Legal Regulation of Relations on Social Security in ILO Instruments

Introduction. In this article, the author provides a general overview of the origins of the right to social security and then examines the main distinguishing features of the International Labour Organization (ILO) “Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention” (Convention 102). In addition, a brief description of the accompanying Recommendation 202 is given, as well as a concise description of the Organization's control mechanism. The author also highlights some of the advantages and disadvantages inherent in the above-mentioned international legal instruments.

Materials and methods. The methodological basis of the study is constituted by such general theoretical methods as the formal-logical method, analysis and synthesis. In addition to those listed above, the work used specific scientific legal methods, namely, historical and comparative legal.

Results of the study. The author comes to the conclusion that Convention 102 can rightfully be called a fundamental universal international legal instrument in the field of social security, in development of the provisions of which Recommendation 202 was adopted in 2012. At the same time, the Convention has certain shortcomings, the main one of which, in the author’s opinion, is the disproportionality of the definition of a “standard beneficiary” in relation to all existing types of social security.

Discussion and conclusion. It is concluded that Convention 102 establishes minimum figures for states on the main qualitative and quantitative indicators of social protection of the population, but at the same time provides countries with the opportunity to independently determine the ways to achieve the latter. The author made a proposal to modify the definition of “standard beneficiary” by extending it to men and women for all types of social protection, as well as excluding the mandatory condition of the presence of children or a spouse.

1. Bekyashev D.K., 2015. Mezhdunarodnoe trudovoe pravo (publichno-pravovye aspekty) [International labour law (public legal aspects)]. Moscow.

2. Glikman O.V., 2005. Problema ehffektivnosti mekhanizma kontrolya MOT [The issue of effectiveness of the ILO supervisory mechanism]. Moskovskij zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava [Moscow Journal of International Law]. № 3. S. 56-76.

3. Ivanov S.A., 1997. MOT: kontrol' za primeneniem mezhdunarodnykh norm o trude i ego problemy [ILO: control over the application of the international labour norms and its problems]. Gosudarstvo i pravo [State and Law]. № 7. S. 17-24.

4. Laptev G.S., 2010. Konvenciya MOT № 102 «O minimal'nykh normakh social'nogo obespecheniya» kak istochnik prava social'nogo obespecheniya [ILO “Social Security (Minimun Standards) Convention” № 102 as a source of social security law]. Vestnik OMGU. Seriya. Pravo [OMGU Bulletin. Series. Law]. № 1. S. 111-115.

5. Lushnikova M.V., 2011. Teoriya i futurologiya mezhdunarodnogo trudovogo prava i mezhdunarodnogo prava social'nogo obespecheniya: aktual'nye problemy [Theory and futurology of the international labour law and the international social security law: current problems]. Mezhdunarodnoe, rossijskoe i zarubezhnoe zakonodatel'stvo o trude i social'nom obespechenii: sovremennoe sostoyanie (sravnitel'nyj analiz): materialy VII Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii [International, Russian and foreign legislation on labour and social security: current state (comparative analysis): materials of the VII International scientific and practical conference]. S. 6-19.

6. Postovalova T.A., 2017. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo social'nogo obespecheniya: istoriya stanovleniya i rol' Mezhdunarodnoj organizacii truda [International social security law: history of formation and role of the International Labour Organization]. Zhurnal Belorusskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Pravo. [Journal of the Belarussian State University. Law]. № 2. S. 35-41.

7. Hagemejer K., 2021. The Right to Social Security and its Implementation: What Role can the ILO Social Security Standards Play? Social Security Review: Evolution of Social Security in South Africa. An Agenda for Action. P. 51-60.

8. Kulke U., 2007. The Present and Future Role of ILO Standards in Realizing the Right to Social Security. International Social Security Review. Vol. 60. Issue 2-3. P. 119-141.

9. Pennings F.J.L., 2015. What is wrong with international standards on social protection? What’s wrong with international law? Ed. by Ceric Ryngaert, Erik Molenaar & Sarah Nouwen. Boston. Р. 166-185.