The Modern Lawyer № 4 (41)





Alexey P. Albov

Doctor of Law, Head of the Department of Theory of Law, State and Comparative Law, Professor of the Russian State University for the Humanities

Professor of the Department of Theory, History of State and Law, Russian Customs Academy, Moscow, Russia. E–mail:

Internal sovereignty: self–conditioning, autarky, immunity


Subject/topic: Тhe article considers in historical and logical connection such concepts as self–conditionality, autarchy, immunity, which constitute the essence of the internal immunity of the state.

Goals/objectives: to reveal the connection of the three concepts in the process of formation of a separate legal category “internal sovereignty”, to show their logical and ontological relationship, to substantiate the need for new approaches in understanding internal sovereignty in connection with changing social and political circumstances.

Methodology: both general scientific methods were used: dialectical, analysis and synthesis of scientific methodological material, and methods of private scientific research: historical–logical, and the method of legal modeling.

Results / Conclusions It is shown that the content of the concept of “sovereignty” was filled with different content depending on the formation of the legal system, legal consciousness, the form of the state; the concept of legal sovereignty is disclosed, which reflects sovereignty as the most important property of law; it is revealed that sovereignty, as a phenomenon in general, and as legal sovereignty in particular, can be considered as an external and internal category; proved a proportionate and balanced manifestation of autarchy, self–sufficiency and immunity as a substantiated basis of internal legal sovereignty, through which the state is able to implement its internal and external functions; it is concluded that the concept of “immunity” is a kind of “reflection” of sovereignty, its continuation, and therefore immunity should extend to the entire legal system, and include the entire legal reality.

Keywords: Aristotle, Plato, J. Bodin, internal sovereignty, self–conditionality, autarchy, immunity.


Glossarium Mediae et Infimae Latinitatis: L. Favre, 1886. P. 659

Meyer–Lubke (2013) – Meyer–Lubke W. Romanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch. 3rd ed. Heidelberg, 1935.

Leonov (2013) – Leonov A.S. State sovereignty: etymology and background of the development of the concept. [Gosudarstvennyj suverenitet: etimologiya i predystoriya razvitiya koncepta] // “State and law. Bulletin of the Nizhny Novgorod University. N.I. Lobachevsky”, 2013, No. 3 (2). pp. 131–135.

Martin (1940) – Martin V. La vie internationale dans la Grèce des Cités (VIe–IVe s. av. J.–C.). Paris: Sirey, 1940. 633 p.

Tunkin (1994) – Tunkin G.I. International law: textbook. [Mezhdunarodnoe pravo: uchebnik] M.: Jurid. lit., 1994.

Palienko (1903) – Palienko N.K. Sovereignty. The historical development of the idea of sovereignty and its legal significance. [Suverenitet. Istoricheskoe razvitie idei suvereniteta i ee pravovoe znachenie] Yaroslavl: Printing house of the provincial government, 1903.

Maritain (2000) – Maritain J. Man and the state. [CHelovek i gosudarstvo] Per. from English. T. Lifintseva. M.: Idea–Press, 2000. S. 37

Degtyareva (2000) – Degtyareva M.I. Development of the concept of sovereignty by Jean Bodin [Razrabotka ponyatiya suvereniteta ZHanom Bodenom] // Polis. 2000. No. 3. S. 161 – 163.

Tikhomirov (2011) – Tikhomirov Yu. A. State: continuity and novelty. [Gosudarstvo: preemstvennost’ i novizna] M., 2011

Rozhdestvensky (1913) – Rozhdestvensky A. The theory of subjective political rights. [Teoriya sub”ektivnyh politicheskih prav] M., 1913. S. 263–266.

Tikhomirov (2008) – Tikhomirov Yu. A. Modern public law. [Sovremennoe publichnoe pravo]  M., 2008.

Tikhomirov (2013) – Tikhomirov Yu.A. Legal Sovereignty: Spheres and Guarantees. [Pravovoj suverenitet: sfery i garantii] Journal of Russian Law. 2013.№3. S.6–7.

(1993) – Heidegger M. European nihilism [Evropejskij nigilizm] // Heidegger M. Time and being. M., 1993. C. 119.

Mikhailov (2002) – Mikhailov F.T. The “Subject–Object” problem or the subject’s search for its own predicates [Problema «Subject–Object» ili poisk sub”ektom svoih predikatov] // Subject. Cognition. Activity. M., 2002. S. 396.

Gaidenko (1997) – Gaidenko P.P. Breakthrough to the transcendent [Proryv k transcendentnomu] M., 1997. S. 211.

Dictionary of foreign words [Slovar’ inostrannyh slov] M., 1989.

Braginskaya (2008) – Braginskaya N.V. Autarky [Antichnaya filosofiya: Enciklopedicheskij slovar’] // Ancient Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary. M.: Progress–Tradition, 2008. S. 72–78.

Aristotle (1983) – Aristotle. Collected works in 4 volumes. [Sobranie sochinenij v 4 tomah] T. 4. – M.: Thought, 1983. S. 446.

Taps (2002) – Taps D. Conceptual foundations of federalism [Konceptual’nye osnovy federalizma] – SP (b): Jurid. lit., 2002. S. 31.

Aristotle (1997) – Aristotle. Politics. [Aristotel’. Politika] Book. 7. ch. 7 1997, publishing house “Thought”. S. 232.

Albov, Ruchkina (2016) – Albov A.P., Ruchkina G.F. The influence of national legal culture, national law and the legal system on the sustainable development of the economy [Vliyanie nacional’noj pravovoj kul’tury, nacional’nogo prava i pravovoj sistemy na ustojchivoe razvitie ekonomiki] // State and Law. 2016. No. 1. pp. 47–58.

Joseph (2006) – Joseph Nye. Flexible power. How to Succeed in World Politics. [Gibkaya sila. Kak dobit’sya uspekha v mirovoj politike] Moscow: Trend, 2006.

Tsygankov (2003) – Tsygankov P.A. The concept and criteria of international relations [Ponyatie i kriterii mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij] // Theory of international relations. M.: Gardariki, 2003. S. 23.

Giddens (2003) – Giddens E. Organization of society: Essay on the theory of structuration [Ustroenie obshchestva: Ocherk teorii strukturacii]. M.: Academic project, 2003.

Lunts (1975) – Lunts L.A. Course of private international law. [Kurs mezhdunarodnogo chastnogo prava. Osobennaya chast’] Special part. – M., 1975. S. 75.

Anufrieva (2002) – Anufrieva L.P. Correlation of international public and international private law: legal categories. [Sootnoshenie mezhdunarodnogo publichnogo i mezhdunarodnogo chastnogo prava: pravovye kategorii] M., 2002. S. 26.

Anufrieva (2000) – Anufrieva L.P. International private law: in 3 volumes. [Mezhdunarodnoe chastnoe pravo: v 3–h t.] Vol. 2. Special part: textbook. – M., 2000. P.85


Mikhail A. Pavlenko

Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Law of Astrakhan State Technical University (ASTU), Astrakhan, Russia.


Maksim L. Romanov

Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Law of Astrakhan State Technical University (ASTU), Astrakhan, Russia. E-mail:

Semi-presidential republic: features of implementation in russia (comparative constitutional review)


Subject/topic. Features of the implementation of a semi-presidential republic in Russia (comparative constitutional review).

Goals/objectives. Identification of the features of the constitutional consolidation and implementation of the form of government in modern Russia in comparison with the form of government in France on the basis of the current constitutional legislation of both countries, its latest changes.

Methodology. The methodological basis of the study was the comparative legal and historical methods.

Conclusion. The study proposes an integrated approach to the study of the problems of implementation in Russia of such a model of the form of government as a «semi-presidential republic». Based on the analysis of the French Constitution, the essence is determined and the characteristic features of the classical model of semi-presidential government are highlighted. The similarities and differences between the models of the republics, enshrined in the French and Russian constitutions, are established. With the introduction of amendments to the Constitution of Russia, there is a tendency for the Russian republic to converge with «pure» samples of a semi-presidential republic, to outgrow them, and conclusions are also drawn regarding the admissibility of this form of government under the conditions of Russian federalism.

Key words: semi-presidential republic, Russian Federation, France, constitution, president, parliament, government, form of government.


Krasnov (2003) – Krasnov M.A. Russia as a Semi-Presidential Republic: Problems of the Balance of Powers (Experience in Comparative Legal Analysis) [Rossiya kak poluprezidentskaya respublika: problemy balansa polnomochiy (Opyt sravnitel’no-pravovogo analiza)] // State and Law. 2003. No. 10. Pp. 16-23.

Khabrieva (2005) – Government of the Russian Federation [Pravitel’stvo Rossiyskoy Federatsii]: Monograph / Ed. T.Ya. Khabrieva. M.: Norma, 2005. 607 p.

Slezhenkov (2019) – Slezhenkov V.V. Semi-Presidential Republic: Actual Historical and Legal Aspects of Development [Poluprezidentskaya respublika: aktual’nyye istoriko-pravovyye aspekty razvitiya] // Forum. Series: humanities and economic sciences. 2019. No. 1. Pp. 39-43.

Chirkin (2014) – Chirkin V.E. What form of government exists in modern Russia [Kakaya forma pravleniya sushchestvuyet v sovremennoy Rossii]? // Russian Journal of Legal Research. 2014. Vol. 1, No. 4. Pp. 32-40.

Kerimov (2000) – Kerimov A.D. Problems of constitutional reform and state building in Russia [Problemy konstitutsionnoy reformy i gosudarstvennogo stroitel’stva v Rossii]. M.: Publishing House of the RAGS, 2000. 51 p.

Radchenko (2000) – Radchenko V.I. President in the constitutional system of the Russian Federation [Prezident v konstitutsionnom stroye Rossiyskoy Federatsii]: Monograph / Ed. B.S. Ebzeeva. Saratov: SGAP, 2000. 184 p.

Solomanina (2007) – Solomanina Yu.V. Republican form of government in Russia: history and modernity [Respublikanskaya forma pravleniya v Rossii: is-toriya i sovremennost’]: Abstract of the thesis. dis. … cand. Legal Sciences. Vladimir, 2007. 25 p.

Khudoley (2010) – Khudoley D.M. Basic, hybrid and atypical forms of government [Osnovnyye, gibridnyye i atipichnyye formy pravleniya] // Bulletin of the Perm University. Legal Sciences. 2010. No. 4. Pp. 53-65.

Kondrashev (2018) – Kondrashev A.A. Super-presidential republic in Russia: myth or reality [Superprezidenstkaya respublika v Rossii: mif ili real’nost’]? // Bulletin of the University named after O.E. Kutafin (MSUA). 2018. No. 6. Pp. 34-42.

Avakyan (2021) – Avakyan S.A. Constitutional law of Russia: Training course [Konstitutsionnoye pravo Rossii: Uchebnyy kurs]: Proc. allowance: In 2 vols. 7th ed., revised. and additional. Vol. 1. M.: Norma: INFRA-M, 2021. 864 p.

Kurdyukova (2010) – Kurdyukova Z.N. Theoretical problems of the political form of the modern state [Teoreticheskiye problemy politicheskoy formy sovremennogo gosudarstva] // Legal policy and legal life. 2010. No. 4. Pp. 59-62.

Duverger (1970) – Duverger M. Institutions et Droit Constitutionnel. 11th ed. Paris: Presses Universitaires De France, 1970. 872 p.


Anton A. Zadvornov

Private practicing lawyer, Samara region, Novokuibyshevsk, E-mail:

Violation of jurisdiction is not a reason for reconsideration of the case


Subject/topic Based on the analysis of Russian judicial practice, an example of violation of the rules of territorial jurisdiction when considering a labor dispute is considered, the practice of the impossibility of revoking a court decision even by way of supervision in the highest judicial instance of Russia, in connection with the consideration of a case with a violation of the rules on jurisdiction is also considered.

Goals/tasks. Consideration of theoretical and practical aspects when considering civil cases in connection with violation of the principle of jurisdiction as a consequence of violation of the right to a lawful court.

Methodology In the course of the work, methods of description, comparison, analysis, synthesis were used.

Conclusions In Russia, many citizens, in case of violation of their constitutional rights, often have to spend a significant amount of time and other resources, including psychological ones, in order to force higher courts to admit their mistake (judicial error). A lot of such court disputes show all the imperfection and inconsistency of the Russian judicial system, where Russian citizens are virtually disenfranchised and unable to resist judicial arbitrariness. Even in the case of a fundamental distortion of the essence of justice, the judiciary is not ready to admit a judicial error and review the case, despite the fact that Russia officially positions itself as a rule-of-law state, and recognizes human and civil rights and freedoms as the highest value.

Keywords: violation of the rules of jurisdiction, illegal court, case review.


  1. Girko (2018) – Girko S.I., Ilyin I.V. Issues of abuse of the rules of jurisdiction and jurisdiction in the consideration of civil cases//Modern lawyer [Voprosy zloupotrebleniya pravilami podvedomstvennosti i podsudnosti pri rassmotrenii grazhdanskih del //Sovremennyj yurist]. 2018. N 2 (23). pp. 17-24.
  2. Gros (2010) – Gros L.A. On the meaning of the correct determination of the jurisdiction of a civil case // Arbitration and civil procedure [O znachenii pravil’nogo opredeleniya podsudnosti grazhdanskogo dela // Arbitrazhnyi i grazhdanskii protsess]. 2010. N3. pp. 5-8.
  3. Reshetnikova (2021) -Reshetnikova I.V. The right to a competent court: the formation of the composition of the court, the jurisdiction of the case // Law [Pravo na kompetentnyj sud: formirovanie sostava suda, podsudnost’ dela // Zakon]. N 7. pp. 61-69.
  4. Shemeneva (2014) – Shemeneva O.N. Consequences of non-compliance with the rules of jurisdiction: constitutional aspect // Russian judge [Posledstviya nesoblyudeniya pravil podsudnosti: konstitutsionnyi aspekt // Rossiiskii sud’ya]. 2014. N 4. pp. 38 – 41.


Lidia V. Shevtsova

in Law, Senior Lecturer of the Department of National Security law enforcement activity Institute of International Law and Justice, Moscow State Linguistic University, Attorney at law of the Moscow Patron bureau.


Peculiarities of police provocation evidence in criminal proceedings


Topic Identification of material and procedural criteria of incitement to commit a crime by suspected (accused) law enforcement officers on the basis of ECtHR, UN practice.

Aims/objectives To review case law of the ECtHR and the UN Human Rights Committee with the purpose of identifying signs of provocation by law enforcement officials of the suspects (accused) to commit crimes under Art. 290, 291, 291.1, 228, 228.1 of the RF Criminal Code. Consideration of cases in which the European Court found provocation, as well as cases in which police provocation is not seen. The article provides an analysis of the key European Court judgments against Russian applicants on complaints that may be applicable in proving provocation in national courts.

Methodology Analysis, comparison, abstraction, problem statement, concretization.

Conclusion As a result of the study the material and procedural criteria of police provocation were identified, practical recommendations for proving such crimes at the stage of preliminary investigation and in court were given.

Keywords: sale of drugs, bribery, operational and investigative activities, criminal case, investigator, operative officer, police provocation, court, ECHR, UN.


Zhuk (2017) – Zhuk O.D. Comparative legal aspects of the introduction of regular unofficial employees in organized criminal formations [Sravnitel’no-pravovye aspekty vnedreniya shtatnyh neglasnyh sotrudnikov v organizovannye prestupnye formirovaniya] // Russian investigator [Rossijskij sledovatel’] 2017. № 17. P. 49.

Dikov, Chernyshova (2011) – Dikov G., Chernyshova O.S. Evidence and decision-making in modern criminal proceedings [Dokazyvanie i prinyatie reshenij v sovremennom ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve] // Materials of the international scientific-practical conference devoted to the memory of Doctor of Law, Professor Polina Abramovna Lupinskaya. Сollection of scientific works [Materials of the international scientific-practical conference devoted to the memory of Doctor of Law, Professor Polina Abramovna Lupinskaya. Sollection of scientific works]. М. 2011. P. 143-144.

Stepanova, Gurin, Khatuntsev, Paltsev, Trifonova (2020) – Stepanova A.Y., Gurin D.V., Khatuntseva M.V., Paltsev Y.E., Trifonova T.N. Appeal to the European Court of Human Rights: Theory and Practice [Obrashchenie v Evropejskij Sud po pravam cheloveka: teoriya i praktika]/ ed. by A.Y. Stepanova A.Yu. and D.V. Gurin. М. 2020. P. 255.

Stepanova, Gurin, Khatuntsev, Paltsev, Trifonova (2020) – Stepanova A.Y., Gurin D.V., Khatuntseva M.V., Paltsev Y.E., Trifonova T.N. Appeal to the European Court of Human Rights: Theory and Practice [Obrashchenie v Evropejskij Sud po pravam cheloveka: teoriya i praktika] / ed. by A.Y. Stepanova A.Yu. and D.V. Gurin. М. 2020. P. 255-256.


Egor V. Kostin

Practicing lawyer, postgraduate student of Business and Corporate law Department of Moscow State academy of Law, Moscow, Russia.


Expulsion of a shareholder in closely held corporations as a remedy


Subject/topic The subject of the research is the expulsion of a shareholder in closely held corporations as a remedy.

Goals/objectives The purpose of the study is to identify a legal framework for implementation of expulsion of a shareholder in Russian legal field considering main issues of such remedy. In order to profoundly research the problem, the paper examines political and economic prerequisites of r exclusion of a shareholder in closely held corporation.

Methodology Analysis, synthesis, comparative legal method, abstraction, problem statement, concretization, monitoring.

Conclusion Based on the results of the study, the author concludes that it is possible to apply the institution of expulsion of a shareholder from a non-public corporation in a very narrow range of situations. This remedy actually deprives the participant of property, which necessitates the formal consent of a shareholder to the application of such measures to him. At the same time the Russian legal order has an extremely original remedy in non-public business companies, which is characterized by an extremely liberal approach to solving the problem of minority activism.

Keywords: corporation, Non-public Corporation, closely held corporation, protection of shareholders, exclusion of a shareholder.


Abdulkadirov (2018) – Abdulkadirov T. Minority activism as an unfair way to exercise the rights of a shareholder [Minoritarnyj aktivizm kak nedobrosovestnyj sposob realizacii prav akcionera]. Bulletin of arbitration practice. 2018. – №. 3. pp. 29-35

Kapelyushnikov (2012) – Kapelyushnikov R. I. Insecurity of property rights and its economic consequences: the Russian experience. [Nezashchishchennost’ prav sobstvennosti i ee ekonomicheskie posledstviya: rossijskij opyt]. Journal of the New Economic Association.  2012. №. 1. p. 150

Kuznetsov (2014) – Kuznetsov A.A. Exclusion of a shareholder from a limited liability company. Moscow [Isklyuchenie uchastnika iz obshchestva s ogranichennoj otvetstvennost’yu] .Statut. 2014 рр.141

Kuznetsov (2017) – Kuznetsov A.A. Limits of autonomy of will in corporate law: a brief essay. [Predely avtonomii voli v korporativnom prave: kratkij ocherk]. Moscow: Statut, 2017.160 p.

Kuznetsova (2006) – Kuznetsova L.V. Exclusion of a shareholder from a limited liability company. [Isklyuchenie uchastnika iz obshchestva s ogranichennoj otvetstvennost’yu]. Law and economy. 2006. №. 9. pp. 118-122;

Makovskaya (2019) – Makovskaya A.A. Imperative and dispositive rules in the corporate legislation (mistakes in wording, problems of interpretation and law enforcement) [Imperativnye i dispozitivnye normy v korporativnom zakonodatel’stve (oshibki v formulirovkah, problemy tolkovaniya i pravoprimeneniya)] Bulletin of Civil Law. 2019.№. 5. pp. 79-109.

Stepanov (2015) – Stepanov D.I. Interests of a legal entity and its shareholders. [Interesy yuridicheskogo lica i ego uchastnikov] Bulletin of economic justice of the Russian Federation. – 2015. №. 1. pp.29-83

Shchennikova (2019) – Shchennikova L.V. The system of grounds for termination (deprivation) of property rights as a necessary condition for effective implementation of the principle of inviolability of property [Sistema osnovanij prekrashcheniya (lisheniya) prava sobstvennosti kak neobhodimoe uslovie effektivnoj realizacii principa neprikosnovennosti sobstvennosti].Bulletin of Perm University. Legal Sciences. 2019. №44. Electronic resource – prekrascheniya-lisheniya-prava-sobstvennosti-kak-neobhodimoe-uslovie-effektivnoy-realizatsii-printsipa – request from 10.10.2022

Blair M. M. Locking in capital: What corporate law achieved for business organizers in the nineteenth century. UClA l. reV. 2003. Т. 51. P. 387

Freeman R.E., Reed D. L. Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance.California management review.1983. Т. 25.№. 3. pp. 88-106

Gordon J.N., Ringe W.G. (ed.). The Oxford handbook of corporate law and governance.Oxford University Press, 2018.

Velasco J. The fundamental rights of the shareholder //UC Davis L. Rev. 2006.P. 407.

Schmolke K.U. Expulsion and Valuation Clauses–Freedom of Contract vs. Legal Paternalism in German Partnership and Close Corporation Law //European Company and Financial Law Review. 2012. №. 3. pp. 380-419.


Anna R. Purge

Candidate of Law, Associate Professor of the Department of Civil Law Disciplines of the Institute of Law of Vladivostok State University, Vladivostok,


Comparative legal analysis of the institute surrogate motherhood in the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan


Subject/topic The subject of the research is the legal provisions of the institution of surrogate motherhood in the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Goals/objectives The purpose of the work is to compare the legal provisions on surrogate motherhood in the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Methodology The methodological basis is represented by a set of methods of scientific cognition of objective legal reality applied during preparation and writing: comparative legal method, formal legal method, logical method, method of legal modeling.

Conclusion The article considers the main provisions of the surrogate institution of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan in the comparative legal aspect. The main legal acts fixing the general provisions on surrogate motherhood in the Republic of Kazakhstan are outlined. The concept of surrogate motherhood is considered, its main features are outlined. The list of entities entitled to apply for surrogate motherhood services is indicated. The concept of a surrogate mother is considered and the main criteria for it are indicated. The provisions on the contract of surrogate motherhood and its essential conditions are outlined. The main rights and obligations fixed in the contract for the surrogate mother and potential parents are highlighted. The scientific article highlighted the main problems that exist in Russian surrogate motherhood and ways to solve these problems by the Kazakh legislator. Conclusions were drawn about the need to introduce certain provisions of Kazakhstani surrogate motherhood into Russian legal reality in order to improve domestic legal regulation.

Keywords: Russian Federation, Republic of Kazakhstan, surrogate motherhood, surrogate mother, potential parents, surrogacy contract, rights, obligations.


Gartina (2016) – Gartina Yu.A. Surrogate motherhood as one of the types of assisted reproductive technologies [Surrogatnoe materinstvo kak odin is vidov vspomogatel’nyh reproduktivnyh tekhnologij] / Yu.A. Gartina, T.N. Kozichenko // Regional features of market socio-economic systems (structures) and their legal support: materials of the VII scientific and practical conference with the International participation, Moscow, March 14, 2016 / scientific ed. by O.S. Kosheva: editorial board: S.V. Plotnikov, M.Ya. Parfenova, E.V. Levin. – Moscow: S.Y. Witte Moscow University, 2016. – pp. 19-24.

Mikhailova, Timergalina (2021) – Mikhailova D.S., Timergalina G.R. Gender aspect of legal regulation of the institute of surrogacy in the Russian Federation. [Genderny`j aspekt pravovogo regulirovaniya instituta surrogatnogo materinstva v Rossijskoj Federacii.] / D.S. Mikhailova, G.R. Timergalina // Modern lawyer. – 2021. – № 2 (35). – Pp. 117-125.

Purge (2022) – Purge A.R. Legal problems of establishing the origin of children.[Pravovy`e problemy` ustanovleniya proisxozhdeniya detej.] / A.R. Purge // Modern lawyer. – 2022. – № 3 (40). – Pp. 71-80.

Purge (2015) – Purge A.R. Legal regulation of surrogate motherhood as a method of assisted reproductive technologies [Pravovoe regulirovanie surrogatnogo materinstva kak metoda vspomogatel’nyh reproduktivnyh tekhnologij]: dis. … cand. jurid. sciences’: 12.00.03 / Purge Anna Rolandovna. – Dushanbe, 2015. -237 p.

Bogdanova (2021) – Bogdanova E.E. Actual problems of reforming legislation on surrogacy [Aktual`ny`e problemy` reformirovaniya zakonodatel`stva o surrogatnom materinstve]: – Text: electronic / E.E. Bogdanova, D.A. Belova // Actual problems of Russian law. – 2021. – № 4 (125). – pp. 66-75.


Anna A. Chuiko

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education «Russian State University of Justice», Crimean branch, 4th year student.


Problems of establishing administrative responsibility for offenses in the sphere of fake news distribution


Subject/topic Problems of Establishing Administrative Responsibility for Offenses in the Sphere of Fake News Distribution.

Goals/tasks In the article, the author, based on the analysis of data on offenses in the field of dissemination of false news, fake news as a tool for superprofits of distributors and as an instrument of information warfare, examines the issue of studying the old and establishing a new administrative responsibility in the proposed area. The purpose of the study is a critical analysis of legal acts, judicial practice and legal literature in the field of fake news dissemination. The author’s hypothesis, reflected in the study, is the need to improve administrative and tort legislation in this area.

Methodology Analysis, synthesis, comparison, abstraction, problem statement, hypothesis building, concretization, monitoring.

Conclusion Based on the results of the analysis, the author comes to the conclusion that the legislative framework in the field of dissemination of fake news is not sufficient and complete.

Keywords: administrative responsibility, responsibility for fake news, dissemination of false information, dissemination of fake news, false news.


Koshkarova (2018) – Koshkarova N.N. Fake news: creative solution or scam? [Fejkovye novosti: kreativnoe reshenie ili moshennichestvo?] // Bulletin of TSPU. 2018. No. 2 (191). URL: (date of access: 10/21/2022).

Evsikova, Staritsyn (2022) – Evsikova E. V., Staritsyn A. V. Some aspects of legal regulation of digital financial assets in the Russian Federation [Nekotorye aspekty normativno-pravovogo regulirovaniya cifrovyh finansovyh aktivov v Rossijskoj Federacii] //  Uchenye zapiski Crimean Federal University named after V. I. Vernadsky. Legal Sciences. 2022. №2. URL: (date of access: 11/23/2022).

Soroush Vosoughi, Deb Roy, Sinan Aral (2018) – Soroush Vosoughi, Deb Roy, Sinan Aral. The spread of true and false news online [The spread of true and false news online]. 9 Mar 2018 [Elektronnyj resurs] // 9 Mar 2018 [Electronic resource] // URL: (date of access: 10/21/2022)

Martynov, Lyapin, Kruglova (2021) – Martynov A.V., Lyapin I.F., Kruglova E.S. Actual issues of bringing to administrative responsibility for the dissemination of fake news [Aktual’nye voprosy privlecheniya k administrativnoj otvetstvennosti za rasprostranenie fejkovyh novostej] // Bulletin of UNN. 2021. №3. URL: (date of access: 11/21/2022).

Manoilo (2019) – Manoilo A. V. Fake news” as a threat to national security and an instrument of information management [«Fejkovye novosti» kak ugroza nacional’noj bezopasnosti i instrument informacionnogo upravleniya] // Moscow University Bulletin. Series 12. Political sciences. 2019. №2. URL: (date of access: 10/21/2022).

Chuiko (2022) – Chuiko A. A. Some aspects of liability for the placement of prohibited information [Nekotorye aspekty otvetstvennosti za razmeshchenie zapreshchennoj informacii] / A. A. Chuiko // Protection and protection of rights and legitimate interests in modern law: Collection of articles based on the results of an international scientific and practical conference. In 2 volumes, Simferopol, December 10, 2021 / Edited by E. V. Evsikova, I. V. Khmil. Volume I. – Simferopol: Limited Liability Company “Publishing House Typography “Arial”, 2022. – P. 697-702. – EDN PPISEJ.

Tatyanina, Kaminskaya (2022) – Tatyanina A. V., Kaminskaya Ya. V. Responsibility for the dissemination of fake news: questions of theory and law enforcement [Otvetstvennost’ za rasprostranenie fejkovyh novostej: voprosy teorii i pravoprimeneniya] // Bulletin of TIUE. 2022. No. 1 (35). URL: (date of access: 10/23/2022).

Kuzmenko, Popova (2020) – Kuzmenko Yu. A., Popova O. V. Fake propaganda as a tool for disinformation of society and the struggle for their distribution [Fejkovaya propaganda kak instrument dezinformacii obshchestva i bor’ba za ih rasprostranenie // Pravo i gosudarstvo: teoriya i praktika]. // Law and State: Theory and Practice. 2020. No. 10 (190). URL: (Date of access: 11/23/2022).

Zdunova (2021) – Zdunova D. I. Critical thinking as a principle of legal culture [Kriticheskoe myshlenie kak princip pravovoj kul’tury] // Education and Law. 2021. №5. URL: (date of access: 11/21/2022).

Osipov (2022) – Osipov R. A. Legal misinformation as a destructive factor in the legal consciousness of modern Russian society. [Pravovaya dezinformirovannost’ kak destruktivnyj faktor pravosoznaniya sovremennogo rossijskogo obshchestva] // Bulletin of SGYUA. 2022. №3 (146). URL: (date of access: 10/21/2022)

Georgios Petropoulos (2021) – Georgios Petropoulos. 26 August 2021 The great infodemic: time to consider a fake news tax [The great infodemic: time to consider a fake news tax] [Electronic resource] // URL: (Accessed: 10/21/2022)