Military Review

In Russia, in the first reading, a law was adopted, allowing the Constitutional Court to not execute individual decisions of the ECHR

79
In the State Duma, in 1 reading, a bill was passed allowing the Constitutional Court "to recognize decisions of international courts, primarily the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), if they contradict the Russian Constitution as inappropriate," informs TASS.


In Russia, in the first reading, a law was adopted, allowing the Constitutional Court to not execute individual decisions of the ECHR


The initiators of the project are the heads of all factions led by the head of the committee on constitutional legislation, Vladimir Pligin.

Amendments to the Constitutional Law on the Constitutional Court stipulate that “at the request of the federal executive body vested with the competence to protect the interests of the Russian Federation when considering in an interstate body for the protection of human rights and freedoms, complaints filed against the Russian Federation on the basis of an international treaty, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation resolves the possibility of executing a decision of an interstate body for the protection of human rights and freedoms ”, the explanatory note says

According to Pligin, "the competence for such appeals to the Constitutional Court is vested in the President of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Russian Federation."

“If the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation adopts a resolution on the impossibility of executing a decision of an interstate body for the protection of human rights and freedoms, any actions (acts) aimed at the execution of its corresponding decision in Russia cannot be carried out (adopted),” the document says .

“The Constitution of the Russian Federation has the highest legal force and, thus, it has an undoubted priority,” said Pligin, introducing the bill. “No one will cancel this position.”

He noted that "the draft law does not cause any damage to investment activity or the protection of private property (in Russia)."

“Cases of possible non-fulfillment or reference to the assessment of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation will undoubtedly be of a single character,” the parliamentarian stressed.
Photos used:
ITAR-TASS / Vadim Zhernov
79 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. vsoltan
    vsoltan 2 December 2015 10: 37 New
    32
    Swing for a long time. But it’s already good.
    1. St Petrov
      St Petrov 2 December 2015 10: 40 New
      33
      the return of sovereignty is a necessary thing.
      1. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 2 December 2015 10: 46 New
        22
        Quote: c-Petrov
        the return of sovereignty is a necessary thing.

        I would say vital.
        1. Baloo
          Baloo 2 December 2015 11: 05 New
          12
          The ECtHR can dictate to members of the geyropsoyuz. We are not members.
          Does the ECHR side with us on a downward path, or am I not up to something? request
          1. Vladimirets
            Vladimirets 2 December 2015 11: 11 New
            +7
            Quote: Balu
            The ECtHR can dictate to members of the geyropsoyuz. We are not members.
            Does the ECHR side with us on a downward path, or am I not up to something?

            Its jurisdiction extends to members of the Council of Europe, which includes Russia.
            1. Baloo
              Baloo 2 December 2015 11: 33 New
              0
              Accepted, thanks. hi
              1. Mahmut
                Mahmut 2 December 2015 13: 40 New
                0
                It wouldn’t be easier to just amend the constitution. Or can the constitutional court ignore the decisions of the ECHR, but not the other courts? It turns out that only articles of the constitution remain under protection, but our Eurohumanoids can release a person convicted of a criminal article. But in the constitution, after all, only rights are spelled out, and responsibility is spelled out in other laws.
            2. Tor5
              Tor5 2 December 2015 12: 31 New
              +1
              Is this the advice in which our powers have been suspended for more than a year? Oh well... .
            3. The comment was deleted.
        2. Rom14
          Rom14 2 December 2015 12: 58 New
          0
          Still used capital in Russia returned ..
        3. The comment was deleted.
      2. Baikonur
        Baikonur 2 December 2015 10: 54 New
        +8
        I agree, I must step on!
        Now the wave of the Anglo.USA-human rights defenders info war will begin even steeper: Russia refuses to respect human rights!
        Putin is a dictator! Tyrant! Worse than Stalin!
        1. CONTROL
          CONTROL 2 December 2015 11: 21 New
          +4
          Quote: Baikonur
          Putin is a dictator! Tyrant! Worse than Stalin!

          ...It's better! better than Stalin ...
          "... and do not make yourself an intelligent person here! You are an officer ..." (do not take it personally ...)
      3. SibSlavRus
        SibSlavRus 2 December 2015 11: 08 New
        +3
        Even the prosecutor general (!) Repeatedly spoke out against the priority of international law over national laws.
        And this is the official state level.
        Although note that the opposition was. Yet in power now the primacy of international law on sovereign is maintained.

        But it is better to call a spade a spade: not an international LAW, but only agreed RULES of behavior (and they are circumvented and violated by the stronger with impunity).
        The apparatus of coercion and the definition of dispositions and sanctions in this area are not enough to the level of law. And it’s absolutely no more perfect, even in comparison with the national one. I think so.
        1. andj61
          andj61 2 December 2015 11: 37 New
          +2
          Quote: SibSlavRus
          But it is better to call a spade a spade: not an international LAW, but only agreed RULES of behavior (and they are circumvented and violated by the stronger with impunity).

          good Moreover, in order to please these rules, we voluntarily surrender part of our sovereignty, and sometimes this happens in violation of our own Constitution. Now they’re just finalizing the mechanism for observing the country's basic law — and they’re doing it right, though late.
          1. KVS
            KVS 2 December 2015 22: 14 New
            0
            there is only one problem ...
            the basic law of the country has long been no longer respected even by courts of general jurisdiction ...
            the chairman of the Constitutional Court Zorkin has repeatedly stated this ...
            and existing laws are interpreted as "drawbar, as you turn, it happened" ...
            the initiative is good, if only for non-compliance with internal laws they will be punished right up to execution regardless of their ranks and positions ... then there will be order ... and they deprived people of the last opportunity to achieve justice ...
        2. your1970
          your1970 2 December 2015 12: 50 New
          0
          "priority of international law" stop
          Yes there is no such thing, it does not exist in nature - there is international treaty priority(this was also the case in the Constitution of the USSR) after the signing of which there is ratification (approval in force), at the same time (or rather, before signing), a check is carried out for compliance with the Constitution and national legislation.

          The decisions of the ECHR are binding on us because we are members of the Council of Europe and upon entering agreed to abide by its decisions. But these decisions are not international law.
          To make it clear, the decision of our district court is strictly necessary for execution by all: state bodies, legal entities, citizens, etc. But at the same time it has no legislative power and does not create a precedent. They can be appealed, etc.
          So with the ECHR, their decisions, since we adopted their rules of the game, are binding on every specific occasionally - not binding on other cases (not valid right).
          Having exited these agreements, we lose the right to appeal to international courts ... Therefore, in the case of the Mistral, for example, we would lose the right to sue.
          Another question is how effectively we use this right ...
          1. Sam_gosling
            Sam_gosling 2 December 2015 13: 01 New
            -1
            does not exist in nature

            does not exist in nature

            Those. for 5-7 years, people learn a law that does not exist in nature? Locksmiths and plumbers decided that it did not exist. We need to tell the peasants, at least they are laughing.
            we would lose the right to sue

            Stop writing it immediately! I feel bad from your legal nihilism. The ECHR is only part of this supranational structure for regulating relations between state institutions. About the UN International Court of Justice, the UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the Economic Court of the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Court of Justice of the EU, the Supreme Court of the African Union, as well as specialized courts for special categories of international disputes, for example, to resolve disputes in the field of pollution control, disputes in the system GATT / WTO, investment disputes, etc. of course you have not heard. By the way, in the case of especially wooden countries, such as ours, the ad hoc rule applies, which allows you to create a court for a specific case.
            1. sgapich
              sgapich 2 December 2015 14: 52 New
              0
              You forgot to mention the "court of the public." Dixi.
            2. your1970
              your1970 2 December 2015 18: 33 New
              +1
              Well, if you study for 7 years, it’s probably going hard ...
              Give a codified example of INTERNATIONAL LAW, very interesting ...
              SMGS and stuff not to offer
              And at the same time explain why the decisions of the above courts are binding on us - simply because they publish international law (some kind of abstract?) Or because we joined and / or directly participated in their creation
              Also explain the binding enforcement of court decisions for non-aligned countries.
              If not difficult ..
              At the same time, it will be more understandable for locksmiths with plumbers on the VO ...
      4. Tor5
        Tor5 2 December 2015 12: 30 New
        +2
        Still to return the death penalty for terrorists, murderers, rapists and corrupt officials, and even with the confiscation of everything!
        1. Sam_gosling
          Sam_gosling 2 December 2015 13: 16 New
          -2
          The State Duma will not accept laws against themselves sic!
      5. cniza
        cniza 2 December 2015 12: 38 New
        +2
        Quote: c-Petrov
        the return of sovereignty is a necessary thing.



        Only it is necessary to bring it to the end and not stop half way.
        1. the villain
          the villain 2 December 2015 12: 45 New
          0
          Quote: cniza
          Only it is necessary to bring it to the end and not stop half way.

          And it’s high time to nationalize the central bank.
    2. Diana Ilyina
      Diana Ilyina 2 December 2015 10: 41 New
      24
      Thank God it's time! All of their courts are simply fictitious, or rather, they are courts for Russia! The Yukos affair is a vivid confirmation of this!
      1. bornikrub
        bornikrub 2 December 2015 10: 59 New
        +5
        Their courts are gangsters.
        1. CONTROL
          CONTROL 2 December 2015 11: 29 New
          0
          Quote: bornikrub
          Their courts are gangsters.

          Watch American cinema - how are court hearings? Loyers (lawyers) are stocked with links, extracts, precedents, ... and the laws themselves - dozens of thick volumes with amendments, interpretations (interpretations? ...) and explanations ...
          As a result, who will chat with whom; he’ll either buy the jury ... or he will frighten the judge ... The objectivity of the crime as a socially dangerous act is leveled - well, the looser made a mistake, will no longer do that (today! ...), we will regret, forgive, reproach and ... reward .. . (in any order, you can repeatedly ...)
          1. Sam_gosling
            Sam_gosling 2 December 2015 13: 07 New
            0
            There is no legislative system in our understanding, there a precedent system works with a small number of statutes. And the lawyers there are not called loers, as we commonly call here, but attony et lo. And their entire establishment (read thieves) uses their courts, so everything is fine.
      2. SibSlavRus
        SibSlavRus 2 December 2015 12: 18 New
        +2
        You forgot to mention the international court and tribunal in The Hague (example, Former Yugoslavia). That's where the trial was!
        The accused and witnesses there do not even live to see the verdict. The leadership and the citizens of the crowded NATO countries are also being judged.
        There are not even double, but triple standards.
        For example, Carla del Ponte (prosecutor for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda) was silent for 5 years about the atrocities of the Albanians in Kosovo, and then she released the book and repented! But the Bosnian Serbs mixed with mud. And there are many such corrupt hypocrites there.
        International chimera, not law!
    3. vovanpain
      vovanpain 2 December 2015 10: 53 New
      15
      This must be done a long time ago, but better late than never. Actually, it is necessary to change the entire colonial Yeltsin constitution. I imagine how liberals and grant-eaters will conquer now.
    4. Finches
      Finches 2 December 2015 11: 04 New
      +7
      Now some Helsinki group led by the old senile Alekseeva and other grant-eating shobla will whimper about the terrible genocide of the Russians! At the same time, like lousy jackals howling at the moon, they will obsequiously stretch their dead necks towards the American embassy in Moscow, hoping for a handout! laughing
    5. Eulogius
      Eulogius 2 December 2015 11: 10 New
      0
      This law should have been adopted a long time ago, to the delight of our "Masonic partners" and their minions in Russia.
      1. OlegLex
        OlegLex 2 December 2015 13: 08 New
        0
        Based on the context of your application, it turns out that the Law is directed against the Russian Federation? or how?
    6. Totalwar
      Totalwar 2 December 2015 11: 20 New
      0
      Quote: vsoltan
      Swing for a long time. But it’s already good.

      HALLELUJAH!!! We begin to reset the slave chains of "democracy" !!! fellow
      1. OlegLex
        OlegLex 2 December 2015 13: 29 New
        +1
        Partner!!!
        I do not need your Freedom!
        And yes! I do not need her,
        freedom to be a parent-1
        when my country is in trouble
        Freedom for you "partner"
        get into my wife’s underpants
        into my wallet, into the brains of my children ...
        But what about me?
        Never mind!!!
        God gave me free will, souls fly
        and the noise is birch and the laughter of my children
        wealth of the bowels and space
        wheat yellow seas
        and this is my homeland.
    7. Alexey Lesogor
      Alexey Lesogor 2 December 2015 12: 57 New
      +1
      Bravo to Parliament fellow Bravo good
    8. Finntroll
      Finntroll 2 December 2015 13: 39 New
      +1
      The news is extremely positive and I will paraphrase a little: A small step for the State Duma, a big step for the Fatherland. And it took only some 15 years, and also the war in Ukraine, shot down by the Su-24 and the lives of two soldiers .... Slowly, very slowly! Time is now ALL in absolute terms. But alas and oh, we still allow ourselves to scatter them, spending it on how the Police or the Police are all right, or how many time zones our country needs and according to "what time" we better live. We are still only talking about the policy of import substitution (let's not talk about the military-industrial complex, more or less at least something is being done) ....
  2. Vladimir71
    Vladimir71 2 December 2015 10: 39 New
    +8
    Well, finally it happened. We should expect a howling Liberals terrible howl)))
  3. volot-voin
    volot-voin 2 December 2015 10: 39 New
    +6
    Finally they decided. It is high time.
  4. VNP1958PVN
    VNP1958PVN 2 December 2015 10: 40 New
    +2
    In this regard, send Khodorkovsky a question, or will he "suck" us? it would be more specific ...
  5. Mikhail m
    Mikhail m 2 December 2015 10: 41 New
    +6
    Such laws must be adopted immediately in three readings. A few years ago.
    1. 341712
      341712 2 December 2015 10: 57 New
      +3
      Quote: Michael m
      Michael m Today, 10: 41 New
      Such laws must be adopted immediately in three readings. A few years ago


      As far as I know, there was an attempt at the beginning of 2000 ... shook (((((
  6. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 2 December 2015 10: 41 New
    +6
    Oh, now the fifth column will scream - we are returning to the lawless Middle Ages, where the strong one is always right. Have we ever come out of it?
  7. Roman1970
    Roman1970 2 December 2015 10: 42 New
    +6
    The ECHR, of course, is good, but for me, so in Russia, its laws, in particular, spiritual education are not an example higher than the European one.
  8. veksha50
    veksha50 2 December 2015 10: 45 New
    +8
    “allowing the Constitutional Court to“ declare unenforceable the decisions of international courts, primarily the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)"...

    Here it is necessary not to talk about the ECHR first of all, but about the Hague international court ... The ECHR has now awarded us somewhere 1,2 - 1,5 lard, but Hague in the Yukos case - either 30, or 50 lard ( I don’t remember already) ...

    And the decision of the Constitutional Court was caused precisely by these cases, but specifically for some reason, the Resolution of the Constitutional Court refers precisely to the decision of the ECHR ...

    It’s time to remove from the Constitution of the Russian Federation an article on the priority and supremacy of international law ...

    Journalists did not emphasize that it was in the Yukos case (30-50 lard) that there was no concrete court decision ... But in vain ... It turns out that they did not notice the elephant ...
    1. bornikrub
      bornikrub 2 December 2015 11: 02 New
      0
      Most likely, most journalists approve of the supremacy of international law:
      in their midst, liberal-selling still prevails.
  9. avva2012
    avva2012 2 December 2015 10: 45 New
    +5
    He noted that "the draft law does not cause any damage to investment activity or to protect frequent property (in Russia)."
    “Cases of possible non-fulfillment or reference to the assessment of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation will undoubtedly be of a single character,” the parliamentarian stressed.

    Do not forget to say, kindly, sir.
    “The Constitution of the Russian Federation has the highest legal force and, therefore, it has an undeniable priority,
    Well, that's right. It was necessary to begin with this.
  10. mamont5
    mamont5 2 December 2015 10: 46 New
    +5
    Quote: c-Petrov
    the return of sovereignty is a necessary thing.

    That's right. And it seems that the process has begun. Now we still need to save the Central Bank of the Russian Federation from the dictatorship and submission of the Fed.
  11. Sars
    Sars 2 December 2015 10: 46 New
    +4
    Quote: c-Petrov
    the return of sovereignty is a necessary thing.

    We also need the return of economic sovereignty - to remove the article on the central bank from the constitution.
  12. AlexTires
    AlexTires 2 December 2015 10: 46 New
    0
    Our laws are almost good, only judges are bad. And sometimes, an international court may be fairer than homegrown. And on the other hand, now only the lazy one is not trying to bite Russia, slander or put a bullet in the back. So that there is no definite answer and only hope of God's judgment remains.
  13. sa-ag
    sa-ag 2 December 2015 10: 46 New
    +1
    The sense of this law is that if the Constitution of the Republic of Tajikistan, Article 15 reads: "... 4. The generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation are an integral part of its legal system. If other rules are established by an international treaty of the Russian Federation than those stipulated by law then the rules of the international treaty apply. "
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 2 December 2015 11: 22 New
      0
      Quote: sa-ag
      if the Constitution of the Republic of Tajikistan, Article 15 states: "..

      It’s always surprising that newcomers to Sait’s visitors from foreign countries always know the constitution of the Russian Federation better than ourselves. And what is especially surprising is that they know only our constitution, since they are not interested in their own.
      Yes Sahag, my foreign “friend.” Don't pay for knowing your constitution, huh?
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 2 December 2015 12: 06 New
        -2
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Do not pay for the knowledge of their constitution, huh?

        Like the deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation :-)
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 2 December 2015 15: 49 New
          0
          Quote: sa-ag
          Like the deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation :-)

          You often look after your deputies, but in our house we will figure it out.
  14. Flinky
    Flinky 2 December 2015 10: 47 New
    +2
    I feel that by 2018 there will be an awesome gift - the new Constitution.
    1. avva2012
      avva2012 2 December 2015 10: 54 New
      +4
      Maybe to 2017? And not only the Constitution.
      1. CONTROL
        CONTROL 2 December 2015 11: 32 New
        +1
        Quote: avva2012
        Maybe to 2017? And not only the Constitution.

        ... by 2017? ..
        Symbolically! ...
    2. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 2 December 2015 11: 03 New
      0
      Quote: Flinky
      I feel that by 2018 there will be an awesome gift - the new Constitution.

      With an 8 year term of president? laughing
  15. 76SSSR
    76SSSR 2 December 2015 10: 47 New
    +3
    It is high time to equate the ECHR with the district courts of general jurisdiction ... not a big bird to put the COP on the scales.)
  16. Wedmak
    Wedmak 2 December 2015 10: 52 New
    +2
    Oh, we are waiting for the howl of the liberals. Whoever bought the headphones is to blame.
    1. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 2 December 2015 11: 05 New
      +2
      Quote: Wedmak
      Oh, we are waiting for the howl of the liberals. Whoever bought the headphones is to blame.

      Do you hear a howl outside the window? It is they-the liberals howl .. the blood of the patriot is thirsty ... laughing
      You and your nickname are fine .. a conspiracy of their filthy, but what a villainous weed .. laughing You look and fight back, do not see them the body of the commissar ..
  17. samara-58
    samara-58 2 December 2015 10: 53 New
    +1
    And who did this law slow down before? !! "Name of sisteraaaaa !!!"
    1. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 2 December 2015 11: 21 New
      0
      Quote: Samara-58
      Name Sisteraaaa !!! "


      Sssestraaaa !!! .. Duck .. laughing KVN 2001
  18. Turkir
    Turkir 2 December 2015 10: 54 New
    +2
    At last. They swayed for a long time.
    Whose "sins" are corrected?
  19. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 2 December 2015 10: 54 New
    +2
    Well, now I would have to make changes to the law on the Central Bank.
  20. Sergey-8848
    Sergey-8848 2 December 2015 10: 55 New
    +4
    The ECHR has long begun to interpret the term "human rights" in the way the political situation develops and at any given time to the customer. Therefore, it was high time to give them a shortcut.
  21. Yak-3P
    Yak-3P 2 December 2015 10: 58 New
    0
    paper there .. paper here .. who knows the thread of his deputy from his locality in the State Duma ?? so the King and K wrote, they decided - to send them to the Heypop one more time
  22. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 2 December 2015 10: 58 New
    0
    Well, as the "great combinator" used to say: "... the ice has broken, gentlemen of the jury"! It is enough to endure the arbitrariness created by the West towards Russia under the guise of the so-called "struggle for human rights," they do not notice the logs in their eyes, but they see a mote in the eyes of others. The chicken is pecking, I think the turn will come to the nationalization of the Central Bank! Moreover, the recent events in the light of the Turkish provocation will give a new impetus to the revision of the treacherous decisions adopted by the gang of "liberal traitors", the time has come ...
  23. nivander
    nivander 2 December 2015 10: 59 New
    +1
    The ECHR is an American project and therefore judges from the ECHR do their best to turn their faces away from Guantanamo, the NSA’s surveillance of a network of arrests all over the world. But when you look at the Russian Federation, they start to shake them like drug people
  24. dmit-xnumx
    dmit-xnumx 2 December 2015 11: 03 New
    +2
    But we will come to the Constitution of the USSR of 1936.
  25. zekaze1980
    zekaze1980 2 December 2015 11: 05 New
    0
    For all 100 I support, and yet, let's give normal laws for ordinary citizens and for complicated citizens (Serdyukovs, Chubais, etc.) individually for them laws!
  26. Dwarfik
    Dwarfik 2 December 2015 11: 08 New
    0
    It’s high time, and then some sort of Yuyusovskiy court of state N issued a decision for everyone and everyone! They pull too much on themselves!
  27. Cap.nemo58rus
    Cap.nemo58rus 2 December 2015 11: 08 New
    0
    Well, thank God, they gave birth! The ECHR has its own rights as a European man, and we have ours. They have no concept of blasphemy, but we, thank God, still remain.
  28. mik0588
    mik0588 2 December 2015 11: 11 New
    0
    "... What the Bolsheviks said so long happened ...")))
  29. Ruswolf
    Ruswolf 2 December 2015 11: 14 New
    +2
    And the article 15 of the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus “On the Priority of International Law” was adopted only because they themselves were eager for Europe, and in the WTO they adapted documents to their standards.
    Constitution This is primarily a national document and she cannot express the opinions of others!
    The constitution can only express the opinion of its citizens!
    Acceptance of someone else’s opinion (law, regulation, etc.) - contradicts the sovereignty of the state, turning it into a dependent.
  30. guzik007
    guzik007 2 December 2015 11: 26 New
    0
    Why are everyone here happy? Of course, this ban will pinch the tails of every hodor, just separate the flies from the cutlets: much more appeals to the European Court were ordinary citizens who were victims of the police and bureaucratic lawlessness.
    if such principled people sit in the Kremlin, then they should first of all break the Central Bank through the knee. Ha! how can you wait! there are the interests of big bosses, try to shove. And according to the rights of the population, as a sickle by reason, this is welcome. Yes, they will present it in the wake of the ur-patriotic frenzy, like candy. and tomorrow one of us will be kneaded, pushed around in the "Basmanny courts" and will receive a final verdict-sentence and is not subject to appeal! Then it starts scratching turnips. Not from that start. Independence begins primarily with the ECONOMY. That's when they announce to us that today we have our own payment system, our own state banking system and the ban on the circulation of US rubles, that's when I believe.
    Now all the patriots who have green stockings in their stockings start to minus. How-on the holy bit.
  31. heretic
    heretic 2 December 2015 11: 31 New
    0
    Quote: vovanpain
    This must be done a long time ago, but better late than never. Actually, it is necessary to change the entire colonial Yeltsin constitution. I imagine how liberals and grant-eaters will conquer now.

    And we also need a law on the deprivation of Russian citizenship of those "patriots" who obsessed RUSSIA, but at the same time enjoy the rights of a citizen of the Russian Federation.
  32. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 2 December 2015 11: 37 New
    +1
    “Cases of possible non-execution or appeal to the assessment of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation will undoubtedly be of a singular nature”

    Strange position. What do single mean? "Single" means that if desired, the question can be resolved, in the interests of those who bring more, or sit higher. It seems that they are fighting corruption, and they are opening a new, not plowed field. It is necessary to abolish completely, so that everyone would always be equal before the law.
  33. Ruswolf
    Ruswolf 2 December 2015 11: 39 New
    +2
    guzik007
    Why are everyone here happy? .....

    We are glad that the hope began to appear that Russia is dropping from itself everything that was imposed on it.
    The European Court enjoyed ordinary citizens who were victims of the police and bureaucratic lawlessness.

    Therefore, they complained that it was a single US program to undermine power in the Russian Federation. Turning the Constitution of the Russian Federation into a formal piece of paper binding it on the hands of international law. More precisely, the law of the United States and the EU !. So many issues were not resolved on their own!
    Now it will be possible to adopt sovereign norms and rules in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
    IMHO! hi
    1. guzik007
      guzik007 2 December 2015 13: 20 New
      0
      Turning the Constitution of the Russian Federation into a formal piece of paper binding it on the hands of international law.
      -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
      --------
      As I understand it, minus yours. Have you read it to the end? In a piece of paper, as you say, the Constitution was turned into an article on the independence of the Central Bank from the state, first of all. And the independence of the state is primarily economic independence. The house is not being built from the roof, from the foundation. It was necessary to start from the foundation. And everything else, like the courts and so on, was only applied. And so ... a swing on a ruble-hit for a penny. Moreover - what is it - "in individual cases"? So there is no reason "toss bonnets into the air"
      1. Ruswolf
        Ruswolf 2 December 2015 13: 27 New
        0
        guzik007
        As I understand it, minus yours.

        Misunderstood!
        I am able to respect the opinions of others. And if I’m minus (which is very, very rare) then I’m not hiding, but I do it openly and explain why!
        hi
      2. The comment was deleted.
  34. fa2998
    fa2998 2 December 2015 11: 55 New
    0
    Quote: Vladimirets
    Its jurisdiction extends to members of the Council of Europe, which includes Russia.

    Of course, I agree that the Constitution and laws of the Russian Federation come first. It just bothers me that under the ANTI-PEOPLE government the sound criticism will soon be equated with terrorism and anti-state action. As Sharapov said, “it’s possible to crush the law, another ...” because only “red” and “white.” You can only say that something unpleasant to the authorities — and you are equated with Navalny and Co. hiRS-And now they will write laws without looking back!
  35. Zolotse
    Zolotse 2 December 2015 12: 08 New
    0
    In general, it surprises me that with such a “fair” world refereeing, with double standards, we dragged on for so long ... And somehow it’s very timid of the “individual”. We must introduce that all decisions that are contrary to national laws and decisions are a priority for our legislation. Then we can be called, albeit with a tight fit, a sovereign country
  36. kitamo
    kitamo 2 December 2015 12: 10 New
    0
    and rightly so it's time
  37. Taygerus
    Taygerus 2 December 2015 12: 24 New
    0
    let's hope that the central bank at the legislative level is next, as kakly yell - laughing

    Death to the liberals!
  38. TeKuS
    TeKuS 2 December 2015 12: 29 New
    0
    Finally .
  39. novel66
    novel66 2 December 2015 12: 31 New
    +2
    applaud while standing !! and whom our constitution does not suit can bring down where you like!
  40. Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 2 December 2015 12: 42 New
    -1
    Well, at least something. And of course, amendments to the Constitution are needed.
  41. Sam_gosling
    Sam_gosling 2 December 2015 12: 46 New
    -1
    But nothing that Art. 15 prioritizes the application of international law?
    If other rules are established by an international treaty of the Russian Federation than those provided by law, the rules of the international treaty shall apply.

    Since the arbitration was killed, the judicial system as such has disappeared in this country.
    Aslo, how will our ministry of external relations screech about compliance with international law if we ourselves cannot comply with them? Some kind of sur.
    1. your1970
      your1970 2 December 2015 19: 12 New
      0
      Apparently for 7 years of study you have not understood the difference between "international law" and "international treaty", Art. 15 talks about the contract fool
  42. Yar Ga
    Yar Ga 2 December 2015 13: 09 New
    0
    Hooray !!! The path to independence !!!
  43. Flipman
    Flipman 2 December 2015 13: 14 New
    0
    how now they’ll start screaming at the expense of the Yukos case! otherwise the priority was like a bone in the throat!
  44. linadherent
    linadherent 2 December 2015 13: 22 New
    0
    Break off, liberals and pedecrates ... good
  45. atamankko
    atamankko 2 December 2015 13: 57 New
    0
    We must not depend on laws contrary to our Constitution.
  46. Gunther
    Gunther 2 December 2015 16: 58 New
    0
    I agree with Nikolai71, the right decision, it is high time, otherwise the supremacy of international law over national law was prescribed in the EBN Constitution.
  47. proletarian
    proletarian 2 December 2015 23: 59 New
    0
    The first "stone" has been thrown; I hope that in Russia, national laws will "prevail" over supranational ones.