The “annexation” of Crimea by the Russian Federation and the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine have resulted in widespread human rights abuses. Both Ukraine and the Russian Federation are signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights and the Convention should apply within the territory and to the conflict. However, recent applications to the European Court of Human Rights reveal a great deal of confusion over which State bears responsibility for protecting human rights in different parts of Ukraine. This article seeks to shine a light on this problem presenting a deep analysis of the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence and discussing how it applies to both the conflict in Eastern Ukraine and “annexed” Crimea. It addresses salient issues such as responsibility for the actions of non-state actors and armed groups in Eastern Ukraine and whether the legality of the “annexation” has any bearing on the human rights obligations of each State. The article presents a detailed critique of recent judgments from the European Court of Human Rights arguing that the jurisprudence of the Court has created a bewildering degree of complexity and uncertainty as to the obligations of each State and discussing the practical implications of this uncertainty.

Free economic zones have become an essential part of the world economy in recent history. The voluntary entry of the Peninsula of Crimea into the Russian Federation as one of its constituent regions, lead to the adoption of the social and economic development commitments of this region by our state. For this reason, one of the most important goals for authorities of the Russian Federation is to develop the social, economic, and other spheres of the society. The establishment of the free economic zone in the Republic of Crimea and the Federal City of Sevastopol became one of solutions to this problem. This article analyzes the issues of legislation on the free economic zone in the territories of the Republic of Crimea and the Federal City of Sevastopol and aims to find solutions of these issues. This research is based on the application of comparative, retrospective and formal juridical analysis of the legislation and research papers dedicated to questions of the free economic zones and other territories with a special legal regime for conducting entrepreneurial activity (territories of advanced social and economic development, the Free Port of Vladivostok, special economic zones in the Russian Federation). In particular, the norms of current legislation on goals and terms of creation of the free economic zone in the territories of the Republic of Crimea and the Federal City of Sevastopol, the management of the free economic zone and the implementation of entrepreneurial activities within its borders were analyzed. We conclude that it is necessary to improve the current legislation on the free economic zone in the territory of the Republic of Crimea and makes several suggestions for optimization its provisions. The results achieved can be used both in the lawmaking process and as a foundation for further researches.

The crime of genocide, as one of the most complex crimes ever to be examined and prosecuted, is often referred to as the “crime of crimes.” It is never the result of a tragic accident, but always a deliberate, conscious, and intentional act. It is never a single act, but a collection of acts committed by a number of people acting in consort. Several elements of genocide prescribed by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948) distinguish it from other core crimes. The first one is the intention to destroy a protected group – the very specific intention that brings into question the core existence of the group itself. The second element is the focus of the perpetrator’s intent on a particular group; his intent on destruction has to be directed against a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group. No other groups are included on that list. Given the significance to the protected group, this paper will focus on some important issues relating to the protected groups and their identifications, both in legal theory and jurisprudence of international courts. It will also cover some considerations on the exclusion of some other groups that are left unprotected from genocide.

The article is devoted to the consideration of problems in connection with the introduction of the institution of criminal liability for legal persons in Germany and Russia. The authors analyze the doctrinal discussions that have been held for over 200 years with respect to this problem and the arguments raised by supporters and opponents of introducing criminal liability for legal persons. They also consider the modern practice of making legal persons liable. In particular, the institution of “quasi criminal” liability of legal persons in Germany and their administrative liability in Russia is examined. The comparative study shows that there are many similarities with regard to this question in both Germany and Russia. 

According to the Concept of Long-Term Social and Economic Development of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2020, in the next few years the imbalance in world trade, as well as capital flows, will continue to increase, which will lead to changes in foreign exchange rates. That is why the final goal is to promote priority national interests in the framework of bilateral and multilateral trade and economic relations with foreign countries. In pursuit of this goal, the following improvement of customs regulation, and export and currency control mechanisms in the Russian Federation will be aimed at reducing barriers to foreign economic activity of innovative enterprises. Achievement of the set goals today is subject to the influence of a constantly changing world and new technologies. New technologies are increasingly penetrating the life of modern society. Meanwhile, the speed of introduction of new technologies is such that point changes in current legislation will gradually nullify the effectiveness of legal regulation as a system. Therefore, the changes today should concern not only the monetary and financial sphere, but also take into account other areas. The article is devoted to the study of crucial problems of implementing modern technologies from the legal point of view. Thus, at the international level, uncertainty still remains over issues of currency and legal responsibility, which is largely due to various legal regulations. Starting in 2018, the new rules for calculating the liquidity of banks and the ratio of borrowed funds to assets will come into full force in the European Union. Several large banks in France, dissatisfied with the policy of the European Central Bank (ECB), even appealed to the European Court of Justice for a change in the rules. According to FxPro analysts’ reports, economic growth in Europe has accelerated slightly, and the ECB is on the verge of abandoning its ultra-easy monetary policy in the direction of neutral and is preparing for further tightening. One of the subjects of the research is the system of monetary relations from the point of view of analyzing the problems of ensuring its stability, including criminal and legal means. The purpose of this analysis is to illustrate how to protect the domestic foreign exchange market and the challenges facing the monetary system today. The article has been prepared on the basis of legal and technical analysis of legal norms, as well as comparative legal and formal logical methods and system analysis methodology. In the authors’ view, this could contribute to a uniform approach to the problem, without which it would be extremely difficult to achieve success. It is concluded that in view of new challenges facing the global economy and the emergence of cryptocurrency, it is necessary to rethink the phenomenon of currency crimes, to study the experience of combating monetary crimes in other countries and to evaluate the common mechanisms for combating currency crimes. However, this approach cannot be considered legitimate insofar as different interpretation of the same term in different branches of legislation does not allow full realization of the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens. After all, branches of legislation do not exist in isolation from one another, but are interrelated. It is concluded that the person conducting proceedings in a case can and is obliged, based on an analysis of the circumstances under consideration, to proceed from a comprehensive assessment of the category used in making the decision as applied to its understanding in aggregate in various branches of legislation. It is also necessary to create a universal state database for judges, prosecutors, investigators, etc., which would allow free cross-sectoral information exchange on the same subject. The new digital economy also requires retraining of civil servants and state employees, including the judiciary branch of government. At the same time, the article deals with the transformation of the legal profession in the future. It is concluded that classical legal education will not sink into oblivion. However, the lawyers of the future will play a slightly different role, namely, they will act as machinists, builders, operators and inventors of a useful model of legal relations for robot judges.

This article explores constitutional regulation as it relates to the foundation of economic relations. The proper norms and divisions of the basic laws (constitutions) of states are analyzed from the historical and legal point of view: the authors develop an idea of “economic constitutions.” This conception is based on the ideas of American and European economists and lawyers, including the works of the Nobel-prize winner James Buchanan, the author of the conception of “constitutional economy.” The analysis of the individual, the most obvious norms of “economic constitutions” is made in their evolution. The common regularities of formation, development, and functioning of “economic constitutions” are researched. “Economic constitutions” are considered as the immanent legal expression of material conditions of life of communities. The research is based on the criteria of the correspondence of “economic constitutions” with the demands of social economic development of state organized communities. The genesis of “economic constitutions” of the USA, France, Germany and other states, for example, Latin American states are researched. Special attention is paid to “economic constitutions” of socialist and postsocialist states, especially to the “economic constitution” of the Russian Federation. The peculiarities in the development of the newest “economic constitutions” based on the basic laws of Finland and Switzerland are revealed. The authors develop an idea that “economic constitutions” are not limited to the questions of the influence of a state on an economy and of the determination of the borders of state regulation. Economic rights and freedoms, questions of interrelations of labor and capital, financial system, taxation, etc. are considered as the components of “economic constitutions.” Taken into account is that modern international standards are refused from the secondary role of the social economic rights of mankind. The conclusion is made about the interrelationship of the progress of “economic constitutions” and social economic rights in the information society that are able to ensure the fundamentally new level of a direct democracy in the management of a state.