Modern constitutionalism and the state Israel

Abstract work

MODERN CONSTITUTIONALISM AND THE STATE ISRAEL

The constitution, by the definition of K. Marx, the famous philosopher of the XIXth century, is the fundamental law of the state, and the major parameter of essence of the state. There are no disagreements that the Constitution characterizes the mode of the country and determines the essence, purposes and achievements of the society, mode and the state. The constitution is a set of the key rules according to which the country is governed. These rules express the main principles and values of the country. The constitution as the fundamental law, expresses will of the power; and there is no guarantee, that the Constitution will protect the worthy purposes; that the principles of democracy, freedom of speech and human rights of a person and a citizen are not always the overall objective of the Constitution. Application of the Constitution in the country is considered a sufficient condition for realization of rights and freedoms of the citizens, but it does not always work. It is possible to note, that in the countries where there is no democracy, the Constitution does not create democracy, but serves the regimes of the given countries. It is necessary to specify that it is insufficiently to write in the Constitution «protection of democracy» or something similar as without the mechanism of protection of democracy and without the precise definition of elements of protection of democracy there exists no actual value of the Constitution. The Constitution shall have the supreme value over all the laws of the country and consequently all the laws should correspond to the principles of the Constitution. The constitution, as a rule comprises: the fundamentals of the constitutional system, the principle of division of powers, principles of the organization and activity of the organs of government and management, their competence and functions, mutual relations and connection with the citizens.

The major and real purpose of the modern Constitution is to provide observance and protection of human rights of a person and a citizen.

The constitution shall protect, in particular, the weak and the minorities, and absence of these rights in the Constitution deprives the later of the very important protection which they need. Undoubtedly the worker is the weak side in the labour contract and needs protection.

The constitution shall be higher authority and organs of the power. Principles of protection of rights in the Constitution shall limit authority. The role of the state in this respect are dual. On the one hand, the state is obliged not to break without lawful grounds the following rights of a person and a citizen: freedom of movement, freedom of worship, freedom of belief, freedom of expression of opinions, protected by the Constitution. On the other hand — the state shall take necessary measures, and act to protect rights of a person to life, security, dignity and to guarantee inhabitants and citizens of the country normal conditions of life and the opportunity of reception of the public blessings.

In modern world the Constitution simultaneously serves to protection of political, and personal human rights in the society.

But in fact it often happens, that the Constitution becomes the means for strengthening of reactionary antidemocratic oppressing regimes.

For example, Constitutions in the majority of the Arabian antidemocratic countries do not only provide their citizens with political rights, the freedom to criticize the state and to be in opposition to the regime, but strengthen the totalitarian yoke, deprive a person of the elementary rights and freedoms (freedom of speech, inviolability of private life). It is necessary to recollect, that the Syrian Constitution has been changed within five minutes in order to allow «to elect» Bashar Asad — the son of the president, as the president of the country after his father’s death.

Only words about democracy without the mechanism for its protection will never transform dictatorship into democracy. Even in the monarchic country — Saudi Arabia in which elementary human rights of a person and a woman are absent, the Constitution exists, but the given Constitution exists, first of all, for strengthening of the power of monarchic family.

The state of Israel was created in 1948 as the democratic state. In the Declaration of Independence of Israel there has been marked unequivocally specifies, that the major purpose of the state of Israel is democracy, and it is written precisely and clearly, that the state of Israel will have the Constitution. There has even been created the board for formation of the project of the Constitution till October 1, 1948. However, till present there is no Constitution in Israel.

During the 58 years of existence of Israel there have been issued a number of fundamental laws for replacement of the absent Constitution right after the creation of the state — «the fundamental law of the Knesset», «the fundamental law of the government», «the fundamental law of legal proceedings», «the fundamental law of the president of the country», «the fundamental law of army», in 1960 — «the fundamental law of the land of Israel», in 1975 — «the fundamental law of the budget of the country». The given laws have been issued to determine the kind and the structure of the power.

In 1994 and 1998 there have been issued the two very important fundamental laws: the first — «the fundamental law on dignity of a person and his freedom» [3], the second — «On freedom of business activity». The given laws have been and are still of great importance, as they shall protect human rights of a person.

" The law on dignity of a person and his freedom". The purpose of the fundamental law is to protect dignity of a person and his freedom, to fix in the given fundamental law value of the State of Israel, as the Jewish and democratic state. The given law shall protect the life of a person, his physical body and his dignity. It shall forbid attempt on his life, his body and his dignity, shall forbid attempt on property of a person. The law stipulates as the fundamental right — the right to private life and non-interference into it without consent of a person: it shall be impossible to search a person without his own sanction, the secret of correspondence of a person and his private telephone conversations shall be guaranteed. The law stipulates, that any other law cannot contradict the fundamental law.

" On freedom of business activity" [4]. The purpose of the given fundamental law is to protect freedom of business activity, to fix in it values of the state of Israel as the Jewish and democratic state.

The given law entitles each citizen or inhabitant of the state to be engaged in any business activity or to have any trade. The given fundamental law shall limit the legislator and shall entitle the judicial authority to interfere with laws and to establish, whether the given laws correspond to values of the state of Israel, whether they correspond to the desired purpose, and to determine the degree of infringement of freedom of business activity. It obliges authorities to respect freedom of business activity of each citizen or inhabitant.

In the both laws any organ of the power is assigned with the duty to respect the rights given by these fundamental laws. The given fundamentals laws also stipulate, that time emergency resolutions shall have no force to change given fundamentals laws, to cancel temporarily or to limit them, that can be possible solely under the special decision of the government for the period of three months, with the opportunity of prolongation of this term under certain conditions.

The law obliges the government to take the given measures solely in case of necessity.

There is no doubt that we speak about positive laws created for protection of a person and maintenance of his fundamental rights. But on the other hand it is necessary to specify that quite often there exists the contradiction between the two principles: «the democratic country» and «the Jewish country». The principle «the Jewish country» (the fact is, that about one and a half million of not Jews live in the state of Israel: the arabs and other nationalities that makes about 20% from the population) is the ground for oppression and discrimination of the arabs. The Supreme Court of Validity has considered this question and has expressed the opinion, that democracy is «higher» than Jewish nationality, but it does not express the common opinion in the country. It is necessary to remind the words of Minister of Protection of ecology of Israel Mr. Gidion Ezra in connection with the war in Lebanon and bombardment of northern Israel by rockets of «Hezbollah» that it is impossible to help the Arabs in the north of Israel.

That fact, that only in 1990th there have been issued the laws protecting human rights, causes the question: «What existed before the given laws? What legal basis protected democracy and human rights» ?

The fact is that the Israeli legal system is based on the English system. Speaking in other words, the precedents are the basic source of law. Therefore the Supreme Court of Validity of the state of Israel has been and is the main stronghold of protection of human rights in the Israeli society.

The Supreme Court of Validity enjoys the huge authority all over the world, but quite frequently it faces the complicated questions arising as a result of occupation of the territories by Israel, and is criticized by the Arabian forces, and the governmental forces.

Up to issue of these laws principles of equality, democracy and freedom of speech have been protected by the Supreme Court of Validity.

The Israeli society suffers, in my opinion, the chronic illness which is called «continuation of occupation by Israel of the Western coast of the river of Jordan and practical authority of Israel over the destinies of a million and a half of inhabitants of sector Gaza». The difficult political situation and every day infringements of the fundamental rights of a person make the Israeli Supreme Court of Validity to discuss continuously various applications on infringement of human rights of the Palestinians on the occupied territories.

It is not a secret, that the most important problem for modern constitutionalism is the war against aggressive international terror. This war subjects to great danger achievement of democracy. Undoable, any country cannot be reconciled with terroristic attacks on its territory.

And, in spite of the fact that terror is very aggressive, it is necessary to respect the constitutional principles and not to allow the authority to commit collective punishments. Proceeding from this, the global democratic public opinion cannot agree with President Bush who has made the anticonstitutional decision and has allowed authorities to listen to telephone conversations of any person at their discretion.

At last, it is necessary to recollect, that the constitutional principles adopted in the democratic countries, are the supreme value, and it is impossible to recede from it.

We believe, that antiterrorist struggle will not deprive European peoples of the achieved gains of democracy in the sphere of rights and freedoms of a person.

LAW-MAKING IN THE SUBJECTS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF IDEAS OF CONSTITUTIONALISM

constitution protection human citizen

The legal mode of constitutionalism assumes supremacy of the law (fixed in the formal-legal regulations in the Constitution of the state) in all the spheres of public and political life.

Thus, the content of constitutionalism is made of the two main principles.

First, it is the supremacy of the law considered as the social phenomenon conditioned by the priority of human rights and acting as the substantial attribute of constitutionalism.

Second, guarantee of the mutual responsibility of the individual and the state. Thus, the major thing is the recognition of that fact, that the organs of the government, officials — representatives of the government, and, so far as they act on behalf of the state, on the ground and in performance of the law, they should bear equal with all members of the community legal responsibility according to the democratic principles of equality of all under the law and court, inevitability of responsibility at presence of fault. The specified principle is considered the determining parameter of the reality of constitutionalism.

In the modern doctrine there exist different approaches in knowledge of essence and contents of constitutionalism. One of them is shown in comprehension of constitutionalism as the process of political-legal creativity. Thus, the constitutionalism is analyzed through the processes connected with law-making, and the major attention is given to the problem of parity of the universal values with requirements of the state expediency.

Constitutionalism as the sociopolitical system assumes unity in the fundamental normative-legal act (Constitution) of moral and legal criteria (supremacy of the law and its moral — legal nature, parity of objective and subjective right, mutual obligations of the state and the person).

At such understanding constitutionalism acts as the universal social regulator which distributes the influence on any public relations requiring legal regulation. Thus, we can specify actually legal aspect of constitutionalism, its ability not only to declare these or that valid postulates, but to guarantee their realization in practice, to use the mechanism of government as the guarantor.

In a modern science there has been formed the direction based on theoretic-legal research of the phenomenon «constitutionalism» which allows to integrate the existing approaches and to formulate the general definition of constitutionalism as the specific political-legal phenomenon comprising including the ideological doctrine, current legislation and legal practice as the structural elements.

The idea of constitutionalism as the principle of management can be perceived only by democratic societies.

Thus, its preconditions is the understanding, that the statehood has appeared, as objectively necessary form of organization of people, and it should carry out these primary functions — to create conditions for normal activity of the people.

The constant opposition of the power and the citizens is unusual for the lawful state as the concept of opposition cannot lead to positive results. The law should serve as the means of overcoming disagreements.

Besides the state has uncountable opportunities to show the will above the person if it is necessary — «to press» on it, to subordinate him to the interests while the person does not have enough such opportunities. In this sense in mutual relations of the state and the person the element of «subordination» is inevitable as the state should be the of power, and the person is barrier the one freedom. The law should counterbalance them under the law including the state as all should be equal.

Solidarization of relations between the person and the state should be based on the principles of their mutual responsibility and trust, balance of will and interests. The intermediary and the judge for them should be the law and both sides are obliged to submit.

Therefore at present in legal policy of the Russian Federation can be specified the idea of recognizing, that the power, the law, legality should become really capable, effective.

Complex-structured character of the Russian Federation as the state of federal type staticizes the problem of law-making in its subjects and the organs of local self-management. Definition of frameworks regional law-making in the doctrine is associated with the statement, on the one hand, about unity of law-making in Russia, on the other — isolation of it in each of subjects of Federation.

The volume and limits of law-making in the subjects of Federation are limited with the principles of the federal structure, and differentiation of the subjects of conducting and powers between the organs of the government in the Federation and the organs of the government of the subjects, fixed in the Constitution of the Russian Federation (Articles 5, 71−73, 76).

The Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 has divided the subjects of conducting on exclusive conducting of the Federation (Article71), joint conducting (Article 72) and exclusive conducting subjects of the Russian Federation. However, the borders of the subjects of conducting of the Russian Federation and its subjects are submitted in the fundamental law insufficiently precisely. So there is no problem with the definition of the subjects of exclusive conducting of the Federation and the corresponding powers. However, there are numerous questions with designation of the limits of «joint conducting» .

The nature of the category of «joint conducting» does not any more assume that the subject of the Federation is the independent and sovereign state source of formation of the regional right and its system.

Thus, it is necessary to take into account that fact, that the federal laws in the sphere of joint conducting (Water, Family, Land codes, etc.) practically reduce their own conducting subjects of the Russian Federation in these spheres to zero.

In spite of the fact that the norms of the legislation adopted at the federal level are considered «working» on the subjects of the Federation, inherently, they have the federal nature and consequently it is not obviously possible to consider them the lawful the factor of law-making of the subjects of the Russian Federation.

It is possible to note the high degree of insufficiency in definition of the number of the subjects of joint conducting in the current Constitution of the Russian Federation: not all spheres objectively requiring recognition as subjects of joint conducting, are designated in it.

Besides, designation of some questions in the list of the number of the subjects of conducting of the Russian Federation and the subjects of joint conducting takes place.

Among the specific features distinguishing the Russian constitutional model of differentiation of the subjects of conducting from others, existing in the world, is the refusal of legal formalization of the list of subjects of exclusive conducting of the subjects of the Russian Federation.

The similar lacks arise not because of inability of division of the state power, and owing to imperfection of the legal proceedings applied during differentiation.

Thus, legal registration of the current Constitution of the Russian Federation requires perfection as blanks of regulation and contradiction in application of the legal categories concerning definition of the number of the subjects of conducting, generate problems in the current, federal, and regional law-making, called to provide legally realization of the constitutional fundamentals of differentiation of the subjects of conducting between the Federation and its subjects.

In juridical literature of last years there is more often approved that in the Russian Federation the process of institutionalization of the subjects of the Federation and their powers at the level of the federal legislation comes to an end which is the precondition for formation of harmonious system of the legislation of the Russian Federation and the basis of lawful activity of legislators of the regional level.

However, it is necessary to recognize, that the major legal means of maintenance of realization of full volume of the government in the differentiation of the subjects of conducting will be the constitutional regulation of legal forms of regulation in the subjects of conducting of the Russian Federation and its subjects.

The most optimal model of differentiation of the subjects of conducting of the Federation and its subjects can be recognized the three-link system of the subjects of conducting: 1) subjects of joint conducting of the Russian Federation and its subjects; 2) subjects of exclusive conducting of the Russian Federation; 3) subjects of exclusive conducting of the subjects of the Russian Federation.

The specified formula of differentiation of the subjects of conducting will allow to limit federal intervention of the Federation into the spheres of exclusive regulation of public relations of the subjects of the Federation, to reduce unreasonable duplication of federal norms in the regional legislation, to make effective the mechanism of responsibility of the power, to stabilize the legislation of the Russian Federation, and, finally, will allow to increase the reality of maintenance of equal rights and freedoms of a person in each subject of the Russian Federation.

At present regional law-making is the major form of realization of the powers of the subjects of the Russian Federation, concretely expressed in the system of statutory acts.

The system of the regional legislation has the features conditioned with the purpose facing the subject — to provide reproduction of the territorial generality living within the limits of the concrete subject of the Federation, its harmonious and integrated development within the framework of the region and the entire territory of the Federation, within the limits of legal opportunities determined by the federal legislation.

Efficiency of law-making is predetermined by the factors influencing the legislator of the subject of the Russian Federation among which we can allocate: external (objective) — geopolitical, social and economic, national and ethnographic, political and legal features of the region, organizational and financial security of law-making functions, and the state of legal system in the country, and internal (subjective) — professionalism and sense of political elite, legality of law-making process, adequate definition of the legal nature of public relations, right choice of the form of the statutory act of the subject of the Federation, definition of the goals and choice of means in regulation of the subject under legal influence, and strict observance of rules of legal proceedings.

Thus, if the purposes of the law are socially significant, actual, vital during the given period (or in perspective) to the subject of the Federation as the territorial generality, the chosen means of regulation are adequate to the goals, and the regulation is positive, qualitative, hence, the statutory-legal act can be recognized as an effective regulator of the public life.

Analysis of the regional legislation allows to allocate its main lacks: unsystematic character of the legislation, internal discrepancy, lack of a number of statutory acts and excessive plurality of statutory-legal acts.

At the session of the Council of legislators the President has designated the major prospects and directions of the legislative activity of the subjects of the Russian Federation, in particular, having emphasized, that influence of the regions on the formation of the legal space of Russia is very great.

" All legal mechanisms, including the regional legislation, should promote the effective decision of essential social and economic problems of the citizens" .

Heads of the regional parliaments specify, that at present realization of the project designated as priority projects by the federal centre, is coming into practical realization in the subjects of the Russian Federation. Their further productivity in many respects will depend on efficiency of interaction of the federal organs of the government in the regions and the organs of local self-management. Thus legislators consider, that the paramount value in this connection will belong to the coordinated work of all levels of the power both at the federal, and at the regional levels.

In particular, the necessary condition at adoption of the federal budget the participation of the regional power will allow in full to take into consideration local features. At the same time, the subjects of the Russian Federation are obliged to debug the system of target and rational application of means of the centre and own resources at realization of the project. The federal centre should in due time realize legal regulation and provide regions with budgetary funds, and local statutory legal acts should be adopted without delay.

The important place in stabilization of the legislation of the Russian Federation is occupied by the process of finishing of reduction of the regional legislation in full conformity with the federal. So, according to the Ministry of Justice «only in ten subjects of the Russian Federation the given work has been fully completed». Last year on the results of examination more than 40 thousand statutory legal acts of the Russian regions almost in 3 thousand have found out infringement of the federal legislation.

According to the head of the state, «blanks» in the regional legislation seriously brake the decision of the major social and economic tasks and, in particular, leads to the «black holes» in the state budget.

In particular he has specified that «in a number of regions the list of privileges for payment of housing and municipal services is completely reduced, and in some regions — additional burdensome payments connected with payment of housing and communal services» are imposed.

Therefore coordination of legality concerning of all the levels of authority, — the major conditions of success of realization of national projects.

D. Medvedev has specified the importance of the parliamentary control over activity of the regional administrations — especially in the sphere of housing construction. Thus it is necessary to remember, that if the executive power by means of party domination and party discipline supervises the decisions of the parliament, it can easily achieve such orders which completely releases it from the formal responsibility for the adopted acts. The legislator does not have responsibility referring that he has given executive power the constitutional authority for appropriate settlement. Such independence of the executive power, in opinion of A. Shajo, strengthens the legislative power not only the party influence of the government, but also the state bureaucracy that can considerably complicate realization of the designated reforms.

Modern tendencies of development of law-making legislation of the subjects of the Russian Federation testify to the changing functional role: transition from «outstripping» legislation to «developing», «detalizing» within the framework of the model «federation — the subject of the federation — the organs of local self-management». Legal proceedings take characteristic properties and features, in many respects conditioned by the objective factors, and by the level of development of legal activity (law-making and legal) and legal consciousness of the population of the concrete subject of the Federation. In particular at the present stage of development of federalism in the regional legislation the special value is given to duplication and development of norms of the federal level referring to the features of the subject of the Federation.

And if by its functional role the law-making of the regional level is called to reflect the requirements of political, economic, social and cultural developments of the population of that territorial generality which has developed within the limits of the subject of the Russian Federation, in the substantial plan this specific activity of the authorized organs is considered as the way, the means of transformation of social into legal.

Thus, optimization of the law-making activity of the organs of the government of the federation and the state organs of the subjects of the Russian Federation can be solved, first, during the precise constitutional differentiation of the subjects of conducting between the organs of the government of the Russian Federation and its subjects, accordingly dividing the spheres of law-making, second, the due coordination and coordination of activity of the subjects of the government of the federal and regional level, differentiation of the competence between the branches and levels of authority in Russia, third, by establishment of constitutionally-legal responsibility according to the powers of the organ of the government (organs of local self-management), fourth, obligatory preaching at all levels of the power and among the population of ideology of supremacy of the law possessing the supreme validity and corresponding to the ideas of equality and validity.

At such organization of the statelegal policy it will be possible to speak about formation of the mechanism guaranteeing reality of constitutionalism in the Russian Federation.

The literature

1. Ромашов Р. А. Современный конституционализм: теоретико-правовой анализ. Автореф. на соиск. д.ю.н. — СПб., 2008. — С. 5.

2. Ромашов Р. А. Современный конституционализм: теоретико-правовой анализ. Автореф. на соиск. д.ю.н. — СПб., 2008. — С. 25.

3. Матузов Н. И. Актуальные проблемы теории права. — Саратов: изд-во Сарат. академии права, 2013. — С. 477.

4. В поле. Правовом // Российская газета. — 18. марта- 2006. — № 55 (4021).

5. Обжитой нацпроект. Российская газета. — 18 марта 2006. — № 55 (4021).

6. Шайо А. Самоограничение власти. — М.: Юристъ, 2009.

7. Конституционное право субъектов Российской Федерации / Отв ред. В. А. Кряжков. — М.: Городец, 2012.

8. Алексеев С. С. Восхождение к праву Поиски и решения. 2-е изд. — М.: НОРМА, 2012.

9. Голенок С. Г. Юридическая техника в системе регионального нормотворчества (теоретико-прикладной аспект) СПб. Автореф. на соиск. к.ю.н. — СПб, 2005.