Il'ya Minnikes, I.V. Minnikes

Authentic (Author’s) Interpretation: Theoretical-Legal and Constitutional Legal Aspects

2021. No. 3. P. 36–55 [issue contents]
The aim of the research is to study the legal nature of authentic interpretation, its contentand meaning as an independent type of interpretation of law, as well as to establish theset of subjects of such interpretation. The methodological basis of the research is formedby General scientific methods: dialectical, logical, system-structural, comparative, etc.;as well as private scientific methods: historical-legal, formal-legal, comparative-legal. Itis noted that the term «authentic interpretation» was given diverse meanings at differentstages of the development of Russian legal science. In the 19-early 20th century, authenticinterpretation was identified with law-making. In Soviet legal science, an authenticinterpretation was considered to come from both the subject of law-making and otherauthorized bodies. Modern research focuses on the government Agency that interpretsthe norm. It is proposed to replace the term «authentic» with the term «author’s», sincethis name more accurately characterizes this type of interpretation. The article shows themain approaches to understanding authentic (author’s) interpretation in Russian andforeign jurisprudence. It is established that when determining the range of subjects ofthe author’s interpretation, it is necessary to consider the presence or absence of legalformalization of the power to interpret the norm. If we assume that the right to create andformalize norms automatically generates the right to interpret them, then the subject ofauthentic (author’s) interpretation can be any state or non-state body that is the subjectof law-making. If we assume that the author’s authority to interpret their acts and itsimplementation should be regulated by the law, the range of subjects of author’s (authentic)interpretation will be sharply narrowed. In addition, the research examines therelationship between the range of subjects of authentic (author’s) interpretation and theform (source) of law in which the author puts the norm. Several controversial problemsare identified: the subject of author’s interpretation when creating an act in the order ofdelegation, and people’s law-making, judicial author’s interpretation, the author’s interpretationof religious texts and normative agreements. The relationship between the subjectand the object of authentic (author’s) interpretation is demonstrated.
For citation: Minnikes I.A., Minnikes I.V. (2021) Authentic (Author’s) Interpretation: Theoretical-Legal and Constitutional-Legal Aspects. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, no 3, pp.36–55 (in Russian) DOI: 10.17323/2072-8166.2021.3.36.55
Citation: Minnikes I., Minnikes I. (2021) Autenticheskoe (avtorskoe) tolkovanie: teoretiko-pravovoy i konstitutsionno-pravovoy aspekty [Authentic (Author’s) Interpretation: Theoretical-Legal and Constitutional Legal Aspects]. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, no 3, pp. 36-55 (in Russian)
Rambler's Top100 rss