Gaps in Russian Legislation

The purpose of the study. The article discusses the problems of abuse of substantive and procedural rights in disputes in the field of consumer protection. The article analyzes the existing legal regulation, established and developing law enforcement practice, as well as doctrinal positions regarding the qualification of actions that go beyond the principle of good faith in the exercise of their rights by the subjects of the legal relations under consideration. The purpose of the study is to identify and systematize criteria for distinguishing between the legitimate exercise of rights by the consumer and abuse of rights, which is necessary to ensure a balance of interests between the subjects of the legal relationship under consideration, increase the effectiveness of legal proceedings and prevent procedural manipulation. Conclusions. As a result of the conducted research, the authors conclude that abuse of the right in consumer disputes manifests itself in two interrelated planes: material (unjustified overstatement of claims, creation of artificial grounds for liability) and procedural (prolongation of the judicial process, abuse of the right to appeal to the court, presentation of deliberately false information and evidence). The general formulas of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation have insufficient industry specification, which creates legal uncertainty. The authors substantiate the expediency of applying a differentiated approach based on the criteria of good faith, proportionality of claims, the presence of real property or non-property damage, as well as the procedural purpose of the actions performed. It is proposed to consolidate systemic indicators of abuse in the explanations of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and introduce mechanisms for the procedural suppression of unfair behavior. This approach will make it possible to maintain a high level of consumer protection, while excluding the use of consumer status in order to extract unjustified benefits or destabilize business activities.

The purpose of this study is to analyze the results of the regulatory and supervisory activities of the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology, and Mass Media (hereinafter referred to as Roskomnadzor or the Service) over the past five years. This article presents a review of the transformation of Roskomnadzor's approaches to regulatory and supervisory activities in the field of information technology, identifying qualitative changes in the methods and tools for conducting inspections. The relevance of this study stems from the need for a scientific understanding of the trends in the improvement of Roskomnadzor's powers. General scientific methods of analysis, synthesis, and generalization were used in the study, which allowed us to draw conclusions to achieve this goal. A formal legal method was used to analyze the provisions of regulatory documents. Key findings: The results of the study confirm the hypothesis of a transformation of Roskomnadzor's powers, initially focused on oversight of the information technology sector. It is concluded that today this federal service has effectively become a systemic regulator of digital infrastructure.

The purpose of this article is to identify the structural barriers that impede the full participation of Russian and Chinese SMEs in international commercial arbitration and to assess the principal ways of overcoming them. It is concluded that such barriers fall into three main types: economic, procedural, and competence-related. The competence barrier, which hinders SMEs' access to international commercial arbitration, is of key importance. In practice, it translates either into additional expenses for external legal counsel or into procedural risks at the stage of recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award. Within the framework of Russian-Chinese trade, these barriers are being addressed along four key lines: the establishment of a network of regional branches of international commercial arbitration institutions; the availability of expedited procedures for disputes involving amounts of less than USD 50,000; online arbitral procedures (APEC-ODR) and the digitalisation of arbitration as a whole (the SCIA Smart Arbitration System); and institutional cooperation between the ICAC at the RF CCI and the Guangzhou Arbitration Commission (GZAC). However, these directions do not fully address the competence barriers, which is why the development and implementation of separate educational and advisory mechanisms is proposed. In particularly sensitive sectors, it may also be appropriate to subsidise the first arbitration proceedings for SMEs in certain categories in order to lower the entry threshold.

The article examines fundamental changes in the legal construction of a life insurance contract brought about by the introduction of «pay-as-you-live» (PAYL) models. It analyzes the transition from a static model of insurance legal relations, based on a one-time risk assessment, to a dynamic obligation featuring continuous monitoring of the policyholder’s behavior and automated adjustment of the insurance premium.

The purpose of the study is to identify key legal collisions between the existing civil-law regulation (primarily Article 959 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) and algorithmic pricing, as well as to substantiate avenues for the comprehensive adaptation of Russian legislation.

Conclusions. As a result of the research, it has been established that the classic construction of a one-time change in the degree of risk is ill-suited to permanent streaming data processing, engendering risks of algorithmic opacity, erosion of insurance secrecy. The article substantiates the need to modernize Article 959 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, to introduce a category of «high-risk tariff-setting algorithms» subject to mandatory audit, to extend the insurance secrecy regime to all participants in the PAYL digital ecosystem, and to establish mandatory requirements for algorithmic transparency. The author concludes that without these changes, the legal construction of life insurance risks losing the balance between innovativeness and the guarantees of the policyholder’s rights.

The article states that there are currently sufficiently representative materials on the practice of pre-trial and judicial proceedings in criminal cases provided for in Article 207.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. These issues are covered in a significant number of scientific articles devoted to this topic, in which, among other things, various aspects of methodological support for the investigation of these crimes are considered. Along with this, it should be noted in the published textbooks and manuals on criminology that there is no description of the basics of private methods of their investigation, despite the obvious need for it. The author's attention was drawn to the specific use of forensic characteristics of these crimes as a component of the information basis for their investigation. The existence of this specific feature was based on the results of studying relevant investigative and judicial practice. According to these results, at the time of initiating criminal cases related to these crimes, law enforcement agencies had certain information about individuals who had publicly disseminated "fake" information about the alleged illegal actions of the Russian Armed Forces in order to discredit them. This included misrepresenting the objectives of their participation in the special military operation. According to the author, the search essence and practical usefulness of this forensic characteristic are more pronounced in the fact that it guides investigators to the correct choice of sets and tactics for carrying out procedural and other actions at the initial and subsequent stages of pre-trial proceedings on the facts of the spread of such "fake news" in the current situations. The relevant forensic methodology has similar elements to the methods of investigation of slander, crimes of extremist and terrorist orientation, coinciding in certain circumstances and the direction of intent, motive of commission. The author presents a position on the content of the information basis of this methodology, including the inclusion of a typical forensic characteristic as a component under the previously mentioned conditions.

Purpose of the study. Based on the analysis of doctrinal approaches and empirical data (statistics, investigative practice), the article identifies the features and current forms of transformation of organized crime. The authors substantiate their scientific contribution to clarifying the characteristics of the subject of the crime in terms of the dispersed (collective) management model in Russian organized criminal formations. Conclusions. As a result of the study, it has been proven that, along with traditional selfish motives, modern organized crime in Russia is becoming a destabilizing factor, and there are some manifestations of organized crime in the penitentiary system, given the concentration of individuals who have committed serious and particularly serious crimes in places of detention. Practical significance. The proposals formulated by the authors to improve countermeasures can be used in the operational and investigative work of the units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia, as well as in the educational process for training specialists in the field of criminal law and criminology.

This article examines the exceptional grounds provided by law for the disclosure of testimony given by victims and witnesses during the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings. Each basis for the disclosure of testimony given during the pre-trial stage is analyzed. A separate explanation is given as to why a confrontation is the only way to challenge a witness's testimony incriminating the accused. The article presents the positions of the highest courts of the Russian Federation, case law, and offers suggestions for improving legislation in this area.

The purpose of the research. The article examines the problems of legal regulation of the institute of compensation for inadequate conditions of detention of suspects, accused and convicted persons in the penitentiary system of the Russian Federation. The current legislation (the Criminal Executive Code of the Russian Federation, the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation, the Federal Law “On Detention”), judicial practice, as well as the results of the author’s survey of FSIN staff, prosecutors, experts and persons held in penitentiary institutions are analyzed. The aim of the study is to identify systemic shortcomings of the legal mechanism of compensation and to develop scientifically based proposals for its improvement in the following areas: legal regulation, procedural aspects, financial support, control and monitoring, interdepartmental interaction. Findings. As a result of the conducted research, the author concludes that the current compensation institute is characterized by heterogeneity of judicial practice, the absence of uniform criteria for assessing inadequate conditions of detention, and inequality of the procedural status of different categories of citizens. To eliminate these shortcomings, it is proposed: to introduce into legislation the requirement to prove the absence of fault of a public authority; to ensure strict observance of the three-month time limit for filing a claim; to establish an alternative form of compensation in the form of sentence reduction (one day for every ten days spent in inadequate conditions); to create the institute of penitentiary judges; to develop a compensation calculation methodology using correction factors; to form a unified information database of violations within the framework of the interdepartmental electronic interaction system (SMEV). The author concludes that the implementation of the proposed measures will make it possible to form an integral, predictable and humanistically oriented compensation mechanism that complies with constitutional principles and international standards.

The purpose of the article is to determine the limits of applying Part 2 of Article 203 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to information abuses by a private detective. Based on formal legal, systemic structural and law-enforcement analysis, the article substantiates that the qualified structure of this provision is mainly focused on a violent and security-oriented model of excess of authority: violence, threat of violence, use of weapons or special means of physical coercion and grave consequences. However, typical acts of private detectives are connected not with physical coercion, but with illegal obtaining, use and transfer of protected information: private life data, secrecy of communications, banking and tax secrecy, personal data, computer information and data from restricted information systems. Based on judicial practice, the article shows that the current wording of Part 2 of Article 203 does not provide a clear legal instrument for assessing grave informational harm. The author concludes that a substantial violation of rights under Part 1 of Article 203 should be distinguished from grave informational consequences caused by massive, long-term, sensitive or irreversible illegal circulation of protected data.

This article analyses national mechanisms for implementation, reporting and follow-up (NMIRF) as a key instrument for institutionalising states international human rights obligations. It examines the historical background to the development of NMIRF. their legal framework and their evolution within the United Nations system. Particular attention is paid to international standards and declarations that contribute to the strengthening of these mechanisms, including the Marrakesh and Asuncion Declarations.

The paper outlines the main functions and responsibilities of NMIRFs, including interagency coordination, engagement with international bodies, consultative processes and digital monitoring of the implementation of recommendations. It analyses international and regional experience of NMIRF operations, as well as their institutional characteristics that ensure sustainability and effectiveness.

Particular emphasis is placed on the experience of Uzbekistan, where a national model is being developed that combines elements of coordination, accountability and monitoring. The integration of the NMIRF with human rights indicators and national databases is examined as the basis for the transition to data-driven governance.

In conclusion, it is argued that NMIRFs serve not only as a reporting tool but also as a strategic element of public administration, ensuring the systematic, measurable and sustainable fulfilment of international human rights obligations.

This article presents an analysis of the recently published collective monograph "From the Past to the Future: Human Rights in the Modern World" (edited by V.A. Fadeev and A.Kh. Abashidze, Moscow, 2025), prepared by leading Russian experts in international law, human rights theory, political science, and the humanities. The monograph demonstrates that it offers a holistic understanding of the evolution of human rights—from natural law concepts to their institutionalization in international law and contemporary political and legal practice—in the context of the transformation of the global legal order and growing geopolitical and civilizational confrontation. Particular attention is paid to the civilizational approach to human rights, where human rights are viewed as part of the sociocultural identity of peoples and a subject of intercultural dialogue between various legal traditions (Islamic, Eurasian, and Confucian). A significant place in the monograph is occupied by a critique of the practice of instrumentalizing human rights in international politics, an analysis of the concepts of humanitarian intervention, "responsibility to protect," human rights NGO rankings, and the GONGO phenomenon as instruments of "soft power." It also demonstrates how the traditional human rights architecture is confronted with new technological and bioethical risks. The author emphasizes the monograph's interdisciplinary nature, methodological diversity, and combination of philosophical-legal, political-legal, religious-ethical, and sociocultural analysis. The author concludes that the monograph makes a significant theoretical and applied contribution to the development of modern human rights theory and the formation of a multipolar, culturally balanced system of human rights protection.