Evolution of the activities of states as reflected in legal and political Teachings
Authors: Klishin A. A. 
Published: January 2021

INTRODUCTION.A specific feature of the current state of international relations is the existence of elements that reflect the growing antagonism between the leading countries that make up the world order, as well as between such countries and those international associations that are supposed to regulate and sometimes directly manage the cooperation among the subjects of international relations. The totality, the acuteness and the complexity of these antagonisms determine the phenomenon which is defined as a “crisis” by the experts who analyze the nature and the development of international relations. The article below analyzes different opinions of legal experts in relation to the objective needs of legal regulation of international affairs expressed from the view point of prospects and new forms of such regulation, as well as the legal instruments used by the countries when faced with encroachment on them on the part of other players, i.e. states and their associations. The author mentions the fact that the political, economic and legal development of the system of international relations in the last few decades has become sustainably dependent on the integration processes taking place within the framework of the world order in whole, i.e. on something commonly defined as the “globalization”, while the objective prerequisites for the harmonious integration with interests of all countries taken into account are often absent in the designated processes and the main drivers of globalization efforts are those subjects of international relations that get most of the benefits from these processes, such as states, public organizations, specific public figures. As a result, the customary and efficient forms and contractual relations in international law are being re- placed with the ideas of “global law” or “supranational law” based on the intent to implement the “denationalization” of law by way of submitting the legal systems of some sovereign states to the will of international institutions. The activities of such institutions established numerously in the post-war period are of increasingly administrative nature in cases when such organizations are vested with authoritative, supervisory or other similar powers whilst the specific features of national legal order are ignored. A separate issue in the development of international law, both at the doctrinal level and in terms of practices of international administrative and judicial bodies, is the trend towards the stimulating of the loss of the so-called “national legal identity” in favor of various network-based, surrogate and culturally unspecific forms of regulating relationships, first and foremost economic ones. The dilution of legal norms, standards and rules that are customary for the population of the developed countries makes a notable impact on the public con-science, creating the objective preconditions for a boom in “legal nihilism” and the public negation of the necessity to abide with the rules of law, all this going in parallel with such inadequately working principles as the “supremacy of law”, “observance of civil rights”, “democratic basis of social structure” etc. In the opinion of the author, the fact that the Western countries and their closest allies have lost the perception of the necessity to preserve the distinction and the independence of the legal concepts and institutions created during the centuries of the world development and have made their choice in favor of the expansion of the functions of international organizations and associations is the historical phenomenon that characterizes a certain stage in the development of the world order. The creation of economic and political forms at this stage is followed by the development of law that is cyclical, uneven and not always logical from the viewpoint of historical process. The return of the law to its traditional, system-level basics that are clear to everyone taking part in the social relations is often facilitated by crises, such as the one in place today when the existing challenges and problems are complemented by the objective force majeure events like the virus attack in 2020 which the amorphous “network-based” instruments or not entirely just and efficient elements of the “international legal order” cannot cope with, as opposed to the active governmental and legal mechanisms of sovereign states capable of ensuring the balance of legal instruments and administrative levers of management in crisis situations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS.The methodology of the analysis is comprised of the system-based and formally jurisprudential methods that analyze not only the theoretical works of the leading Russian and foreign scientists, but also a considerable bulk of legal standards, judicial acts and sources pertaining to the activities of international organizations. This allows to look upon the general trends in the development of Russian domestic law and international law institutions, statutory acts and relevant legal doctrines, as well as to demonstrate their interdependence and the similarity in some of the lines of their development. The issue of conflict interaction of national (in particular, Russian) legal systems and the activities of international judicial bodies is discussed separately in the article. The obvious dependence of the activities of international judicial bodies based on the relevant international agreements and conventions on the political situation in the world is also shown in the article. A conclusion is drawn as to the advisability of revision of the key provisions of international acts adopted in different times and regulating the procedure for the formation and operation of international judicial bodies, such revision required so as to provide for the supremacy of the Russian Constitution in cases of conflicts between the court orders and the provisions of the fundamental law of Russia.

RESEARCH RESULTS.The articles outlines the results of the analysis of the issue of state sovereignty and national jurisdiction from the viewpoint of the efforts taken by the leading Western countries with a view to ensure the advantages of their legal and judicial systems in the process of international, first and foremost, economic cooperation. Conclusions are drawn in the article as to the ways and forms of competition in the sphere of law whereby the separate groups of countries, seeking to constrain its economic rivals, impose such ways of regulating the economic activities that give advantages to specific economies to the detriment of the others. One of the aspects of such competitive practice, as the author believes, is the set of anti-offshore measures extensively implemented at the initiative of the US tax agencies and the international tax agencies marching in their lockstep in order to undermine the reputation of major Russian companies and create the conditions for the worldwide persecution of Russian businessmen and government officials.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS.Based on the examination of new phenomena in the international law practice, the author concludes that the efficiency of legal instruments aimed at the protection of Russian national interests, including those of the Russian private business, against various abuses and discriminatory acts on the part of foreign laws enforcement agencies and judicial bodies, must be enhanced. The application of the principle of “extraterritorial jurisdiction” intensively applied in the US courts is demonstrated by the examples of UD doctrines, such as “arm’s length” and Alien Tоrt Statute that are actively used in the American judicial system contrary to the principles and rules of application of the decisions of national courts enshrined in the relevant international covenants. A conclusion is drawn in respect of the growing influence of the social and political processes on the development of international law institutions and mechanisms for the regulation of public processes. As noted by the author, it is necessary to integrate the efforts of legal experts from different law schools and traditions in order to preserve the role of the main public regulator played by both national and international law.