No 11 (2025)

The article substantiates the thesis that human civilization at the present stage of its development is a civilization of law, in which the most important regulator of social interaction is the rule of law as a form of human freedom and the embodiment of the rational principles of human community. However, at present we are witnessing an extremely dangerous weakening of its regulatory power in the space of global relations and a widespread increase in arbitrariness as the “right” of force on such a scale that the question of the survival of humanity is on the agenda. It is becoming increasingly obvious that law, losing its support in spiritual and moral values (and this is a feature of our time), is not capable of coping with the systemic challenges of modernity. It can be a norm of freedom and a guarantee against arbitrariness only if society has reached the appropriate level of moral maturity. However, the current ideology of consumption with its pursuit of material values at the expense of spiritual ones, with the demonstrative consumption of some while underconsuming others, with the devaluation of honest work and creativity creates the preconditions for ever greater spiritual degradation. Technological progress contributes to the increase in global uncertainty and the erosion of spiritual and moral values. We are now witnessing the destructive potential of its achievements in military conflicts. Less noticeable, but no less dangerous is its influence on the strengthening of the transhumanistic (i.e. non-humanistic) vector of development of technogenic civilization. Although tough competition in the technological sphere dictates the need for Russia to increase its efforts in this race, we cannot help but discuss the possible consequences of such escalation, fraught with the loss of control over the development of technology. Obviously, the most important role in the discussion and resolution of such issues belongs to the scientific community. From domestic lawyers this requires, first of all, further efforts in the field of development of philosophical and legal research, focused on understanding the challenges of modernity in the context of the current tasks of improving law-making and law enforcement practice.

The article analyzes the key directions of reforming the justice system in the Russian Federation, viewed as a comprehensive transformation affecting the fundamental basis of legal regulation, citizens’ constitutional rights, and the technological paradigms of public administration. It explores the dialectical tension between the state’s administrative drive for modernization and centralization and the need to protect the autonomy of legal institutions and individual rights. A doctrinal and comparative legal analysis of reforms in the legal profession, notaries, and the digitalization of justice is provided. The objectives include: identifying the constitutional and legal risks of the concept of lawyers’ monopoly on legal representation; examining notary reform through the prism of public law theory; critically analyzing the ideology of client-centricity and the transition to a registry-based model of public administration; and assessing the ethical and legal challenges associated with the introduction of artificial intelligence in legal proceedings. Digital transformation fundamentally alters the nature of legal fact and creates new challenges to the principles of legal certainty and the right to a fair trial.

The article is devoted to a comprehensive review of the legislative process of public authorities of the Russian Federation at the federal level. A general description of legislative activity in modern Russia is given, an overview of its regulatory framework is presented, and trends in the legislative process in the context of social transformations are identified. In addition, attention is paid to the systemic problems of the domestic legislative process associated with legal defects in regulating this area. In the context of disclosing possible areas for improving the legislative process, the author draws attention to the experience of foreign countries, emphasizing the increasing role of digital technologies in this area. A forecast of scenarios for the development of the legislative process in Russia is proposed.

The article examines the legal and organizational problems related to the management of public property assigned to state higher education institutions. The focus is on the institutional imbalance between the autonomy of universities and the restrictive regime of operational property management established by civil and budgetary legislation. Universities are often unable to perform effectively a wide range of public functions – from educational, scientific, and expert to museum and library, as well as territorial development – both de jure and de facto, due to a lack of flexibility and efficiency in managing their assigned public property complexes. The authors propose to replace the archaic institute of operational management with a more flexible regime in order to create a management model focused on the effective use of public property for the implementation of various functions prescribed to universities by Russian legislation.

The article is devoted to the peculiarities of the regional integration policy pursued by the state authorities of the Russian Empire in relation to the annexed lands in the 19th century. An appeal to the realities of the past era predetermined the reliance on the principle of historicism. Four main models used in the period under review in relation to different regions are identified and substantiated. The differences in the approach to integration in relation to the western and eastern outskirts of the Empire, as well as the Central Asian lands, are shown. The relationship between territorial integration and the integration of the population, its inclusion in the general orbit of socio-economic and 19 political-legal relations of the state is substantiated. The importance of forming a single legal space to ensure state unity is emphasized. It is concluded that the integration policy implied, first of all, the establishment of an effective management system in the new territories, and the government pursued a fairly flexible policy, taking into account local specifics and using the already established structures. However, the preservation of the existing legal systems in certain annexed territories led to a rupture of the Russian legal space, violated its integrity, which in turn negatively affected the unity of the state.