No 6 (2025)

The subject of the research is the manipulative speech strategies of opinion leaders in the digital environment (primarily influencers and bloggers), considered within the context of their possible transformation into verbal crimes. The focus is not on manipulation per se, but on those forms of speech influence that, under certain conditions, may acquire criminal-legal significance: public calls, justification and romanticization of violence, dissemination of knowingly false information, desacralization of religious objects, normalization of enmity and discrimination. Special attention is paid to how manipulative strategies "integrate" into the elements of the crime composition – the object, the objective side, the subjective side, and the characteristics of the subject – and how the status of an opinion leader enhances the public danger of corresponding statements in the context of the blogosphere and online mass communication. The methodological basis of the research consists of an interdisciplinary approach, a combination of dogmatic analysis of criminal law, jurilinguistic and discourse analysis of the speech practices of influencers, as well as analysis of Russian judicial practice and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights in cases of verbal crimes. The scientific novelty of the work lies in proposing to consider manipulative speech strategies of opinion leaders not as a psychological "background" of communication, but as a structural element of the composition of verbal crime, influencing the object of encroachment, the objective side, the characteristics of the subject, and the subjective side. A three-level model of criminal-legal assessment of manipulative statements is justified (substantive-dispositive, contextual-communicative, and result-oriented-evaluative levels), adapted to the specifics of influencers and the blogosphere. Criteria for distinguishing permissible manipulation from criminally punishable speech acts are formulated, taking into account Russian law enforcement and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. It is concluded that it is necessary to consider the communicative status of opinion leaders and the influence strategies they use when addressing questions about the presence of intent and the degree of public danger, as well as the advisability of closer interaction between criminal-legal doctrine and judicial linguistics when qualifying statements in the digital environment.

In this article, the authors examine the issues related to administrative and legal regulation of information dissemination in the context of protecting the foundations of the constitutional order. The subject of the study is the administrative legal norms that establish liability for disseminating information in violation of the prescribed order through the lens of protecting constitutional values. The authors discuss the problem of freedom of mass media through the prism of fundamental constitutional principles. They develop a scientific concept of balancing the right to freedom of information and ensuring national security. The work analyzes and compares the existing constitutional and administrative norms in the field of information dissemination. Based on this analysis, the authors raise the question of the limits of the right to freedom of information dissemination and the role of administrative legal mechanisms in this context. The study also explores the practice of the Constitutional and Supreme Courts regarding the stated topic. The methods of legal interpretation and formal-legal methods are used, which allow for an interpretation of Chapter 1 of the Constitution, Article 29 of the Fundamental Law of the country, and the formulation of the authors' own concept. The work investigates 22 scholarly sources from domestic researchers on the subject. In particular, this includes the works of Avakyan S.A., Balekina V.S., Jafarova N.T., and other researchers. In one way or another, these authors and others have previously raised the issue of the inadmissibility of abusing the right to disseminate information. The main conclusions of the authors are their own conceptualization of the balance between the right to disseminate information and ensuring national security. The analysis of constitutional norms allows for the assertion that the realization of other constitutional values is impossible without ensuring national security. At the same time, restrictions on the right to disseminate information should only occur in the face of real and specific threats to fundamental constitutional values, not imaginary ones. The conclusion is drawn regarding the priority of national security within the system of constitutional values, which should be regarded as a guiding principle in the administrative legal mechanisms of liability for violations of the information dissemination order. Based on the analysis of existing constitutional principles, the authors present their own conclusion regarding the feasibility of current administrative and legal restrictions in the area of information dissemination and the mechanisms of administrative liability for violations of the established order of information dissemination.

This article is devoted to the analysis of modern problems and prospects for the development of public control in the system of local self-government. The subject of the research is regulatory legal acts regulating the implementation of public control at the local level and scientific works of legal scholars on this issue. The object of the study is social relations arising in the process of formation and implementation of public control. The article provides a deeper understanding of the role of public control and its importance for the development of civil society at the local level. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as the effectiveness of the implementation of public control over the activities of municipal bodies, issues of increasing the involvement of civil society in the development of local self-government, detailing the subject of public control, issues of improving the legal regulation of the participation of representatives of civil society in the implementation of local self-government. Special attention is paid to the development and strengthening of the position of the institution of municipal public control, increasing transparency in decision-making by local governments, increasing openness and accessibility of decisions taken at the local level. In the course of the work, systemic-structural, formal-logical, dialectical, comparative-legal, sociological research methods were used. The author's special contribution to the research of the topic is to draw the attention of the scientific community to the legal status, guarantees of implementation and strengthening of mechanisms for the participation of various social forces in the implementation of local self-government. The main conclusions of the study are the following. Firstly, according to the conducted research, municipal public control is able to perform, among other things, a stabilizing function in our society, suppressing the spread of misinformation in society. Secondly, according to established law enforcement practice, in the context of the current reform of local self-government and the emerging trend of liquidation of local self-government at the settlement level, the role of the village headman increases annually. In this regard, it seems advisable to include the village head among the subjects of public control. The novelty of the research is the identification of current problems and the introduction of a number of proposals for correction.

Modern constitutional theory and practice face a fundamental challenge posed by the growing gap between the static nature of the fundamental law and the dynamics of global transformations. The traditional model of constitutional lawmaking, historically developed as a reaction to specific crises, demonstrates a systemic inability to proactively ensure the stability of the political order in conditions of chronic uncertainty. This issue is especially relevant in an era of accelerated technological progress, global pandemics, hybrid conflicts, and the erosion of liberal democratic institutions. The central contradiction lies in the tension between the demand for the constitution to be an immutable foundation of statehood and the need for its flexible transformation in response to changing realities. The subject of the study is the concept of "adaptive constitutionalism," which combines elements of proactive constitutional design, the doctrine of the "living constitution," and strategies for constitutional resilience. The article analyzes institutional mechanisms capable of ensuring the adaptation of the constitutional order without undermining its stability and legitimacy. Special attention is given to the dual nature of adaptive mechanisms, which can be used both to strengthen democracy and to legitimize authoritarian transformation. The methodological basis of the research is a comparative legal method supplemented by formal legal analysis, a historical-legal approach, and systemic analysis to study the interconnections between the elements of the constitutional order. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the systemic integration of disparate approaches into a unified theoretical model that views the constitution as a complex, self-organizing system capable of internal transformation without losing its identity. The proposed "concentric structure" of adaptive constitution, in which an immutable constitutional core is surrounded by areas of strategic resilience and operational adaptability, overcomes the artificial opposition between stability and flexibility. The study reveals the dual nature of adaptive mechanisms and develops a system of institutional "safeguards" against their instrumentalization in authoritarian contexts. The practical significance of the paradigm is manifested in the formation of specific tools for legislators, courts, and civil society, including innovative digital technologies for civic participation. Russian constitutional practice demonstrates the potential for developing adaptive mechanisms through the activation of expert institutions and the digitalization of public participation procedures.