pravoПравоприменениеLaw Enforcement Review2542-15142658-4050Dostoevsky Omsk State University10.24147/2542-1514.2019.3(1).33-43pravo-209Research ArticleПРИМЕНЕНИЕ НОРМ ПРАВА ОРГАНАМИ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОЙ ВЛАСТИTHE LAW ENFORCEMENT BY PUBLIC AUTHORITIESПринцип пропорциональности (соразмерности) конституционно‐правовой ответственности политических партийPrinciple of proportionality of constitutional legal responsibility of political partiesНикитинаАнна ВасильевнаNikitinaAnna V.

PhD in Law, Associate Professor, Head, Department of Constitutional, Administrative

A_Nikitina@inbox.ruХабаровский государственный университет экономики и права, г. ХабаровскРоссияKhabarovsk State University of Economics and Law, KhabarovskRussian Federation20192604201931Правоприменение3343Copyright © Никитина А.В., 20192019Никитина А.В.Nikitina A.V.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://enforcement.omsu.ru/jour/article/view/209

Анализируется принцип пропорциональности (соразмерности), применяемый зарубежными конституционными судами и Европейским судом по правам человека при рассмотрении дел о ликвидации (запрете) политических партий. Делается вывод о несоответствии российского законодательства и судебной практики рассмотренным демократическим стандартам, формулируются предложения по их совершенствованию.

The subject

The subject. The object of research is a principle of proportionality – first as the constitutional principle allowing resolve the conflict arising during the liquidation of political party. This conflict exists between the equally protected constitutional values – freedom of association, democracy, on the one hand, and a need of protection of national interests, national security, the rights and freedoms of the citizens – on another hand. Proportionality is also cross‐sectoral principle of legal responsibility guaranteeing justice at constitutional‐legal responsibility cases and proportionality of the constitutional legal sanction to the constitutional delict, circumstances, the reasons and conditions of its commission.

The purpose of the study is to highlight the constitutional principles, concerning the prohibition or dissolution of a political party according to European democratic standards and to refute or confirm the hypothesis that they are not effectively reflected in Russian legislation and law enforcement practice.

Methodology

Methodology. As the main method of this research the author chose the method of legal comparison which allowed carry out the comparative analysis of practice of the foreign constitutional courts, the European Court of Human Rights on the questions raised in the work. Also traditional methods of knowledge of legal matter – the analysis, synthesis, deduction, induction and a formal legal analysis were used.

The main results of research and a field of their application. Liquidation of political party must be a consequence only of serious constitutional offenses or crimes committed by its members acting on behalf of political party. Organizational violations (a lack of number or regional offices of political party, late submission of the updated data necessary for modification of the Unified State Register of the Legal Entities) can't be the basis for the compulsory termination of activity of the political party. The courts have to be guided by the principle of proportionality when they consider cases about liquidation of political parties. The judges must give an assessment if a liquidation of political party proportional to the constitutional offenses committed by it and whether liquidation is strictly necessary for protection of the bases of the constitutional system, morality, health, the rights and legitimate interests of the people, defense of the country, national security or public order.

Принцип соразмерноститест на пропорциональностьполитическая партияконституционно‐правовая ответственностьконституционный деликтконституционный судконституционно‐правовой спорконфликт конституционных ценностейправо на объединениеPrinciple of proportionalitybalancing testpolitical partyconstitutional legal responsibilityconstitutional delictConstitutional Courtconstitutional legal disputeconflict of constitutional valuesright to associationReferencesTsakyrakis S. Proportionality: An Assault on Human Rights? / S. Tsakyrakis // International Journal of Constitutional Law. – 2009. – Vol. 7, no. 3. – P. 468–493.Tsakyrakis S. Proportionality: An Assault on Human Rights? International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2009, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 468–493.Варламова Н.В. Принцип пропорциональности в современной конституционно‐правовой доктрине и практике / Н.В. Варламова // Современный конституционализм: Теория, доктрина и практика: сб. науч. тр. / отв. ред. Е.В. Алферова, И.А. Умнова. – М.: Ин‐т науч. информ. по обществ. наукам РАН, 2013. – С. 65–76.Varlamova N.V. The principle of proportionality in modern constitutional‐legal doctrine and practice, in: Alferova E.V., Umnova I.A. (eds.). Sovremennyi konstitutsionalizm: Teoriya, doktrina i praktika, collection of proceedings. Moscow, Institute of Scientific Information on Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., 2013, pp. 65–76. (In Russ.).Stone Sweet A. Proportionality Balancing and Global Constitutionalism / A. Stone Sweet, J. Mathews // Columbia Journal of Transnational Law. – 2008. – Vol. 47, no. 1. – P. 72–164.Stone Sweet A., Mathews J. Proportionality Balancing and Global Constitutionalism. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 2008, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 72–164.Barak A. Proportionality: Constitutional Rights and Their Limitations / A. Barak. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. – 666 p. – DOI: 10.1017/cbo9781139035293.Barak A. Proportionality: Constitutional Rights and Their Limitations. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2012. 666 p. DOI: 10.1017/cbo9781139035293.Толстых В.Л. Конституционное правосудие и принцип пропорциональности / В.Л. Толстых // Российское правосудие. – 2009. – № 12. – С. 47–56.Tolstyh V.L. Constitutional Justice and Pro Rata Principle. Rossiiskoe pravosudie = Russian Justice, 2009, no. 12, pp. 47–56. (In Russ.).Aleinikoff T.A. Constitutional Law in the Age of Balancing / T.A. Aleinikoff // Yale Law Journal. – 1987. – Vol. 96, no. 5. – P. 943–1005.Aleinikoff T.A. Constitutional Law in the Age of Balancing. Yale Law Journal, 1987, vol. 96, no. 5, pp. 943–1005.Никитина А.В. Импичмент Президента: конституционное законодательство и практика Конституционного Суда Республики Корея / А.В. Никитина // Конституционное и муниципальное право. – 2017. – № 11. – С. 77–80.Nikitina A.V. Presidential Impeachment: Constitutional Legislation and Practice of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Korea. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo = Constitutional and Municipal Law, 2017, no. 11, pp. 77–80. (In Russ.).Шлинк Б. Пропорциональность: к проблеме баланса фундаментальных прав и общественных целей / Б. Шлинк // Сравнительное конституционное обозрение. – 2012. – № 2. – С. 56–76.Schlink B. Proportionality. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie = Comparative Constitutional Review, 2012, no. 2, pp. 56–76. (In Russ.).Beatty D.M. The Ultimate Rule of Law / D.M. Beatty. – Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. – 193 p.Beatty D.M. The Ultimate Rule of Law. Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press, 2004. 193 + xvii p.Бажанов А.А. Соразмерность как условие справедливости санкции / А.А. Бажанов // Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Юридические науки. – 2017. – Т. 21, № 4. – С. 486–507. – DOI: 10.22363/2313‐2337‐2017‐21‐4‐486‐507.Bazhanov A.A. Proportionality as a condition of sanction`s justice. Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Yuridicheskie nauki = RUDN Journal of Law, 2017, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 486–507. DOI: 10.22363/2313‐ 2337‐2017‐21‐4‐486‐507. (In Russ.).Нудненко П.В. Принципы справедливости и равенства в сфере административной ответственности / П.В. Нудненко // Известия Саратовского университета. Новая серия. Серия: Экономика. Управление. Право. – 2014. – Т. 4. – Вып. 1. – Ч. 1. – С. 105–110.Nudnenko P.V. The Principles of Justice and Equality in the Area of Administrative Responsibility. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaya seriya. Seriya: Ekonomika. Upravlenie. Pravo = Izvestiya of Saratov University. New Series. Series: Economics. Management. Law, 2014, vol. 4, no. 1, pt. 1, pp. 105–110. (In Russ.).Cho Yongho. Constitutional Justice as a Guarantee of Ensuring the Supremacy of Constitutional Norms – Focusing on the Korean Experience / Cho Yongho // Конституционное правосудие: Вестник Конференции органов конституционного контроля стран новой демократии. – 2015. – № 3. – С. 103–108.Cho Yongho. Constitutional Justice as a Guarantee of Ensuring the Supremacy of Constitutional Norms – Focusing on the Korean Experience. Konstitutsionnoe pravosudie: Vestnik Konferentsii organov konstitutsionnogo kontrolya stran novoi demokratii, 2015, no. 3, pp. 103–108.Никитина А.В. Конституционно‐правовые споры о ликвидации политических партий: опыт сравнительно‐правового исследования / А.В. Никитина // Современное общество и право. – 2017. – № 2. – С. 56–64.Nikitina A.V. Constitutional‐legal disputes about the dissolution of political parties: comparative legal research. Sovremennoe obshchestvo i pravo = Modern society and law, 2017, no. 2, pp. 56–64. (In Russ.).Кондрашев А.А. Конституционно‐правовая ответственность в Российской Федерации: теория и практика / А.А. Кондрашев. – М.: Юристъ, 2006. – 345 с.Kondrashev A.A. The constitutional‐legal responsibility in the Russian Federation: theory and practice. Moscow, Yurist Publ., 2006. 345 p. (In Russ.).Хертуев Р.Ю. Принудительная ликвидация как мера конституционно‐правовой ответственности политических партий / Р.Ю. Хертуев // Академический юридический журнал. – 2010. – № 3. – С. 61–66.Khertuev R. Compulsory winding‐up as a measure of constitutional liability for political parties. Akademicheskii yuridicheskii zhurnal = Academic Law Journal, 2010, no. 3, pp. 61–66. (In Russ.).Моисеев А.М. Конституционное право граждан на объединение в политические партии и судебная практика его защиты: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / А.М. Моисеев. – М., 2008. – 180 с.Moiseev A.M. Constitutional right of citizens to association into political parties and judicial practice of its protection, Cand. Diss. Moscow, 2008. 180 p. (In Russ.).Немеянова С.Э. Теоретико‐правовое исследование конституционного судебного контроля в Российской Федерации: автореф. дис. … д‐ра юрид. наук / С.Э. Немеянова. – Екатеринбург, 2004. – 50 с.Nesmeyanova S.E. Theoretical‐legal research of constitutional judicial control in the Russian Federation, Doct. Diss. Thesis. Yekaterinburg, 2004. 50 p. (In Russ.).Бондарь Н. Конституционное правосудие как фактор формирования политической многопартийности / Н. Бондарь // Конституционное правосудие: Вестник Конференции органов конституционного контроля стран молодой демократии. – 2009. – Вып. № 2. – С. 7–51.Bondar' N. Constitutional justice as a factor of formation of political multi‐parties. Konstitutsionnoe pravosudie: Vestnik Konferentsii organov konstitutsionnogo kontrolya stran novoi demokratii, 2009, vol. 2, pp. 7–51. (In Russ.).Мильчакова О.В. Судебный конституционный контроль деятельности политических партий / О.В. Мильчакова // Актуальные проблемы российского права. – 2014. – № 2. – С. 188–194. – DOI: 10.7256/1994‐1471.2014.2.10473.Milchakova O.V. Judicial constitutional control over the activities of political parties. Aktual'nye problemy rossiiskogo prava = Actual Problems of Russian Law, 2014, no. 2, pp. 188–194. DOI: 10.7256/1994‐1471.2014. 2.10473. (In Russ.).Никитина А.В. Конституционно‐правовые споры: моногр. / А.В. Никитина. – М.: Норма: ИНФРА‐М, 2018. – 320 с.Nikitina A.V. Constitutional‐legal disputes, Monograph. Moscow, Norma Publ., INFRA‐M Publ., 2018. 320 p. (In Russ.).

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.