforcement Problems has published a popular science book that presents a large number of cases on this topic: “Beyond the Law: Legislators, Courts and Police in Russia.”

1. When does the law begin to work?

One of the main theses of the sociology of law says that the law will not work until there is someone who will make it work - “mobilizes the law.” One's own or someone else's, for one's own good or for the common good, voluntarily or under duress. When a police officer removes a very drunk person but chooses not to notice a less drunk person, he is exercising his authority in relation to one and not in relation to the other.

The term “mobilization of law” was introduced in 1973 by, probably, the last of the major theorists of the sociology of law, Donald Black. His goal was to understand how and when in life people begin to “turn on” the law, try to make it work, be it ordinary citizens or those who are specially trained and trained to mobilize this right for the common good.

Black D. J. Mobilization of Law, The //J. Legal Stud. - 1973. - T. 2. - P. 125.

2. Inequality before the law

It is important to note: the opportunities to mobilize law are not equal. An educated, working, sober person has a much greater chance of correctly mobilizing the right for his own good.

In fact, no one is equal before the law. Depending on our social status, we have fundamentally different opportunities. This is obvious when we start looking at discriminated groups. With a few exceptions, we see a completely standard pyramid: the richer, more educated, older a person is (up to a certain limit), the larger the population center he lives in, the easier it is for him to mobilize the law, the easier it is for him to switch the situation from everyday to legally normalized.

There are a few exceptions around the world. For example, in Russia (no special studies have been conducted, so I will use an everyday term), “active old women” could be identified as an exception. It would seem that age is beyond what gives an advantage, social status, as a rule, is not very high, the income group is small, but we have all repeatedly observed a situation where representatives of this group were much more successful than many others in mobilizing the law for their benefit.

Burstein P., Monaghan K. Equal employment opportunity and the mobilization of law //Law & Soc’y Rev. - 1986. - T. 20. - P. 355.

3. The desire to mobilize the law

Along with opportunities, a person has a desire to mobilize the right, and it is quite strongly related to social status. As a study of students at a university on the West Coast of the United States showed, losing an ID (either a student ID or a license) sharply reduces the desire to interact with the police. Although in America, unlike Russia, the situation does not imply the constant presence of a passport.

Moreover, there are many interesting characteristics that influence our desire to mobilize the law. The easiest way to demonstrate this is with crime victims. A large, good study was conducted based on the American victimological survey. People who are victims of crime at night are much less likely to contact the police than those who are victims of crime during the day. People who are victims of crime in their own neighborhood are more likely to call the police than people who are victims of crime in someone else's neighborhood. Women are more willing than men, and so on. If we take it to the point of absurdity and give a stereotypical example, then an educated girl who becomes a victim of a violent crime at the threshold of her own home is much more likely to contact the police than a drunk young man who becomes a victim of a property crime in a strange area of ​​the city at night.

Formally, the situation is the same: people are victims of crime. In fact, society is structured in such a way that one of these situations is conducive to the mobilization of law, and the second strongly contradicts it. Moreover, as we know from Russian practice, there is often a risk of becoming a repeat victim of police violence.

Abrego L. Legitimacy, social identity, and the mobilization of law: The effects of Assembly Bill 540 on undocumented students in California //Law & Social Inquiry. - 2008. - T. 33. - No. 3. - pp. 709-734.

Avakame E. F., Fyfe J. J., McCoy C. “Did you call the police? What did they do? An empirical assessment of Black’s theory of mobilization of law //Justice Quarterly. - 1999. - T. 16. - No. 4. - pp. 765-792.

4. National context of legal mobilization

Along with the opportunity and desire to mobilize the right, there is also a situational context, which we can call discriminatory and non-discriminatory situations. Some situations are conducive to the mobilization of law, others are not. This is a completely nationally specific story. In France, large differences arise between urban and rural areas, since the main enforcer in the French countryside is the gendarmerie, which is a military structure, reports to the Minister of Defense and behaves very differently from civilian police structures. In Russia, context is associated with the conventional suitability of a particular situation for a legal decision. A person who sues for breaking his leg will be perceived quite normally in his circle in Russia. A person who files a lawsuit for verbal insult (if this is not the mayor of Moscow or a State Duma deputy) will most likely be considered strange by those around him. Especially if he sues an old acquaintance.

Hendley K. Demand for law in Russia: A mottled picture // Constitutional law: Eastern European Review. - 2001. - No. 4. - P. 37.

Handley K. Appeal to the court in modern Russia: the emergence and development of conflicts associated with apartment renovation // Law and law enforcement in Russia: interdisciplinary studies / Ed. V.V. Volkova. - M.: “Statut”, 2011. - 317 p. Ss. 178-220.

5. The importance of social status in law enforcement

All three facts together - desire, opportunity and context - show us that along with the law, the right that a person has, there is also a technology for its mobilization, which makes people unequal before the law. What an educated man of Slavic appearance can easily achieve, an uneducated woman of Central Asian appearance will have great difficulty obtaining. The thing for which a young, poor, uneducated Slavic man will most likely be detained by the police, practically does not threaten a Slavic, but educated, wealthy, middle-aged woman. Even if they behave in exactly the same way or are equally likely to be suspected of a crime.

Indeed, in addition to the fact that a person himself has different chances of mobilizing the law, he also has a different probability of becoming an object of mobilization of the law. This is one of the main stories for the sociology of law, once again showing the simple fact that social context radically changes the degree of equality before the law and in fact there is no equality before the law. Our pseudo-equality before the law is entirely mediated by our social status and the situational context that is accepted within our social world.