Введение. В представленной статье рассматривается важный вопрос современного института публичных мероприятий – проблематика неоднозначного понимания ряда дефинитивных положений Федерального Закона от 19.06.2004 г. № 54-ФЗ «О собраниях, митингах, шествиях, демонстрациях и пикетировании»
Материалы и методы. Методологическую основу работы составляют общие и частно-научные методы познания. Особое значение для достижения цели имеет формально-юридический и логический методы.
Результаты исследования. Рассматриваемый в работе федеральный закон, являющийся основным предметом исследования, выполняет важнейшую юридическую функцию – конкретизирует положения Конституции Российской Федерации. Сложность уяснения и правильного восприятия буквы закона существенно усложняет как научно-теоретическое осмысление ряда его положений, так и вносит весьма существенные недостатки в правоприменительную практику и в практику реализации гражданами Российской Федерации своих конституционных прав на организацию и участие в мероприятиях публичномассового характера. В связи с этим, дефинитивный аппарат нуждается в существенном уточнении.
Introduction. The article considers an important issue of the modern institute of public events the ambiguous understanding of a number of definitive provisions of Federal Act No. 54-FZ of June 19, 2004 “On meetings, rallies, marches, demonstrations and pickets”
Materials and methods. The methodological basis of the work is a number of general and specific scientific methods of cognition. The formal legal and logical method is of particular importance for the achievement of the goal.
Results. The federal law under consideration, which is the main subject of research, fulfils the most important legal function – it concretizes the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The complexity of clarifying and correctly perceiving the letter of the law significantly complicates both the scientific and theoretical comprehension of a number of its provisions and introduces very significant shortcomings into law enforcement practice and into the practice of realization by citizens of the Russian Federation of their constitutional rights to organize and participate in public events. In this regard, the definitive apparatus needs to be substantially refined.
Discussion and Conclusion. The problem addressed in the study has been the “generic” feature of the institution of public events for many decades. For example, it is interesting, for example, that the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR No. 9306-11 of 28.07.1988 “On the Procedure for Organizing and Conducting Meetings, Street Processions and Demonstrations in the USSR” did not clearly delineate such concepts as rally or picketing, procession or demonstration either. Misunderstanding the specifics of a particular form of public event local government bodies often suggested that the organizers and citizens hold a meeting instead of, say, a rally, or a procession instead of demonstration assuring people that there was nothing terrible in such a replacement. At the same time in practice there were cases when law enforcement officers, when making decisions on cases of violations of public order during mass events, referred not to the norms of the existing substantive law, but to the Ozhegov Russian language dictionary.
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.