Code of Administrative Proceedings as a Mean for Improving the Procedures of Claiming Materials Extremist
Abstract
The following article is dedicated to the legal analysis of problems, connected to the procedure of the recognition of informational materials as extremist. On the basis of the study of legislative initiatives of great public interest, which were taken in a hurry because of negative experience of implementation provisions of the Counteraction to Extremist Activity Law, the author comes to a disappointing conclusion about legislative ban of recognition as extremist the content and quotations from Bible, Quran, Tanah and Kanjur. Inconsistencies between adopted rules of law and constitutional principles (the principle of secular state and equality of any religious association) and inconsistency of legislator's approach are validated in the article. Author draws attention to, in his opinion, genuine, radical problems of substantive procedural character, appearing with implementation of an Article 13 of the Counteraction to Extremist Activity Law, which determines the procedure of recognition materials as extremist. Revealing the legal nature of this kind of public relations, the author comes to a derivation about necessity in consideration of this sort of cases along with those initiated by empowered state authorities, in public interest and according to the Code of Administrative Proceedings. The author displays peculiarities of this sort of cases. In particular, they belong to following groups: connected with the list of subjects (who can be an administrative claimant or defendant), dedicated to territorial and instance jurisdiction (where and in which court of the system the case should be considered in the first instance), associated with the necessity in providing security for a claim (special interim measures), concerned with consequences of sustaining a claim (confiscation of materials and sending a message), related to the procedure of appeal (competence of the parties concerned). According to everything stated above, the author suggests to remove provisions of considering cases on recognition informational materials as extremist and bring them to another chapter in the section IV of the Code of Administrative Proceedings, “Specific features of judicial proceedings on certain categories of administrative cases”, and provide line-item regulation.
References
Babkin A.I. (2015) Otdel'nye voprosy administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva [Cases of Administrative proceedings]. Rossiyskiy sud'ya, no 9, pp. 3-5.
Bondar' N.S. (2011) Sudebnyy konstitutsionalizm v Rossii v svete konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya [Judicial Constitutionalism in Russia]. Moscow: Norma, Infra-M, 544 p. (in Russian)
Golubkova N. (2015) Na Sakhaline otmeneno reshenie suda o priznanii ekstremistskoy knigi «Mol'ba (dua) k Bogu» [Sakhaline Court Cancelled the Court Decision on Recognizing the book «Mol'ba (dua) k Bogu» as Extremist]. Available at: http://www.sakhalin.info/news/16.08.2006/108408 (accessed 10 February 2016).
Goryainov L. (2015) Svyashchennye teksty vne podozreniy [Sacred Texts ar above Suspicion]. Parlamentskaya gazeta, no 42 (2717), p. 9.
Kazantsev D. (2012) Zakon o svobode sovesti: edinstvo v mnogoobrazii [Law on the Freedom of Conscience]. EZh-Yurist, no 39, p. 9.
Lebedeva O.O. (2015) Primenenie otdel'nykh prinuditel'nykh mer administrativnogo preduprezhdeniya kak samostoyatel'noe administrativnoe proizvodstvo v strukture administrativnogo protsessa [Applying Coercive Measures in Administrative Proceedings]. Leningradskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, no 3, pp. 203-210.
Luparev E.B. (2015) Podderzhanie balansa lichnykh i publichnykh interesov v sfere gosudarstvennogo upravleniya v svete Kodeksa administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Supporting the balance of public and Private Interests in State Administration according to the RF Administrative Proceedings Code] Administrativnoe pravo i protsess, no 11, pp. 49-52.
Mikhaylov V. (2015) Protsedura priznaniya materialov ekstremistskimi trebuet korrektsii [Procedure of Recognizing Materials Extremist requires Correction]. Administrativnoe pravo, no 1, pp. 83-88.
Murav'ev A.A. (ed.) (2015) Kommentariy k Kodeksu administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii (poglavnyy) [Commentary to the RF Code of Administrative Proceedings]. Moscow: Prospekt, 408 p.
Nosova Yu.B. (2015) Podvedomstvennost' i podsudnost' administrativnykh del sudam [Jurisdiction of Administrative Cases]. Administrativnoe pravo i protsess, no 11, pp. 62-70.
Oganesyan S.S., Mikhaylov V.K. (2015) Problemy pravovogo soderzhaniya prava na svobodu sovesti i veroispovedaniya, a takzhe opredeleniya religioznogo ekstremizma [Issues of Right to Freedom of Conscience, Faith and the Definition of Religious Extremism]. Pravo i sovremennye gosudarstva, no 3, pp. 27-36.
Plotnikov D.A. (2015) K voprosu o probleme opredeleniya podvedomstvennosti publichno-pravovykh sporov v grazhdanskom i administrativnom sudoproizvodstve [On Determining Jurisdiction for Public Law Disputes]. Rossiyskiy sud'ya, no 9, pp. 5-9.
Ponkin I.V. (2004) Sovremennoe svetskoe gosudarstvo: konstitutsionno-pravovoe issledovanie: (Avtoref. diss. Doktor. Jurid. Nauk) [Modern Secular State: Constitutional Law Research (Summary of doctor of juridical sciences dissertation)]. Moscow, 41 p.
So A.A. (2011) Konstitutsionno-pravovoy rezhim ravenstva religioznykh ob”edineniy pered zakonom: sovremennye problemy i puti resheniya [Constitutional Law Regime of Equality for Religious Organizations before Law]. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo, no 9, pp. 27-29.
Sultanov A.R. (2013) Zashchita svobody sovesti, rasprostraneniya ubezhdeniy cherez prizmu postanovleniy Evropeyskogo suda po pravam cheloveka [Protecting Freedom of Conscience, Spreading Ideas throughth ePrism of ECHR]. Moscow: Statut, 544 p. (in Russian)
Copyright (c) 2016 Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
