Russian Law Journal

Advanced search

Equalization of Legal Status with Respect to Gender

Full Text:


This article discusses the current trends in Russian legal doctrine and legislation on aligning the legal status of women and men, taking into account the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights.

It analyzes and critically reflects upon the gender aspects and content of those branches of Russian law in which such aspects are most clearly represented, either objectively or by tradition – techniques for gender neutralization of legal norms, the establishment of gender privileges and gender restrictions in legal status.

Constitutional law: the basic premise of gender equality, preferential treatment for certain categories of citizens, gender limitations; problems of quotas for women’s representation in government, administration and other structures, provisions for women’s representation in party electoral lists, etc.

Criminal Law: trends in the gender neutralization of crimes of a sexual nature while maintaining criminal responsibility for offenses against pregnant women, etc.; gender neutralization of preferential treatment in the punishment of persons with children.

Family Law: Russia’s traditional view of marriage and parenthood; privileges for women in the divorce process, disputes about children, maintenance obligations; gender restrictions on adoption, assisted reproductive technologies; variants of gender neutralization of some family law norms.

Labor law: the preservation of absolute protection of the rights and interests of pregnant women and mothers of young children; the trend for gender neutralization of the legal status of parents of young children; continued restrictions on women’s access to certain areas of work.

Analysis of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights shows that on a number of gender equality aspects in Russian legislation and law enforcement practice, the views of these courts differ greatly. At the same time, there is a convergence of views on certain issues (for example, on the implementation of the legal status of persons with family responsibilities).

About the Authors

Nadezhda Tarusina
Demidov Yaroslavl State University
Russian Federation

Professor, Head of the Social and Family Law Department, Dean of the Faculty of Law,

10 Sovetskaya str., Yaroslavl, 150000

Elena Isaeva
Demidov Yaroslavl State University
Russian Federation

Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law,

10 Sovetskaya str., Yaroslavl, 150000


1. Blanpain,R. European Labour Law (Wolters Kluwer 2008).

2. Choudhury B. New rationales for women on boards, 34(3) Oxford J. of Legal Stud. 511, 523 (2014).

3. DuBois C. The impact of ‘Soft’ affirmative action policies on minority hiring in executive leadership: the Case of the NFL’s Rooney rule, 18(1) Am. L. & Econ. Rev. 208–253 (2016). DOI: 10.1093/aler/ahv019.

4. De Vos M., Culliford Ph. Gender quotas for company boards Cambridge – Antwerp – Portland 3 (2014).

5. Hyden A., Allman M. Children and Same Sex Families (Jordan publishing LTD 2012).

6. Hennette V. More women – but which women? The rule and the politics of gender balance at the European Court of Human Rights, 26(1) The Eur. J. of Int’l L. 195–221 (2015). DOI: 10.1093/ejil/chv004.

7. Isaeva E., Sokolov A., Tarusina N. Gender and Civic Engagement in Modern Russia, 25(3) Annals for Istran and Mediterranian Stud. Series Historia et Soc, 457–458 (2015).

8. Lister R. ANordic nirvana? Gender, citizenship, and social justice in the Nordic welfare states, 16(2) Soc. Pol.: Int’l Stud. in Gender, St. and Soc’y 242–278 (2009). DOI: 10.1093/sp/jxp007.

9. Kravchuk N., The Child’s Right to Express His/Her Views in the Context of Russian Culture and Democracy, 2(3) Russian L. J. 31–35 (2014).

10. Maleshin D. The Russian Style of Civil Procedure, 21(2) Emory Int’l L. Rev. 545–548 (2007).

11. Tarusina N.N., Isaeva E.A. Gender Game’ on the Field of Russian Jurisprudence, 5(1) Eur. J. of Soc. Sci. Educ. & Res. 380–384 (2015).

12. Tarusina N.N. European Experience and National Traditions in Russian Family Law, 2(3) Russian L. J. 97–108 (2015). DOI: 10.17589/2309-8678-2015-3-2-97-108.

13. Tarusina N.N., Isaeva E.A. Gender Tendency of Russian Political Activity from the Perspective of Jurisprudence, 11(12) Am. J. of Applied Sci. 1976–1979 (2014). DOI: 10.3844/ajassp.2014.1976.1979.

14. Tobin Brian. Marriage Equality in Ireland: The Politico-Legal Context, 30(2) Int’l J. of L., Pol’y & The Fam. 115–130 (2016). DOI: 10.1093/lawfam/ebw002.

15. Лушников А.М., Лушникова М.В., Тарусина Н.Н. Гендер в законе [Lushnikov A.M. Lushnikova M.V., N.N. Tarusina. Gender v zakone [Lushnikov A.M. Lushnikova M.V., N.N. Tarusina. Gender in law]] 194–195 ( Prospekt, Мoscow 2015).

For citation:

Tarusina N., Isaeva E. Equalization of Legal Status with Respect to Gender. Russian Law Journal. 2016;4(3):74-93.

Views: 1248

ISSN 2309-8678 (Print)
ISSN 2312-3605 (Online)