The functions of the state are foreign policy law enforcement. Morality, politics and law enforcement. What is a state
A.V. MALKO, Doctor of Law, Professor, Director of the Saratov Branch of the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation, V.A. TEREKHIN, candidate of legal sciences, head. Department of Justice, Penza State University, Honored Lawyer of the Russian Federation The problems of functioning of the law enforcement system of the Russian Federation are investigated; conclusions are drawn that it is in a state of deep crisis ...
This article was copied from https://www.site
Pages in the magazine: 3-8
A.V. MALKO,
Doctor of Law, Professor, Director of the Saratov Branch of the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation,
V.A. TEREKHIN,
candidate of legal sciences, head. Department of Justice, Penza State University, Honored Lawyer of the Russian Federation
The problems of functioning of the law enforcement system of the Russian Federation are investigated; conclusions are drawn that it is in a state of deep crisis; measures are proposed for its reform, formation and implementation of law enforcement policy as the basis of all modernization processes.
Keywords: law enforcement agencies, law enforcement system, law enforcement, modernization, law enforcement policy.
Law-enforcement policy as a basis for the development of law-enforcement activities
Malko A., Teryokhin V.
The law-enforcement system functioning of the Russian Federation is studied in the article. The authors come to the conclusion that it is in deep crisis at the moment. Since the law-enforcement policy turns out to be the basis of all the development processes, a set of steps is proposed to its administration, formation and reformation.
Keywords: law enforcement agencies, law enforcement system, law enforcement activities, development, law enforcement policy.
Extremely negative recent events related to a series of offenses by employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation (mass “cleansing operations” in Blagoveshchensk, the murder of a teenager in Tyva and a journalist in Tomsk, the execution of civilians by Major Yevsyukov in Moscow, an unprecedented special operation to create a “human shield” from private cars on the Moscow Ring Road, the detention of the entire company of traffic police officers in Astrakhan for extortion, the falsification of criminal and administrative cases against innocent citizens of many regions of the country), gave rise to serious doubts in the Russian public consciousness about the ability of these bodies to fulfill the human rights function of the state.
In addition, publications appeared in the central mass media with conclusions not only about the alienation of the police from society, but about their direct confrontation. A legal paradox has emerged, the main contradiction of our time: the employees of these services “see their task in “protecting” themselves, in extreme cases, their corporate interests, and not citizens.” There are calls, including from State Duma deputies, for the abolition of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the creation of people's squads "to protect the population from the police," and the Minister of Internal Affairs "allowed us to defend ourselves from the police."
Along with this, the flow of information reported daily by the media about corruption in all power structures, about numerous violations of socio-economic rights, systemic violations of the rights of children left without parental care, obvious and gross disregard for the current standards for the operation of especially dangerous objects of life clearly show, on the one hand , the absolute defenselessness of a person, and on the other hand, the weakness and inefficiency of the domestic mechanism of law enforcement.
According to many expert estimates, the entire law enforcement system of the country is in a state of deep and systemic crisis. Under the new conditions, it is not capable of fully fulfilling the tasks assigned to it to ensure the legal security of our citizens, public and state interests. The professional and moral deformation of many representatives of the relevant structures has set in. There was an obvious conflict between their personal and public interests. It seems that public confidence in the whole block of law enforcement has been undermined. So, according to sociological research by the Yury Levada Analytical Center, now “only three very stable institutions are in the zone of trust: Putin and Medvedev, the army and the church… mistrust."
Therefore, it is not at all accidental that on February 18, 2010, the President of the Russian Federation issued Decree No. 208 “On Certain Measures to Reform the Ministry of the Interior”. In fact, in this legal act we are talking about the beginning of the transformation of one of the most important areas of state activity. A little earlier, in 2007, structural changes were made in the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation, under which the Investigative Committee was formed (Federal Law of 05.06. ”), and in 2008 the President of the Russian Federation announced the start of the next stage of reforming the judicial system (Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of May 20, 2008 No. 279-rp “On the formation of a working group on improving the legislation of the Russian Federation on the judicial system”).
In this regard, a natural question arises: can the implementation of the planned measures lead to an improvement in the state of law enforcement? The question posed is most likely to be answered in the affirmative. Or rather, it will to some extent contribute to changing the current situation.
At the same time, it is not difficult to assume that the modernization of the public spheres specified in the named legal acts will not in itself lead to radical changes, a significant increase in the efficiency of the entire law enforcement complex and the high results expected by society. And this is explained by the fact that the adopted decisions, as can be seen from their content, are strictly substantive, relatively speaking, departmental in nature. The range and volume of reform measures is somewhat targeted and limited. It does not affect the entire law enforcement system and is isolated from many other law enforcement issues.
In our opinion, one of the important and indispensable conditions for overcoming such large-scale and profound social and legal phenomena is the conceptual approach. Therefore, appropriate efforts, systematic and consistent work on the formation and implementation of doctrinal foundations in the field of protection of law and legal values are required. In other words, we need a state law enforcement policy. And on its basis, it is possible to more successfully solve the problems of increasing the efficiency of all law enforcement activities, ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens, the interests of society and the state.
Law enforcement policy, of course, should become one of the varieties of well-thought-out, officially adopted and actively implemented legal policy in society. In other words, law enforcement policy is one of the components of a more capacious and broad concept, which is legal policy in general.
It should be noted that, in contrast to legal policy in general, to which the attention of many scientists has recently been drawn, the problems of law enforcement policy have not been properly studied until recently. Therefore, today there is a weak elaboration and debatability of many conceptual foundations of this legal phenomenon. Thus, in legal science there is no consensus on the concept and content of such basic legal categories as law enforcement agencies, law enforcement system, law enforcement mechanism, law enforcement activities, the scope and subjects of its implementation, etc. There is also no general scientific approach to the content of legal the term "protection", its correlation with similar legal categories "protection", "ensuring", "implementation of the rights and freedoms of the individual". Moreover, we do not have well-established scientific ideas about law enforcement policy, its content, priority areas for implementation. In the meantime, there are disputes between representatives of science and practicing lawyers, the criminal situation has become a real factor threatening Russia's national security. The rights and freedoms of our fellow citizens, as already noted, are significantly and systematically violated in many other areas of social relations.
The above once again emphasizes the importance of developing and implementing an official law enforcement policy and its concept that meets modern social realities and takes into account both our own historical experience and the achievements of world practice. A concept is not only a set of theoretical ideas, but also a kind of program of specific actions. And as the practice of social management in recent years shows, it is the program-target method that makes it possible to effectively solve the tasks set and achieve the intended goals.
As is known, depending on the functions of law, legal policy can be divided into law-regulatory and law-enforcement. If the first is intended to promote the implementation of the regulatory function of law, the creation of prerequisites for the harmonious development of social relations, then the second is to give a general algorithm to the actions of all subjects of law enforcement, to mobilize them for a more effective performance of the protective function of law. Law enforcement policy combines all existing subjects of law enforcement into a law enforcement system.
The protective function of law requires constant attention from state and non-state law enforcement agencies. And for the effective exercise of their powers, they must somehow participate in the formation and implementation of law enforcement policy.
If this function does not work, which is observed in modern Russia, then, as legal practice shows, the legal system as a whole does not work either. The role of law enforcement policy is to debug, to fully restore the protective function of law, to make law more secure from the challenges and threats of our time.
In our opinion, in the most general form, law enforcement policy can be defined as a scientifically based, consistent and comprehensive activity of state and non-state institutions to improve the effectiveness of the protective function of law, build a full-fledged law enforcement system, improve law enforcement activities in order to ensure the rights and legitimate interests of the individual, society and states.
Law enforcement policy has a very specific content, goals, objectives, functions, priority areas. It is based on certain principles.
Its essence lies in the development and practical implementation of protective ideas and goals of a strategic nature.
This policy is based on integration principles. By virtue of its nature, it is able to combine many varieties of legal policy in order to achieve common law enforcement tasks: law-making, law enforcement, judicial law, criminal law, procedural law, financial law.
In practical terms, this policy is a versatile activity of many actors aimed at solving a wide range of law enforcement tasks, such as:
1) improving the efficiency of legal regulation of this area;
2) organization of a workable law enforcement mechanism;
3) coordination and interaction of law enforcement structures;
4) formation of their personnel;
5) improvement of the actual law enforcement activities - the fight against crime and other offenses, control and supervisory functions, justice and other areas;
6) development and implementation of preventive measures;
7) formation of a law enforcement culture of civil servants and law-abiding individuals, etc.
At the conceptual level, in our opinion, the question of the subjects of law enforcement policy and related activities requires a detailed study. And if an innumerable number of legal entities and individuals, including citizens, can take part in the formation of law enforcement policy, then not many people have the right to actually perform the functions of law enforcement.
Undoubtedly, law enforcement policy should not be reduced to criminal law policy. The scope of its interests is not limited to the criminal environment, and the objects of its protection are all areas of social relations regulated by law. Often a violation of, for example, environmental, construction, medical, labor, housing standards sometimes causes no less social harm than a crime.
In the modern theory of law, state and non-state law enforcement activities are distinguished. The latter is carried out by many social formations that perform the functions of protecting the rights and freedoms of the individual, protecting public order, and resolving certain legal disputes.
At the same time, the Constitution of the Russian Federation directly assigns the solution of tasks related to law enforcement to the state. How correctly E.A. Lukashev, a necessary condition for ensuring human rights is the improvement of the activities of the state and its bodies.
In legal science, a conditional division of state bodies into two large groups has developed: firstly, these are bodies for which ensuring human rights is important, but not the main activity, and secondly, bodies that carry out law enforcement activities as the main one. The bodies included in the second group are considered specialized and are called law enforcement agencies. They have become the centerpiece of the law enforcement system.
There are no definitive norms in the legislation that reveal the concept of "law enforcement agencies", therefore it is developed by the legal doctrine. In science, they traditionally include special bodies for combating offenses (crime), bodies exercising control and supervision powers, and a number of others.
The role of the court in the formation and implementation of law enforcement policy deserves a separate discussion. At first glance, in this formulation, this question does not present any difficulties. The court as a body of state power, by virtue of the functions it performs in law enforcement, law interpretation and law-making, undoubtedly forms the judicial, law enforcement and, in general, legal policy of the state. However, the problem lies in the fact that for a long time in legal science the status of the court as a subject of law enforcement has remained uncertain. Among scientists and practitioners, the opinion has become stronger that the court cannot be considered as one of the law enforcement agencies and is not part of their system.
However, one can hardly agree with this point of view. In our opinion, the term "law enforcement agencies" is a collective one, and the court also belongs to such bodies in terms of the meaning and essence of their activities. Having the main legal means - the current legislation - and exercising special powers on behalf of the state, the court protects the rights and freedoms of citizens, the interests of society and the state. According to I.L. Petrukhin, "in a sense, the courts are even more law enforcement agencies than the prosecutor's office, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the FSB." From the standpoint of the functional approach, as M.I. Baitin, the courts were and remain bodies specially created for the protection of law, law and order, that is, law enforcement agencies. Here, apparently, it is appropriate to recall the words of the prominent jurist of the 19th century N.M. Korkunov: the case of the judiciary is "to protect the existing law."
The main argument of opponents, who argue that the court does not protect, but protects already violated rights, and therefore does not perform the functions of law enforcement, from our point of view, cannot in any way shake the status of the court as a subject of law enforcement. In our opinion, the concept of "protection" is an integral part of broader terms, such as "protection" and "ensurement" of human rights and freedoms. In addition, the court in modern conditions not only restores the violated or contested rights of the individual, but also performs a preventive, educational and even in certain cases, seemingly unusual for our legal system function - law-making. In any case, the recently adopted ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of November 19, 2009 No. 1344-O-R “On the clarification of paragraph 5 of the operative part of the Decree of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of February 2, 1999 No. 3-P on the case of checking the constitutionality of the provisions of Article 41 and part three article 42 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Decree of the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation of July 16, 1993 “On the Procedure for Enacting the Law of the Russian Federation “On Amendments and Additions to the Law of the RSFSR “On the Judicial System of the RSFSR”, Code of Criminal Procedure RSFSR, the Criminal Code of the RSFSR and the Code of the RSFSR on Administrative Offenses ”” ”, by which he, instead of the country's legislative body, essentially abolished such a type of criminal punishment as the death penalty, leaves no doubt about this. And in fact, case law is being formed in modern Russia.
That is, the law enforcement activity of the court does not begin with the restoration of already violated rights, but at an earlier stage.
Therefore, the problems of the implementation of judicial and legal policy and the functioning of the judicial system, from our point of view, can become an integral part of the concept of law enforcement policy. And here it is necessary to take into account the existing very acute defects in the execution of judicial acts. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly stated in its decisions that judicial procedures for the protection of human rights cannot be considered completed if the decision made by the court is not actually executed.
Active subjects of law enforcement, in our opinion, should be new state institutions for modern Russia. Such, for example, as the Commissioner for Human Rights, the Federal Financial Monitoring Service, legal bureaus created within the framework of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation to provide legal assistance to the population. By the way, these bureaus, as state institutions, became the prototype of the state advocacy that is now emerging.
Now let's briefly dwell on some, in our opinion, priority areas of law enforcement policy and the modernization of this system.
Of course, this should be the improvement of the organizational and legal foundations for the control and fight against crime, and above all with the most dangerous forms of its manifestation: organized crime, including criminal communities, corruption and embezzlement, drug trafficking, terrorist manifestations, juvenile delinquency as a nutrient medium for its most dangerous forms.
One of the main directions of this policy should be the coordination of all subjects of law enforcement and especially special services, the elimination of their redundant and duplicating functions. Recently, the President of the Russian Federation at the board of the Prosecutor General's Office laid the blame for the failures in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and on supervisory authorities. Apparently, the function of coordinating law enforcement agencies performed by the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation does not quite work. And additional measures are required at the level of state policy to overcome the disunity of various departments, strengthen their interaction, unite forces and means to fulfill the common tasks of law enforcement.
The problem of developing uniform criteria for the effectiveness of law enforcement has become quite complicated. Unfortunately, the current indicators for evaluating special structures are largely formal and do not reflect the true state of achieving socially useful goals by them. They are largely dominated by corporate principles. At the same time, it is very gratifying that in recent years the problem of improving the criteria for evaluating the law enforcement system has been actively discussed in society. It seems that here it is necessary to get away from the formal-quantitative approach, and the indicators of the effectiveness of law enforcement activities should be focused not on departmental, but on national, public interests.
Serious adjustments should be made to personnel policy. On this basis, to develop and adopt a federal law "On Law Enforcement Service in the Russian Federation". After all, it is no secret to anyone that the negative phenomena noted among employees of this field of activity did not arise today, but have their roots in the 90s of the last century, when professionals left these bodies for certain reasons, were completely destroyed and still have not been restored. the basics of staffing the relevant structures, and especially in the Ministry of Internal Affairs. As the former head of the Moscow police department V. Pronin recently noted, “over the past many years, we have not been selecting for the system of internal affairs bodies, but recruiting.” It seems that now it is necessary to deal not with the consequences of the problems that have arisen, but with the causes. Therefore, real and effective measures are required for the selection, professional training and retraining of personnel, and raising the legal status of employees. Their level of material, domestic and social security must be worthy, correspond to the high responsibility placed on them, and service in the bodies must be prestigious. And undoubtedly, it is necessary to solve the problem of restoring and increasing the level of trust and support for them from the society.
Ensuring the effective operation of the entire mechanism of law enforcement is impossible without reliable functioning control by society, as well as the development of the principle of publicity (transparency) of the activities of these bodies. Their closeness is a breeding ground for corruption, abuse and illegal decisions that violate or infringe on the rights and legitimate interests of citizens. On July 1, 2010, the Federal Law of December 22, 2008 No. 262-FZ “On Ensuring Access to Information on the Activities of Courts in the Russian Federation” came into force. It will, of course, contribute to the maximum possible openness of the entire sphere of judicial activity and to a greater extent guarantee the provision of fair justice. Now it is necessary to develop and adopt another legal act in order to regulate the principle of publicity in the activities of other law enforcement agencies.
In conclusion, we note that the law enforcement system of modern Russia plays a leading role in fulfilling the human rights function of the state, establishing harmonious relations between the individual and power. The law enforcement policy, which should be formed by the joint efforts of scientists and practitioners, of all those who are interested in the further legal and democratic development of our society, can become the basis for its exit from the state of crisis and improving the efficiency of law enforcement.
Bibliography
1 The work was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project no. 09-06-00156a).
2 See for more details: Gareev M. For beating 300 people by riot police, the police authorities received suspended sentences // Komsomolskaya Pravda. 2010. March 6; Krasnoperov A. Sobering up // Novaya Gazeta. Jan 20, 2010; Golovanov D. Ricocheted. The head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Tuva lost his post because of his subordinate // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. 2009. Oct 27; Kachkaeva E., Nizamov R. During the announcement of the verdict, Evsyukov hid his eyes from his victims // Komsomolskaya Pravda. Feb 20, 2010 and etc.
3 On the concept of the human rights function, see more: Mirzoev G. Protection of human rights and the role of the law enforcement system of the state in its provision // Criminal Law. 2006. No. 3. P. 114.
4 Radzikhovsky L. Can't be changed? // Russian newspaper. Dec 1, 2009; Aleksandrov G. Can they do everything? // Arguments and Facts. 2010. March 17-23; Ovchinnikov A., Ryabtsev A. Nurgaliev allowed to defend himself from policemen // Komsomolskaya Pravda. Nov 28, 2009
5 Radzikhovsky L. Decree. slave.
6 See, for example: Raichev D. Mayor suppression. The head of Smolensk, his deputy and bodyguard are accused of extorting bribes // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. 2010. March 1; Yamshanov B. Recipe from the Prosecutor General. Yuri Chaika tightens control over gambling establishments, salaries and officials // Ibid. Jan 12; Baturin Y. Assistance to orphans and homeless children // Parliamentary newspaper. Dec 18, 2009
7 Gudkov L. The authorities have a year in reserve // Moskovskaya Street. April 30, 2009; Zhuravleva A. My police do not protect me // Parliamentary newspaper. 2009. Dec 25; Ivanov V. For the truth - to the European Court. Only 17% of Russians trust domestic legal proceedings // Moskovsky Komsomolets. 2008. May 21-28.
8 See: Draft concept of legal policy in the Russian Federation until 2020 / Under. ed. A.V. Malko. - M., 2008. S. 36.
9 See for more details: The state and trends of crime in the Russian Federation: Criminological and criminal law reference book / Under. ed. AND I. Sukharev, S.I. Grinko. - M., 2007; Luneev V.V. Crime of the XX century: global, regional and Russian trends. - M., 2005; He is. Trends in modern crime and the fight against it in Russia // State
gift and right. 2004. No. 1. S. 5-18; He is. Corruption in Russia // Ibid. 2007. No. 11. S. 20-27.
10 See, for example: Report of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation for 2007 // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. 2008. March 14; Vyzhutovich V. Protection of Lukin // Ibid. April 4, 2007; Nesterova O. For pay to the prosecutor // Ibid. Jan 20, 2009; Statement of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation // Ibid. 2010. March 9.
11 See: Lukasheva E.A. Improving the activities of the state is a necessary condition for ensuring human rights // State and Law. 2005. No. 5. S. 61-65.
12 See: Kolesnikov E.V., Komkova G.N., Kulusheva M.A. Constitutional Law: Proc. - M., 2008. S. 116.
13 See for more details: Suleymanov B.B. On the question of methodological aspects of law enforcement policy // Problems of interaction between subjects of law enforcement policy: Sat. Art. based on the materials of the All-Russian scientific-practical. conf. / Under. ed. A.V. Malko, V.A. Terekhin. - Penza, 2008. S. 89-93; Mak-Mak V.P. The concept of "law enforcement agency" (based on the analysis of scientific and educational literature) // Trends and contradictions in the development of Russian law at the present stage: Sat. Art. V All-Russian scientific-practical. conf. - Penza, 2006. S. 141-144; Gaidov V.B. The law enforcement system of Russia and its place in the state mechanism // Police law. 2005. No. 3. S. 40-42.
14 See, for example: Savitsky V.M. Organization of the judiciary in the Russian Federation: Proc. allowance. - M., 1996. S. 3-11; Savelyeva T.A. Judicial power in civil process: Proc. allowance. - Saratov, 1997. S. 11; Vdovenkov V.M. Topical issues of the judiciary in the Russian Federation: Abstract of the thesis. dis. … cand. legal Sciences. - M., 2004. S. 15.
15 Petrukhin I.L. The problem of the judiciary in modern Russia // State and law. 2000. No. 7. P. 17.
16 See: Baitin M.I. Essence of law (Modern normative legal understanding on the verge of two centuries). - Saratov, 2001. S. 295.
17 Korkunov N.M. Lectures on the general theory of law. - SPb., 2003. S. 325.
19 See: Vyatchanin N. The pursuit of interest is canceled // Parliamentary newspaper. Nov 25, 2005; Lavrov A. In the Ministry of Internal Affairs are going to cancel the "cane system" // Komsomolskaya Pravda. Nov 27, 2009; Demchenko V. On paper, we are all magicians. Rashid Nurgaliev abolishes the stick system in the Ministry of Internal Affairs // Izvestia. Jan 22, 2010
20 Pronin V. “As a police chief, I sometimes wanted to howl from these cadres” // Komsomolskaya Pravda. Feb 6, 2010
Share this article with colleagues:181Substance, features and mechanisms for the implementation of state law enforcement policy
182Law enforcement, human rights, judicial bodies and their role in the implementation of state law enforcement policy (state policy in the field of law enforcement)
181 Essence, features and mechanisms of implementation of law enforcement policy of the state
According to. Constitution of Ukraine, a person, his life, health, honor, dignity is recognized as the highest value. Such a declaration determines the content and direction of the activity of the state and all its bodies for the approval, provision and guarantee of human rights and freedoms.
For a legal democratic state, the recognition and practical implementation of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, ensuring their protection is one of the priority functions. The law enforcement function is the leading one in the system of internal functions of the state and provides for the guaranteed protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens by establishing an effective legal order, ensuring the rule of law, and protecting national security.
The law enforcement function is implemented through the law enforcement policy of the state, which is a component of state policy.
Law enforcement policy is a separate type of activity of the government and other public institutions at the national and local levels, aimed at:
Protection and protection of the constitutional values of the Ukrainian state and society;
Ensuring the principle of the rule of law;
Protection installed. the Constitution of the social system, territorial integrity;
Protection of human rights and freedoms, protection of the legal order, restoration of violated rights, detection and investigation of crimes
The essence of law enforcement policy lies in the purposeful activities of power structures and government bodies at various levels aimed at ensuring the rule of law, as an objective need to solve the development of the state and society, to prevent and suppress offenses.
An important direction of state law enforcement policy is the formation of legal security, which is a universally significant value that meets the interests of society and citizens. The category "legal security" occupies a priority place in the system of national values. It is a fundamental principle of building a legal system, branches of law and their institutions in terms of ensuring the safe functioning and development of social relations. The dominant in the security system is the creation of conditions for the safe existence of the individual, the realization of his rights and freedoms. Consequently, the state must guarantee strict observance of laws, the implementation of the principle of legality, the security of the individual in society, and ensure the optimal balance between the protection of democratic institutions, common interests and the protection of the rights and freedoms of the individual. The effective activity of the state (and society) to create safe conditions of existence ensures the natural functioning and development of social relations. The state must guarantee such means, methods and forms of activity of law enforcement and judicial bodies that ensure the observance of the rights and interests of the axis of interests of the society.
State law enforcement policy is also aimed at ensuring public order and public safety, which guarantees the avoidance of certain dangers both for the whole society and for individual citizens. It is important to distinguish between the concepts of "public order" and "public security" Public order is a system of relations, a set of established rules, a certain order that has been formed in society and meets the interests of the state and all its citizens. Public security is a system of relations that is formed in the process of preventing and eliminating a threat to the life, health of citizens, and their property. Public security is a state when citizens are not in any danger, there is no threat of disruption of the normal functioning of state and non-state organizations of non-state organizations.
The legal basis for the implementation of state policy in the field of protecting the rights and freedoms of citizens, the interests of society and the state is. Constitution of Ukraine. Laws of Ukraine: "On the police", "On operational-investigative activities", "On the security service", "On access to court decisions", "On the judicial system of Ukraine", "On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine", "On the prosecutor's office" , "On the High Council of Justice", "On the State Executive Service", "On the Commissioner of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine for Human Rights", "On the State Protection of State Authorities of Ukraine and Officials", "On the Organizational and Legal Framework fight against organized lochinnistyu","On measures to counter the illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and precursors and their abuse","On state protection of employees of the court and law enforcement agencies"Decrees. President of Ukraine "On the National Anti-Corruption Program", "On Improving the Coordinating Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies in Combating Corruption and Organized Crime". Decrees and. Cabinet. Ministers of Ukraine "On the State Security Service under the Ministry of Internal Affairs", "On the Approval of Model Regulations on the Service for Juvenile Affairs" thin ". MVS", "About the confirmation of typical regulations on service with the right of the non-commissioned" then.
The means used by government bodies to ensure the realization of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, the formation of legal security, public safety and public order, in their form and content, are versatile in nature and depend on the competence of the bodies and the place they occupy in the system of executive power . Broad powers in the field of ensuring the rights and freedoms of the people, in the formation of security has the highest body in the system of executive power -. Cabinet. Ministers of Ukraine. Protection of human rights and freedoms is a priority area of government activity. Its implementation is carried out mainly through the process of directing and monitoring the work of ministries, central executive authorities, local state administrations, as well as through the issuance of special resolutions and orders. The activities of the government in the implementation of the rights and freedoms of citizens, the formation of legal, civil security, public order should be based on the principles of the rule of law, legality, separation in state, collegiality, scientific character, publicity.
The integral state law enforcement policy of guaranteeing (guaranteeing) the realization of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen provides for the conditions, means, methods that ensure the full protection of the rights and freedoms of the individual. Therefore, the specifics of the activities of the executive power in relation to the rights and freedoms of citizens is the guarantee of their implementation. After all, the proclamation of any rights and freedoms of man and citizen, even securing them by the relevant legal acts of the state, is worth nothing without real guarantees of implementation and implementation. The concept of guarantee means a combination of objective and subjective factors aimed at the practical implementation of rights and freedoms and at removing possible obstacles to their proper implementation.
Guarantees of human and civil rights provide for the provision of measures specified in domestic and international legislation. Domestic institutions for the protection of the rights of citizens are systems of socio-economic, cultural, political and legal means and conditions that ensure the direct protection of human and civil rights. An important role in the practical implementation of the rights and freedoms of the citizen is acquiring a system of special legal guarantees, among which the leading place is occupied by administrative and legal ones. Consequently, legal guarantees of the rights and freedoms of the individual, as legal means of ensuring them, are a set of interrelated and interacting legal, institutional and organizational guarantees for ensuring the implementation, protection and protection of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen.
Regulatory guarantees for ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens are a set of legal norms that determine the scope of the rights, freedoms, duties of citizens, as well as the means established for their implementation and protection, from violations, these are the means established by law and norms of law, which protect and the rights of citizens are protected, their violations are terminated and eliminated, violated rights are restored. Institutional and organizational guarantees for ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens are social and political institutions provided for in regulatory legal acts, which are entrusted with the relevant functions and powers to organize and implement legal support for the implementation, protection and protection of human and civil rights and freedoms. Normative-legal and institutional-organizational guarantees for ensuring rights and freedoms are closely related, since the regulations regulate in detail the activities of state and public institutions in organizing and implementing activities aimed at ensuring rights and freedoms.
In the institutional and organizational aspect, the leading role in ensuring the rights and freedoms of man and citizen belongs to. The President of Ukraine, who, according to Article 102 of the Constitution of Ukraine, is the guarantor of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen. The exercise of these powers. The President is carried out through the initiation of laws, the issuance of decrees aimed at ensuring the rights and freedoms of man and citizen. Powers of Ch. Avi of the state in the field of protecting the rights and freedoms of citizens is embodied in the right of veto in relation to those adopted. Supreme. Rada of Ukraine laws, in law. President to cancel acts. Cabinet of Ministers, decisions of the heads of local state administrations, some other normative acts in case of violation of the rights and freedoms of the individual in Ukraine.
Powers. The President, as the guarantor of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, are also realized through the activities of such bodies as: Secretariat. the President; Commission at. President of Ukraine on issues of drunkenness communities,. Office of Pardons; department of letters and reception of citizens at. Secretariat. President. The main goal of these bodies is to strengthen the guarantees of observance of the rights of the community.
Institutes that ensure the implementation of civil rights and freedoms, guarantee their protection, is an institution. Commissioner. Supreme. Rada for Human Rights. Committee. Supreme. Rada of Ukraine on legal policy issues, law enforcement, human rights bodies, justice bodies. An important human rights function is performed by non-state formations and formations (public human rights organizations; public formations along the Kh. Oron of public order and the state border; human rights movements).
Let us consider in more detail the features of the implementation of law enforcement policy through law enforcement, human rights activities and the administration of justice.
Law enforcement is aimed at ensuring the rule of law in society. Law enforcement is an important component of domestic state policy, the general principles of which are determined. Supreme. Council of Ukraine. Law enforcement ensures the effectiveness of the Ukrainian state.
The priority tasks of law enforcement activities are:
Installed protection. the Constitution of Ukraine of the social system of the state;
Protection of the political system;
Protection of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens, enterprises, institutions, organizations, subjects of all forms of ownership;
Counteracting the emergence of undesirable relations in society, conflict manifestations
A special place in the system of goals and objectives of law enforcement is occupied by the protection of human rights and freedoms, his safety, life, honor, dignity, inviolability.
Law enforcement activity is a state lawful activity, the main purpose of which is the protection of rights, the restoration of violated rights
A component of law enforcement activity is special law enforcement activity, the essence of which is the priority implementation of the order of the constitutional order, national security, identification, investigation. Anna, suppression of crimes, execution of punishments. Special law enforcement activities are implemented through the activities of special services and are a tool for exercising the leadership of the state in resolving issues of political, economic, informational, and financial dangers.
Law enforcement activities of the state are carried out through the system of law enforcement agencies. In the Law of Ukraine "On State Protection of Court Employees and Law Enforcement Agencies" law enforcement agencies are listed. An, to which belong to lie:
Prosecutor's Office;
Internal affairs bodies;
Security agencies;
Military law enforcement agencies c. Armed Forces of Ukraine;
Customs;
Bodies of protection of the state border;
Bodies and institutions for the execution of sentences;
Bodies of the state tax service;
Bodies of the state control and audit service;
Fish protection authorities;
Bodies of the state forest protection;
Other bodies exercising law enforcement or law enforcement functions
The guarantee of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen is characterized by the presence of effective justice - an integral attribute of a democratic constitutional state. Effective justice is the quintessence of regulations and protective functions of the state. Through justice, citizens can defend their rights. Justice is a state activity, which is carried out by the court by consideration and decision of civil, criminal, gentlemen. RSK and administrative cases in court sessions in a special procedural form established by law. In the Law of Ukraine on the judiciary of Ukraine "it is noted that the main purpose of the court is to ensure the protection of the guaranteed rights and freedoms of man and citizen, the rights and legitimate interests of legal entities, the interests of society and the state. Judicial activity is a kind of jurisdictional activity, which is characterized by signs of both order and human rights protection of the Avozakhist.
The main goal of judicial activity is the administration of justice, which combines such forms of legal proceedings as constitutional, administrative, economic, civil, and criminal. Courts providing legal protection of constitutional and other legal values. Judicial activity is a universal mechanism for the protection and protection of rights, the restoration of violated rights, the termination of violations of rights, the consideration of disputes in court, the mechanism of administrative and legal support for the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, primarily covers administrative justice, the activities of administrative courts, as well as the entire judicial system in protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens. Judicial protection of the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen is considered as a type of state protection, which should be provided by the state in accordance with Part 2 of Article 55. The right to judicial protection of the Constitution of Ukraine provides for guarantees of effective restoration of rights through the administration of justice.
An important function of a democratic state is to ensure the protection and protection of the rights of citizens through human rights organizations that are independent of state bodies, as well as through individual state bodies, they are characterized by openness and democracy. Human rights activity consists in providing legal assistance to citizens, legal entities, foreigners, stateless persons. The subjects of human rights activities are: public organizations (for example, human rights organizations, associations for the protection of consumer rights); business structures (private entrepreneurs, legal entities) providing a variety of legal services; public authorities (judicial authorities, BP Commissioner for Human Rights); advocacy; notary
The focus of the activities of law enforcement, human rights, judicial bodies is determined by five main tasks:
1) preservation and protection of the existing constitutional order;
2) protection of the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens;
3) protection of legitimate interests of the domestic manufacturer;
4) fight against crime;
5) purposeful development of the system of judicial and law enforcement activities
Important factors in the effectiveness of judicial, law enforcement and human rights activities, as components of internal state policy, are the high level of competence and professionalism of the personnel of authorized bodies, as well as the perfection of the performance of organizational and managerial functions.
A specific feature of law enforcement activity in modern conditions is its use as a means of managing and controlling the social sphere, the development of economic activity, and the course of economic and economic processes. There is an expansion of the influence of bodies, legal
practices on the functioning of the banking and financial sector, on the activities of various sectors of the national economy (such as the fuel and energy complex, transportation), as well as on privatization processes, on the management of enterprises in the authorized capital of which there is a share of state funds. However, it should be pointed out that only the influence of law enforcement agencies on economic, financial, technical decisions taken in the process of social management is envisaged. Such influence of law enforcement agencies should preventive action. Through the detection of smuggling, the termination of the production of low-quality products, law enforcement agencies (authorities and prosecutors, security services, customs authorities, border troops, internal affairs bodies, advocacy) contribute to solving one of the key problems of the economy - the protection of domestic producers. Podlenie nnu negative barter relations. Such an orientation of law enforcement activity against undesirable socio-economic phenomena, the suspension of illegal actions is constructive and positively opposes political processes.
The effectiveness of state law enforcement policy largely depends on the interaction of law enforcement agencies, combining their efforts to combat crime and to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens. Yes, aka coordination of law enforcement - one of the management functions, unites and systematizes the efforts of law enforcement and other state and non-state bodies and institutions to achieve the main tasks of combating crime. The essence of coordination is to unite the efforts of law enforcement agencies in the fight against crime, especially organized crime, in preventing it, in coordinating actions, and comply with the laws and regulations.
The main forms of law enforcement coordination are:
1) development and implementation of special operations;
2) joint operational meetings;
3) creation of joint investigative and operational groups;
4) exchange of information;
5) general analysis of information;
6) joint trips to the regions (districts, regions);
7) introduction and use of unified data banks;
8) holding joint seminars, meetings, conferences;
9) publication of organizational and administrative documents;
10) exchange of experience
Coordination of the management of law enforcement agencies is an integral part of state policy and provides for the formation of specific goals, ensuring conciliatory actions, determining the content of these tactical operas.
Given the intensification of international terrorism and transnational crime, international agreements play a leading role in coordinating the actions of law enforcement agencies of any country. International law enforcement cooperation is based on. Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of Proceeds from Crime, as well as on the basis of decisions taken at the governmental or interdepartmental level.
The legal basis for organizing interaction is: constitutional requirements for the protection of human and civil rights, criminal procedure legislation; sectoral and special (functional) acts of legislation; decrees, instructions. the President of Ukraine; resolutions. Governments on the fight against crime and the organization of law enforcement; state programs to combat crime, international agreements with p. Ethan cooperation in the field of combating crime; departmental and interdepartmental legal acts; acts. Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine on the organization of interacting.
The implementation of state policy in the field of protecting the rights and freedoms of citizens, the interests of society and the state from unlawful encroachments, ensuring public order, public security belong to the sphere of the era of tasks. President of Ukraine. Cabinet. Ministers of Ukraine, Ministry of Internal Affairs and its local authorities, local state administrations and local governments. The Ministry of Internal Affairs is the central body of executive power, whose powers are defined in art. Regulations on Ministry of the Interior. In a broad sense, ensuring public order and peace of mind is the task of both state and non-state organizations.
Along with morality and law, a number of other social regulators operate in society, the most important of which is politics.
The main issue of politics is the question of power, its conquest, use and retention.
Differences:
The presence of differences between politics and morality under certain conditions can turn into a manifestation of contradictions between them:
1. Politics is more volatile than morality, so political actions may be contrary to outdated moral norms, which become an obstacle to the implementation of political goals that reflect the needs that have formed in society.
2. There is a problem of observing the principle of fairness in the implementation of law enforcement policy. We are talking about the fact that the interests of both victims and offenders should be equally protected.
3. In situations where politics does not meet the interests of society, it comes into conflict with correct moral principles.
4. The contradiction between morality and politics may not really be realized by people (Stalinist repressions), and vice versa, such a contradiction may not really exist, but for one reason or another, a person can perceive it (strike of employees of joint-stock enterprises).
The fundamental principle of morality - humanism is manifested in the legislative consolidation of the obligation of police officers to provide first aid to persons who have received bodily injuries when using coercive means and notify their relatives as soon as possible (clauses 4, 5, art. 19).
It is also important to determine for each special means separately the grounds and the order of their application. In addition, Russian law allowed the police to use all special means in cases where the use of firearms is possible, which is quite understandable by the relatively lower degree of danger of special means.
An analysis of Article 22 shows that it is also ethical to prohibit the use of special means “when suppressing illegal meetings, rallies, demonstrations, marches and pickets of a non-violent nature that do not violate public order, the operation of transport, means of communication and organizations” (clause 1.2). .
In accordance with the fundamental moral principle of humanism, it is forbidden to use special means against women with visible signs of pregnancy, persons with obvious signs of disability and minors, except when they show armed resistance, commit a group or other attack that threatens people's lives, health (clause 1.1 ).
It is humane to prohibit the use of firearms with the production of a shot to kill against women, persons with obvious signs of disability, minors, when the age is obvious or known to the employee, except when they carry out an armed or group attack that threatens people's lives, as well as with a significant crowd of people when unauthorized persons may suffer from this (p. 5, 6).
The use of physical force, special means and firearms in excess of authority entails liability established by law.
It should be noted that although the police have a wider scope of powers to use coercive measures than other organs of state administration, their use is not the only means available to them. The police is not a body for coercion, violence, its goal is protection, ensuring the personal safety of citizens, the state and society as a whole.
M.G. ARUTYUNOV,
Senior Lecturer, Department of Theory and History of State and Law
Institute of Service, Tourism and Design (branch) of the North Caucasian Federal University in Pyatigorsk
The role and place of law enforcement policy as a kind of legal policy are considered and determined. Attention is focused on the need to improve the efficiency of the protective function of law.
Key words: legal policy, law enforcement policy, concept of law enforcement policy in the Russian Federation, law enforcement activities of the state, subjects of law enforcement policy.
On the subject of actuality of law enforcement policy in Russia Arutjunova M.
Examines and identifies the role and place of law enforcement policies as a form of legal policy. Attention is focused on the need to improve the efficiency of protective functions of law.
Keywords: law enforcement policy, legal policy, the concept of law enforcement policy in the Russian Federation, the law enforcement activity of the state and subjects of the law enforcement policy.
UDC 342.5:342.9
To the question of the relevance of law enforcement policy in Russia
Among all types of politics of the modern Russian state, as rightly noted by N.V. Isakov, “there is such a variety of it that is called upon to play a special role in society, since in its essence and nature it is a unique phenomenon that has received recognition in the scientific literature as a legal policy”1.
Logically, one should pay attention to the fact that special hopes are placed on both law and politics precisely in the crisis periods of development of a particular state. Analyzing law, politics, legal policy, law enforcement policy, it is necessary to avoid idealization of these phenomena, but to give them a special status of phenomena that contribute to overcoming the crisis at the state and even interstate levels.
As O.Yu. Rybakov, “the topic of legal policy has become popular and quite in demand in the last 15 years. In fact, we are talking about the formation of a new scientific theory, designed to explain the essence of legal policy, as well as the laws of its functioning, the mechanisms of improvement. In this sense, the exit to a new level of understanding of this problem is obvious.
tics, consideration of legal policy as a multidimensional phenomenon”2.
In science, there is an abundance of definitions of legal policy, which does not allow making an unambiguous conclusion about the legal nature of this phenomenon. In the theory of law, they reflect three approaches to understanding the essence of legal policy, which is defined, firstly, as a set of goals, measures, tasks, programs, guidelines; second, as a phenomenon; thirdly, as the activities of various subjects of law3.
V.A. Terekhin in 2008 wrote in his work that “in contrast to legal policy in general, to which the attention of many scientists has recently been drawn, the problems of law enforcement policy have not been given due attention until recently. Therefore, today there is a weak elaboration and debatability of many theoretical foundations of this legal phenomenon. Thus, in legal science there is no single point of view on the concept and content of such basic categories as law enforcement agencies, law enforcement system, law enforcement mechanism, law enforcement activities, the scope and subjects of its implementation, etc. There is also no single scientific approach.
1 Isakov N.V. The main priorities of modern Russian legal policy / ed. V.A. Treasurer. - Pyatigorsk, 2003. S. 4.
2 Rybakov O.Yu. Legal policy as a scientific theory in legal research // Law. Legislation. Personality. 2010. No. 2. S. 107-108.
3 See ibid. S. 109.
The concept of law enforcement policy in the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the project)2 is intended to fill the gap in this area of scientific knowledge. This work will serve as a starting point for subsequent fundamental scientific research on law enforcement policy as a multifaceted phenomenon.
The authors of the project characterize the current state of the law enforcement system of the Russian Federation, define the general principles of law enforcement policy, disclose the content of law enforcement policy, make proposals for improving law enforcement legislation, formulate priority areas for the development of law enforcement policy in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation3.
The scientific significance of the definitions of basic concepts given in this work, such as "The Concept of Law Enforcement Policy in the Russian Federation", "Law Enforcement", "Law Enforcement Service", "Law Enforcement Agencies", "Law Enforcement Function", "Law Enforcement System", "Law Enforcement Policy ”, “priorities of law enforcement policy”, “mechanism for the implementation of law enforcement policy”4.
Under law enforcement policy, we propose to understand a set of grounds based on a scientific study of the causes of offenses, and actions taken by state and non-state structures to increase the effectiveness of the protective function of law, to improve law enforcement by modernizing the law enforcement system.
The uniqueness of this phenomenon is given by the unifying principles. In our opinion, the components of law enforcement policy are:
1) policy of legislative (representative) bodies;
2) judicial policy;
3) the policy of the prosecutor's office;
4) the policy of the investigating authorities;
5) the policy of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation;
6) the policy of the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation;
7) the policy of state control services (the Accounts Chamber of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, the Main Control Directorate of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation, etc.);
8) the policy of the state tax authorities of the Russian Federation;
9) policy of the State Customs Committee of the Russian Federation;
10) the policy of the Main State and Legal Department of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation;
11) the policy of the Bar;
12) notary policy, etc.
As R.V. Puzikov, “speaking about the current state of the law enforcement sphere, it should be admitted with regret that at present in Russia there is no law enforcement policy in its pure form, in the sense in which it is understood by legal scholars, and this is due, among other things, to the lack of a unified methodological approach”5.
One of the main tasks of the Russian state is the protection of citizens from violence and arbitrariness, any illegal encroachments. The criminal situation in Russia today has dictated the need for a qualitatively new approach to law enforcement.
The Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation states: public opinion polls conducted in the country regularly show that about 60% of victims of various kinds of crimes prefer not to contact law enforcement agencies, being sure that they will not receive protection from them . No less significant is the fact that up to half of the persons recognized as victims in the course of criminal proceedings did not want to bring a civil claim. A quarter of the victims, for one reason or another, retracted their testimony during the trial. Approximately the same number did not appear in court at all6.
1 Terekhin VA. Some discussion aspects of the formation and implementation of law enforcement policy // Problems of interaction between subjects of law enforcement policy / ed. A.V. Malko, V.A. Terekhin. - Penza, 2008. S. 11-12.
2 See: The concept of law enforcement policy in the Russian Federation (draft) / ed. A.V. Malko. - Saratov, 2012. 32 p.
3 See ibid.
4 See ibid. pp. 9-10.
5 Puzikov R.V. Law enforcement policy in modern Russia: methodological aspect // Legal policy and legal life. 2010. No. 4. P. 121.
6 See: Problems of protecting the rights of victims of crime: special report of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation of May 27, 2008 // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. 2008. June 4.
"Modern Law", No. 8" 2013
These circumstances testify to the mutual alienation of the population and law enforcement agencies.
Law enforcement activity of the state is one of the most important functions of the state, which consists in creating the necessary conditions for the implementation of the rules of law in specific legal relations, expressed in the activities of specially authorized state bodies and officials to protect society and the state from offenses1.
Emphasizing the importance and necessity of carrying out effective law enforcement activities of the state, one should agree with the opinion of V.M. Raw that "it is necessary to see the limits of this activity, so as not to turn this important function of the state into total surveillance of citizens, their collective associations and organizations, not to turn the rule of law into a police state"2.
Law enforcement policy is an activity carried out by special (special) subjects: state bodies, officials, some public organizations. Citizens are not direct subjects of law enforcement policy, since the state has not authorized them to such activities. However, this does not diminish the role of citizens in legal protection. Their participation in the formation and implementation of law enforcement policy, that is, the strategy and tactics of the state in the field of imperious implementation of legal norms, is not only possible, but essential3.
In confirmation, it should be said that politics invades all spheres of society, permeates all forms of consciousness.
This is not a closed area of activity for professional politicians. Turning to different historical periods, it should be concluded that the life of any society, with the exception of the primitive one, is saturated with political interests and political struggle. Politician
ZASIMOV I.Yu. - 2012
SHAGIEV BULAT VASILOVICH, SHAGIEVA ROZALINA VASILIEVNA - 2014
To use the preview of presentations, create a Google account (account) and sign in: https://accounts.google.com
Slides captions:
The social purpose of the state Elective course in political science grades 10-11 Compiled by Kushchenko G.V., history teacher, MKOU "Gaufskaya secondary school"
“Outside the state - the dominion of passions, war, fear, poverty, abomination, loneliness, barbarism, savagery, ignorance; in the state - the dominion of reason, security, wealth, decency, refinement, knowledge and favor. T.Hobbes
The social purpose of the state in society 1. The state decides common affairs, governs the people living on its territory. The state reveals the common interests of its citizens: the desire for security, stability, comfort. It contributes to the preservation of public order, organizes and controls the implementation of activities necessary for the development of society as a whole.
2. The state resolves social disputes (national, class, religious, etc.). The political elite is looking for compromises that, while preserving the foundations of the social system, would remove the danger of a head-on collision of social groups. The duty to resolve conflicts between individual citizens, organizations, state bodies lies with the courts. The state power is also responsible for the settlement of external conflicts.
3. The state uses legal and legitimate violence. The legality of coercion is the compliance of coercive measures with the law. The legitimacy of violence is the degree to which the population supports the measures being applied. Coercion acts in the form of criminal punishment, administrative, property and other sanctions. Legitimacy is confirmed by the data of public opinion, voting, referenda. The universal criterion for the legitimacy of coercion is its compliance with universal human values.
"Bayonets are good for everything, but you can't sit on them." Talleyrand
The functions of the state The functions of the state are the main directions of its activity, expressing the essence and purpose of the state in society. Functions of the state internal external
Domestic Political Law enforcement Social Development of health care, education, science, culture Ensuring national security Ecological Information Transport Construction of public systems (roads, irrigation, reclamation, defensive, etc.) Combating the consequences of emergency situations Ecological Information Cooperation in solving global problems Foreign economic
Main internal functions 1 . Political: It is due to the need to balance the interests of different social groups. The state forms a parliament, ensuring democracy. The state ensures the protection of the constitutional order and state sovereignty The state carries out law-making activities
2. Economic It is expressed in the development of programs for the economic development of the country The state establishes taxes Issues loans, investments Establishes benefits for business entities Creates the legal framework for the market Manages enterprises owned by
3.Law Enforcement It is aimed at ensuring the exact and complete implementation of laws by all citizens, organizations and state. Authorities The state applies legal measures Fights offenses with the help of the law enforcement system
4. Ecological At the present stage - one of the main functions of the state. The state develops environmental legislation
External functions of the state 1. Diplomatic: The state promotes the maintenance of acceptable relations with all countries, regardless of their ideology, economic system
2. Defense function: The state keeps its armed forces on alert to repel external aggression
3. Foreign policy: The state carries out political cooperation with other states in order to exclude global armed conflicts The main bodies for coordinating the political interests of countries: the UN, the UN Security Council
5. Foreign economic: Associated with the development of mutually beneficial cooperation with other states, manifested in the international division of labor, the exchange of technologies, the coordination of trade, the development of credit and financial ties.
6. Law enforcement: It consists in resolving disputes between states, protecting those states and peoples who are not able to stand up for themselves. It manifests itself in the fight against international terrorism and crime.
8. Social: Manifested in social assistance and support for developing countries, as well as countries in transition (aid, financial, humanitarian, etc.)
9. Cultural cooperation: Carried out on the basis of bilateral and multilateral agreements between states, non-governmental organizations (IOC). UN activities coordinated by UNESCO
10. Contribute to the establishment of world legitimacy: Manifested in the development of international law (International Humanitarian Law, International Charter of Human Rights)
11. Information: Providing the world community and its peoples with truthful information about international events.
12. Environmental: Participation in the aftermath of environmental disasters
13. Cooperation of states in solving global problems of our time: Organization of rational use of natural resources, energy conservation, peacekeeping, demographic policy, etc.