@ARTICLE{26583261_118947341_2014, 
	author = {Elena Lukyanova}, 
	keywords = {, constitutional regime, legal consciousness, civil society, foreign agent, ad hoc laws, legal uncertainty, civil disobedience, package agreement, parliamentary crisis, public examination, deprofessionalisation of lawmaking, legislative processselection in terms of loyalty},
	title = {Population and Laws. Developments in the Communicative Culture between Russian Society and State},
	journal = {},
	year = {2014},
	number = {1},
	pages = {180-193},
	url = {https://law-journal.hse.ru/en/2014--1/118947341.html},
	publisher = {},
	abstract = {Lukyanova Elena - Professor, Department of Con­stitutional and Municipal law, Law Faculty, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Director of the Institute of Monitoring Efficiency of Judicial Enforcement at Russian Federation Public Chamber, Doctor of Juridical Sciences. Address: 20 Myasnitskaya Str., Moscow, 101000, Russian Federation. E-mail: pravoslovo@mail.ru.The article is an attempt to analyze the transformations in the relations between the state and society in modern Russia. It analyzes public reaction to five high-profile changes in Russian legislation between 2012-2013, toughened sanctions for the involvement in public events, introduction of the concept of noncommercial organization — a foreign agent, freedom of discussion limitation, in mass media and the Internet, a wider interpretation of the concept of banned political activity. The amendments to the legislation have become the response to an extremely high public activity since the 2011-2012 winter. Each of the laws in question was the subject matter of heated criticism in society and its application got actually blocked. Public examination confirmed common disadvantages relating to both the content of law (substitution of its subject matter with legislative objectives) and the procedure of its discussion af­fected by the violation of laws and principles of legislative process. The laws were adopted for a special purpose, i.e. ad hoc. This circumstance makes all the five acts dubious in terms of constitution and causing violations against the constitutional rights of citizens. Besides, they contradict international ob­ligations taken by Russia. The acts in question are typical of legal uncertainty (ambiguity in presenting normative content). Finally, all the acts analyzed violate the consistency in Russian legislation. The pub­lic response to this irrelevant regulation was intentional public disobedience. In this regard, the analysis of the causes in the situation is of special importance which is embedded in the process of election and counting votes. Negative selection is applied when making up the body of the parliament, people included in it as the representatives in parliament depends on the degree of loyalty of their majority to President and the executive power. This is the cause of deprofessionalisation of lawmaking in the Rus­sian Parliament and a lower level in its competency and thus a similar attitude to its activity by society.},
	annote = {Lukyanova Elena - Professor, Department of Con­stitutional and Municipal law, Law Faculty, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Director of the Institute of Monitoring Efficiency of Judicial Enforcement at Russian Federation Public Chamber, Doctor of Juridical Sciences. Address: 20 Myasnitskaya Str., Moscow, 101000, Russian Federation. E-mail: pravoslovo@mail.ru.The article is an attempt to analyze the transformations in the relations between the state and society in modern Russia. It analyzes public reaction to five high-profile changes in Russian legislation between 2012-2013, toughened sanctions for the involvement in public events, introduction of the concept of noncommercial organization — a foreign agent, freedom of discussion limitation, in mass media and the Internet, a wider interpretation of the concept of banned political activity. The amendments to the legislation have become the response to an extremely high public activity since the 2011-2012 winter. Each of the laws in question was the subject matter of heated criticism in society and its application got actually blocked. Public examination confirmed common disadvantages relating to both the content of law (substitution of its subject matter with legislative objectives) and the procedure of its discussion af­fected by the violation of laws and principles of legislative process. The laws were adopted for a special purpose, i.e. ad hoc. This circumstance makes all the five acts dubious in terms of constitution and causing violations against the constitutional rights of citizens. Besides, they contradict international ob­ligations taken by Russia. The acts in question are typical of legal uncertainty (ambiguity in presenting normative content). Finally, all the acts analyzed violate the consistency in Russian legislation. The pub­lic response to this irrelevant regulation was intentional public disobedience. In this regard, the analysis of the causes in the situation is of special importance which is embedded in the process of election and counting votes. Negative selection is applied when making up the body of the parliament, people included in it as the representatives in parliament depends on the degree of loyalty of their majority to President and the executive power. This is the cause of deprofessionalisation of lawmaking in the Rus­sian Parliament and a lower level in its competency and thus a similar attitude to its activity by society.}
}