Principle of proportionality of constitutional legal responsibility of political parties

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. 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.

Conclusions. Constitutional principles, concerning the prohibition or dissolution of a political party according to European democratic standards are not effectively reflected in Russian legislation and law enforcement practice. It is necessary to recognize and reflect exclusive character of such enforcement measure as a liquidation of political party in the legislation. It demands a change of the bases for liquidation.

Principle of proportionality, balancing test, political party, constitutional legal responsibility, constitutional delict, Constitutional Court, constitutional legal dispute, conflict of constitutional values, right to association

1. Tsakyrakis S. Proportionality: An Assault on Human Rights? International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2009, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 468–493.

2. 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.).

3. Stone Sweet A., Mathews J. Proportionality Balancing and Global Constitutionalism. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 2008, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 72–164.

4. Barak A. Proportionality: Constitutional Rights and Their Limitations. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2012. 666 p. DOI: 10.1017/cbo9781139035293.

5. Tolstyh V.L. Constitutional Justice and Pro Rata Principle. Rossiiskoe pravosudie = Russian Justice, 2009, no. 12, pp. 47–56. (In Russ.).

6. Aleinikoff T.A. Constitutional Law in the Age of Balancing. Yale Law Journal, 1987, vol. 96, no. 5, pp. 943–1005.

7. 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.).

8. Schlink B. Proportionality. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie = Comparative Constitutional Review, 2012, no. 2, pp. 56–76. (In Russ.).

9. Beatty D.M. The Ultimate Rule of Law. Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press, 2004. 193 + xvii p.

10. 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.).

11. 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.).

12. 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.

13. 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.).

14. Kondrashev A.A. The constitutional‐legal responsibility in the Russian Federation: theory and practice. Moscow, Yurist Publ., 2006. 345 p. (In Russ.).

15. 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.).

16. 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.).

17. Nesmeyanova S.E. Theoretical‐legal research of constitutional judicial control in the Russian Federation, Doct. Diss. Thesis. Yekaterinburg, 2004. 50 p. (In Russ.).

18. 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.).

19. 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.).

20. Nikitina A.V. Constitutional‐legal disputes, Monograph. Moscow, Norma Publ., INFRA‐M Publ., 2018. 320 p. (In Russ.).