National law and legal pluralism
https://doi.org/10.52468/2542-1514.2022.6(4).5-14
Abstract
The subject of the article is correspondence and competition legal monism and legal pluralism. The purpose of the study is to confirm or refute the author's hypothesis that a peculiar dialectic of legal monism and legal pluralism is inherent in domestic law.
The methodology. The methods of various sciences related to the study of social and legal pluralism are combined. In particular, the system approach, dialectical method, methods of formal logic, formal-legal and comparative-legal methods, theoretical-sociological and theoretical-cultural analysis are used.
The main results, scopresue of application. Within the framework of various social sciences, types of legal understanding, both a monistic view of law and various opinions about its plurality are presented (natural and positive law; the law of various states; domestic and international law; official and unofficial law).
Domestic law in developed countriesis unified, but it is a complex unity consisting of various subsystems (levels). The question of whether these subsystems can not only correspond to each other and complement each other, but also compete with each other, be used by various entities within the framework of choosing the optimal regime of legal regulation has always been ambiguousfor lawyers.
Discussions about legal monism and legal pluralism contribute to the development of theoretical knowledge about law. Situations of more or less pronounced legal plurality undoubtedly influence the specifics of all the main types of legal activity: from legal education and criticism of law to law enforcement. For the latter, the problem of compatibility of the principles of legality, formal equality and various forms of legal plurality has always been one of the most important.
Conclusions. The main manifestations of weak legal pluralism in modern domestic law can be considered as: (1) identification of subsystems of the law of the subjects of the federation and municipalities; (2) recognition of partial legal autonomy of various non-public organizations and autonomous communities (mainly in the field of private law). Each of these manifestations is considered separately. The problem of constitutionalization of legal pluralism is also touched upon. It is shown that a peculiar dialectic of legal monism and legal pluralism isinherent in domestic law.
About the Author
S. V. Biryukov
Dostoevsky Omsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sergey V. Biryukov – PhD in Law, Associate Professor; Associate Professor, Department of Theory and History of State and Law,
55a, Mira pr., Omsk, 644077
References
1. Griffiths J. What is Legal Pluralism? Journal of Legal Pluralism. 1986, vol. 18, iss. 24, pp. 1–55. DOI: 10.1080/07329113.1986.10756387.
2. Benda-Beckmann F. von, Benda-Beckmann K. von. Communal rights to land: liberation or indirect management? in: Customary Law and Legal Pluralism, materials of the XI International Congress on Customary Law and Legal Pluralism, August 1997, Moscow. Moscow, N.N. Miklukho-Maklay Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., 1999, pp. 91–101. (In Russ.).
3. Benda-Beckmann K. von. Legal pluralism in the international context, in: Custom and law. Studies in legal anthropology, Moscow, Strategiya Publ., 2002, pp. 87–95. (In Russ.).
4. Tolstykh V. L. law of the country with a plurality of legal systems in international private law. Medzdunarodnoe publichnoe i chastnoe pravo, 2003, no. 2, pp. 34–36. (In Russ.).
5. Lesnova N.I. Legal dualism in Russia of the XVIII – early XX century, Cand. Diss. Thesis. Nizhny Novgorod, 2007. 21 p. (In Russ.).
6. Levina M.I. Problems of legal pluralism in the conditions of the federal form of the state structure of Russia. Available at: https://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/789/693/1219/021.LEVINA.pdf (date of access: 11.15.2021). (In Russ.).
7. Richardson J. The social construction of legal pluralism. Gosudarstvo, religiya i tcercov v Rossii i za rubedzom. 2013, no. 2, pp. 40–62. (In Russ.).
8. Eleizer D.J. Comparative federalism. Polis, 1995, no. 5, pp. 106–115. (In Russ.).
9. Silonov P.M. Federalism in foreign countries: constitutional, legal and political technologies, Doct. Diss. Moscow, 2005. 437 p. (In Russ.).
10. Eremenko E.O. Canadian Federalism: the experience of managing ethnopolitical processes, Cand. Diss. Moscow, 2000. 142 p. (In Russ.).
11. Zakharov A. Centralization and decentralization: a liberal response for the EU and Russia, in: Liberalism in the XXI century: Modern challenges to freedom and new liberal responses. Moscow, Mysl’ Publ., 2019, pp. 147–178. (In Russ.).
12. Shirko E.N. The model of cooperative federalism: principles and boundaries of use (on the example of the USA and Russia), Cand. Diss. Moscow, 2002. 170 p. (In Russ.).
13. Dudko I.G. Legislation of the subjects of the Russian Federation. Questions of theory, Doct. Diss. Thesis. Nizhniy Novgorod, 2004. 54 p. (In Russ.).
14. Potapov M.G. The system of norms of law and the system of normative legal acts of the subjects of the Federation. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava, 2001, no. 1, pp. 59–73. (In Russ.).
15. Leontenkov A.V. Municipal legal acts in the system of sources of Russian law, Cand. Diss. Thesis. Nizhny Novgorod, 2005. 36 p. (In Russ.).
16. Chashchina S.I. System of municipal regulations, Cand. Diss. Thesis. Khabarovsk, 2006. 27 p. (In Russ.).
17. Pavlov A.S. Course of church law. Sergiev Posad, own printing house of the Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra, 1902. 552 p. (In Russ.).
18. Varyas M.Yu. A short course of church law. Moscow, MZ Press Publ., 2001. 128 p. (In Russ.).
19. Tal L.S. Labor contract: civilistic research. Moscow, Statut Publ., Consultant Plus Publ., 2006. 537 p. (In Russ.).
20. Kudrin A.S. The impact of subjects of social power on public relations included in the subject of labor law: some aspects of theory, history and practice, Cand. Diss. Perm, 2015. 222 p. (In Russ.).
21. Karnaukhova E.V. Systematization of local regulatory legal acts in the Russian Federation: general characteristics and types, Cand. Diss. Thesis. Tyumen, 2011. 22 p. (In Russ.).
22. Kostogryzov P.I. Community law. Antinomii, 2019, no. 2, pp. 67–86. (In Russ.).
23. Daniel N., Schwikkard P.J. The 'Soft Vengeance' of the People: Popular Justice, Community Justice and Legal Pluralism in South Africa. Journal of Legal Pluralism, 1996, no. 36, pp. 69–87.
24. Zakharova T.A. Customs of indigenous peoples in judicial decisions of Canada and the Russian Federation (comparative legal research). Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatelstva i sravnitel’nogo pravovedeniya, 2018, no. 4, pp. 30–35. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Biryukov S.V. National law and legal pluralism. Law Enforcement Review. 2022;6(4):5-14. https://doi.org/10.52468/2542-1514.2022.6(4).5-14
Views:
548
Email this article 