Public law in Russia is developing under the influence of constitutional reform and the fight against the pandemic. The Russian Constitutional Court (RCC) became the object of constitutional changes that affected its legal status and powers, which can be assessed ambiguously from the point of view of the development of constitutionalism. RCC acted, on the one hand, as a participant in the legitimization of the constitutional reform, and on the other, responded to the second urgent challenge – it recognized the restriction of freedom of movement during a pandemic as legitimate based on a decree of the governor of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation. Thus, RCC proclaimed security, the protection of traditional values as a response to the challenges of our time and thus determined the development of constitutional law. However, is there any hope for a new path, in which the freedoms, and self-restraint of the authorities will become guidelines, including for RCC?
Beside the Russian Constitution the Public Assembly Law (PAL) regulates the freedom of peaceful assembly (FPA). PAL unites constitutional provisions, the federal and regional laws, the case-law of the Russian Constitutional Court (RCC) related to the implementation of the FPA. There were serious limitations on the FPA by the legislature. At the moment there are ten judgements of the RCC on issues of the FPA. The international human rights instruments have vital importance for protection of FPA in Russia. Therefore, the presentation will provide an overview of systemic problems of the implementation of the FPA in Russia; it will be focused on the analysis of differences in the interpretation of the FPA between the RCC and ECtHR; as well on the analysis of the scope of the FPA and national legislation in the light of documents of the UN Human Rights Committee, reports of the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to FPA and association, as well as leading cases of the RCC and ECtHR.
The proclaimed policy of sustainable development includes a “green economy” approach in national legislation. New tendency shows interrelation of International Environmental Law not only with the Law of Economy, but as well with the International Human Rights Law. So, in 2019 the Supreme Court of the Netherlands issued a decision stating that the Dutch government has failed to reduce greenhouse gases and therefore is responsible for the severe impact on the lives and welfare of the residents of the Netherlands. The European Court of Human Rights in a number of cases founded violation of Art. 2 and Art. 8 of the ECHR due to the non-compliance with states environmental obligations. The presentation will provide for an overview of the jurisprudence of international and national courts on right to a healthy environment. It emphasizes the implementation of the international environmental obligations on the national level in order to archive the sustainable development of Russia.
Constitutional adjudication in Russia knew different models of balancing between fundamental freedoms and public aims. It evolved from liberal approach in early 1990th to conservative model in modern case-law. Constitutional rights adjudication is characterized now by overestimation of weight of public interests. In this regard the author argues on survival of Socialist legal tradition in Russia. Moreover, the concept of constitutional rights initially had an ambivalence. This can be explained by the transition period from soviet system. Taking into account the spread of collectivist ideas in the society, the drafters of the constitutional text in 1993 tried to reconcile the liberal and illiberal concept of constitutional rights. Now the urgent question is whether the liberal concept of rights has the future? Russian experience could be interesting due to the general expansion of populism and the erosion the democratic rules during the COVID pandemic.