State responsibility for the massive violation of rights and freedoms : a comparative analysis of the experience of the United States of America and the Russian Federation

Diana Zurabovna Gogeniia
{"title":"State responsibility for the massive violation of rights and freedoms : a comparative analysis of the experience of the United States of America and the Russian Federation","authors":"Diana Zurabovna Gogeniia","doi":"10.7256/2454-0706.2024.7.71190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The subject of the study is the state responsibility in the form of compensation for harm, committed by massive violation of human rights and freedoms. The object of the study is the actual and historical forms of the state responsibility in the legal systems of the Russian Federation and the United States of America. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as: the implementation of state responsibility for the damage caused within the framework of private law (regular) and public law (emergency) mechanisms; law enforcement practice of the Russian Federation and the United States on issues of state compensation for harm; the practice of adopting \"compensatory acts\". Special attention is paid to the principle of sovereign immunity of the state, its historical origin and modern understanding, differences of its interpretation in the Russian Federation and the United States; identification of common features and differences in approaches to the institution of state compensation for harm in the two countries; proposals for improving national legislation in the context of the topic under consideration. Using a comparative method, the author illustrates the processes of formation of this institution in the studied legal systems, defines the differences between the institutions of compensation for \"private law\" and mass harm committed by the state. The legal research presented in the article allows to conclude that the established practice of implementing this institution has similar features in both studied states, which allows us to use each other's experience. The novelty of the study is justified by conducting a comparative study of state-sponsored compensation institutions in the Russian Federation and the United States with an emphasis on mass harm, which revealed a general trend towards the adoption of \"compensatory acts\", the purpose of which is to circumvent the judicial procedure for dispute settlement in such situations. A proposal was also formulated on the need to specify Russian legislation in the field of compensation for mass environmental damage, including through the introduction of compensatory mechanisms. The practical significance of the work lies in the possibility of using its results to improve legislation and law enforcement practice in the field of state compensation for mass harm.\n","PeriodicalId":503816,"journal":{"name":"Право и политика","volume":"2020 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Право и политика","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0706.2024.7.71190","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The subject of the study is the state responsibility in the form of compensation for harm, committed by massive violation of human rights and freedoms. The object of the study is the actual and historical forms of the state responsibility in the legal systems of the Russian Federation and the United States of America. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as: the implementation of state responsibility for the damage caused within the framework of private law (regular) and public law (emergency) mechanisms; law enforcement practice of the Russian Federation and the United States on issues of state compensation for harm; the practice of adopting "compensatory acts". Special attention is paid to the principle of sovereign immunity of the state, its historical origin and modern understanding, differences of its interpretation in the Russian Federation and the United States; identification of common features and differences in approaches to the institution of state compensation for harm in the two countries; proposals for improving national legislation in the context of the topic under consideration. Using a comparative method, the author illustrates the processes of formation of this institution in the studied legal systems, defines the differences between the institutions of compensation for "private law" and mass harm committed by the state. The legal research presented in the article allows to conclude that the established practice of implementing this institution has similar features in both studied states, which allows us to use each other's experience. The novelty of the study is justified by conducting a comparative study of state-sponsored compensation institutions in the Russian Federation and the United States with an emphasis on mass harm, which revealed a general trend towards the adoption of "compensatory acts", the purpose of which is to circumvent the judicial procedure for dispute settlement in such situations. A proposal was also formulated on the need to specify Russian legislation in the field of compensation for mass environmental damage, including through the introduction of compensatory mechanisms. The practical significance of the work lies in the possibility of using its results to improve legislation and law enforcement practice in the field of state compensation for mass harm.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大规模侵犯权利和自由的国家责任:美利坚合众国和俄罗斯联邦经验的比较分析
本研究的主题是大规模侵犯人权和自由所造成的损害赔偿形式的国家责任。研究对象是俄罗斯联邦和美利坚合众国法律体系中国家责任的实际和历史形式。作者详细研究了该主题的以下方面:在私法(常规)和公法(紧急)机制框架内对造成的损害履行国家责任;俄罗斯联邦和美国在国家损害赔偿问题上的执法实践;采取 "补偿行为 "的实践。特别关注了国家主权豁免原则、其历史渊源和现代理解、俄罗斯联邦和美国对其解释的差异;确定了两国在国家损害赔偿制度方面的共同点和差异;就所审议专题提出了完善国家立法的建议。作者采用比较法说明了该制度在所研究的法律体系中的形成过程,界定了 "私法 "和国家大规模损害赔偿制度之间的差异。文章中介绍的法律研究得出的结论是,在所研究的两个国家中,实施该制度的既定做法具有相似的特点,这使我们能够利用彼此的经验。本研究的新颖之处在于对俄罗斯联邦和美国的国家赔偿机构进行了比较研究,重点研究了大规模伤害问题,结果发现了采取 "赔偿行为 "的普遍趋势,其目的是在这种情况下规避解决争端的司法程序。此外,还就是否有必要明确俄罗斯在大规模环境损害赔偿领域的立法提出了建议,包括引入补偿机制。这项工作的实际意义在于,可以利用其成果改进大规模损害国家赔偿领域的立法和执法实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Shares owned by a limited liability company : grounds and consequences State responsibility for the massive violation of rights and freedoms : a comparative analysis of the experience of the United States of America and the Russian Federation Formation of a state approach to the accumulation of human potential through the prism of the importance of education The social state in Russia and Belarus as a complex constitutional principle On the possibility of compensation for moral damage in case of violation of property rights: traditional views and innovations of practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1