{"title":"大规模侵犯权利和自由的国家责任:美利坚合众国和俄罗斯联邦经验的比较分析","authors":"Diana Zurabovna Gogeniia","doi":"10.7256/2454-0706.2024.7.71190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The subject of the study is the state responsibility in the form of compensation for harm, committed by massive violation of human rights and freedoms. The object of the study is the actual and historical forms of the state responsibility in the legal systems of the Russian Federation and the United States of America. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as: the implementation of state responsibility for the damage caused within the framework of private law (regular) and public law (emergency) mechanisms; law enforcement practice of the Russian Federation and the United States on issues of state compensation for harm; the practice of adopting \"compensatory acts\". Special attention is paid to the principle of sovereign immunity of the state, its historical origin and modern understanding, differences of its interpretation in the Russian Federation and the United States; identification of common features and differences in approaches to the institution of state compensation for harm in the two countries; proposals for improving national legislation in the context of the topic under consideration. Using a comparative method, the author illustrates the processes of formation of this institution in the studied legal systems, defines the differences between the institutions of compensation for \"private law\" and mass harm committed by the state. The legal research presented in the article allows to conclude that the established practice of implementing this institution has similar features in both studied states, which allows us to use each other's experience. The novelty of the study is justified by conducting a comparative study of state-sponsored compensation institutions in the Russian Federation and the United States with an emphasis on mass harm, which revealed a general trend towards the adoption of \"compensatory acts\", the purpose of which is to circumvent the judicial procedure for dispute settlement in such situations. A proposal was also formulated on the need to specify Russian legislation in the field of compensation for mass environmental damage, including through the introduction of compensatory mechanisms. The practical significance of the work lies in the possibility of using its results to improve legislation and law enforcement practice in the field of state compensation for mass harm.\n","PeriodicalId":503816,"journal":{"name":"Право и политика","volume":"2020 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"State responsibility for the massive violation of rights and freedoms : a comparative analysis of the experience of the United States of America and the Russian Federation\",\"authors\":\"Diana Zurabovna Gogeniia\",\"doi\":\"10.7256/2454-0706.2024.7.71190\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The subject of the study is the state responsibility in the form of compensation for harm, committed by massive violation of human rights and freedoms. The object of the study is the actual and historical forms of the state responsibility in the legal systems of the Russian Federation and the United States of America. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as: the implementation of state responsibility for the damage caused within the framework of private law (regular) and public law (emergency) mechanisms; law enforcement practice of the Russian Federation and the United States on issues of state compensation for harm; the practice of adopting \\\"compensatory acts\\\". Special attention is paid to the principle of sovereign immunity of the state, its historical origin and modern understanding, differences of its interpretation in the Russian Federation and the United States; identification of common features and differences in approaches to the institution of state compensation for harm in the two countries; proposals for improving national legislation in the context of the topic under consideration. Using a comparative method, the author illustrates the processes of formation of this institution in the studied legal systems, defines the differences between the institutions of compensation for \\\"private law\\\" and mass harm committed by the state. The legal research presented in the article allows to conclude that the established practice of implementing this institution has similar features in both studied states, which allows us to use each other's experience. The novelty of the study is justified by conducting a comparative study of state-sponsored compensation institutions in the Russian Federation and the United States with an emphasis on mass harm, which revealed a general trend towards the adoption of \\\"compensatory acts\\\", the purpose of which is to circumvent the judicial procedure for dispute settlement in such situations. A proposal was also formulated on the need to specify Russian legislation in the field of compensation for mass environmental damage, including through the introduction of compensatory mechanisms. The practical significance of the work lies in the possibility of using its results to improve legislation and law enforcement practice in the field of state compensation for mass harm.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":503816,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Право и политика\",\"volume\":\"2020 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Право и политика\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0706.2024.7.71190\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Право и политика","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0706.2024.7.71190","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
State responsibility for the massive violation of rights and freedoms : a comparative analysis of the experience of the United States of America and the Russian Federation
The subject of the study is the state responsibility in the form of compensation for harm, committed by massive violation of human rights and freedoms. The object of the study is the actual and historical forms of the state responsibility in the legal systems of the Russian Federation and the United States of America. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as: the implementation of state responsibility for the damage caused within the framework of private law (regular) and public law (emergency) mechanisms; law enforcement practice of the Russian Federation and the United States on issues of state compensation for harm; the practice of adopting "compensatory acts". Special attention is paid to the principle of sovereign immunity of the state, its historical origin and modern understanding, differences of its interpretation in the Russian Federation and the United States; identification of common features and differences in approaches to the institution of state compensation for harm in the two countries; proposals for improving national legislation in the context of the topic under consideration. Using a comparative method, the author illustrates the processes of formation of this institution in the studied legal systems, defines the differences between the institutions of compensation for "private law" and mass harm committed by the state. The legal research presented in the article allows to conclude that the established practice of implementing this institution has similar features in both studied states, which allows us to use each other's experience. The novelty of the study is justified by conducting a comparative study of state-sponsored compensation institutions in the Russian Federation and the United States with an emphasis on mass harm, which revealed a general trend towards the adoption of "compensatory acts", the purpose of which is to circumvent the judicial procedure for dispute settlement in such situations. A proposal was also formulated on the need to specify Russian legislation in the field of compensation for mass environmental damage, including through the introduction of compensatory mechanisms. The practical significance of the work lies in the possibility of using its results to improve legislation and law enforcement practice in the field of state compensation for mass harm.