The article is devoted to the analysis of theoretical heritage of Prof. Nadezhda A. Mikhaleva with regard to the problems of the federal structure of the Russian State, preservation of national unity and separation of powers between the Russian Federation and RF constituent entities. The author highlights different approaches of scholars to the characterization of the stages of the federal relations development in recent decades. The paper examines views concerning an optimal model of separating the Federation jurisdiction from the jurisdiction of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, which is based on the principle of constitutionality and other principles. Also, it characterizes the implementation of "competency" in scientific literature, federal and regional legislation. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the views of Nadezhda A. Mikhaleva and other researchers concerning the content definition of a status of constituent entities of the Federation in accordance with constitutional law, the problem of understanding the joint jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and its constituent entities and separation of the powers between Federal and regional state authorities in the matters of joint competence, the shortcomings of the institute of advanced lawmaking, as well as views on ways of improving the spheres of joint jurisdiction. The author draws a conclusion, inter alia, that consolidation of regulatory frameworks in the federal legislation does not preclude the RF constituent entities from specifying the order and mechanisms for their public authorities to exercise their powers. The analysis of the spheres where the RF constituent entities exercise their separate jurisdiction leads to the conclusion that almost every matter referred to the jurisdiction of the Federation is connected with the areas of joint jurisdiction, thereby allowing the Federation to implement the regulation at its sole discretion.

The article scrutinizes the will of the people as an integral part of modern democracy, as one of the foundations of the constitutional order. While not denying the possibility to analyze the concept of the "will" in psychological, historical and other discourses, the author concludes that in the legal context its meaning is modified and supplemented with new features. Today this phenomenon is dealt with by various branches of jurisprudence, and constitutional law is no exception. Analyzing the diversity of approaches to the definition of "the will of the people (volya naroda)" existing in the legal science, the author concludes that the will of the people is its exclusive property as a subject of relations within the framework of constitutional law. Given that the multinational people represent a complex political institution, its will is formed by means of the merger of its constituent elements into a single unit which has never existed before. The author makes analysis based on the constitutional law enshrining such concepts as "expression of the will of the people" and "the will of the people" in accordance withr constitutional law. The author differentiates the content of the named definitions and concludes that they are not identical. Expression of the will of the people is a form of expression of the will of the people in objective reality when it becomes available for the perception of other subjects of the relations regulated by constitutional law. The paper examines the forms of expression of the will of the people and the objects at which it can be aimed. Expressions can amount to both active and passive activities. The author concludes that the implementation of these forms can be both positive and negative. According to the author, a functional purpose of the will of the people is revealed in its objects. Based on the fact that the will of the people is absolute, the author formulates the statement concerning its orientation at an indefinite number of objects and phenomena of the existing reality. The external expression of the will of the people can manifest itself in its attitude to the State and society, and can be aimed at other subjects of relations regulated by constitutional law. Manifestation of the will of the people towards the State is carried out in a wide variety of public relations connected with: the State foundation, the formation of the system of public authorities, implementation of governmental functions.

This article examines the problems of the balance between an integration policy and an adaptation policy applied by the modern States with regard to national minorities. This question is scrutinized in the context of a more capacious perspective of modern democracy, with effective mechanisms of representation and protection of interests and rights of minorities as its essential attribute. Minority groups that need special attention on behalf of the State are ethnic minorities that include indigenous peoples, "old" and "new" national minorities. In the policy implemented towards indigenous peoples, modern States retain the policy of adaptation as dominating. Nowadays, the balance between the elements of the adaptation policy and integration policy towards national minorities is undergoing notable changes, namely in the context of increasing migration flows to developed countries, as well as intensifying separatist sentiments in some of them. The author notes that the policy towards "new" (immigrant) minorities experiences a noticeable trend towards intensification of the integration policy, whereas the policy implemented towards "old" minorities combines integration and adaptation. Their balance and manifestations in a particular country depend on many factors: the number of national minorities, the level of national consciousness and the prevalence of separatist tendencies among minorities, the severity of inter-ethnic relations, the chances of minorities to have their interests taken into account on the basis of formally equal representation and satisfaction of minorities and the national majority with situation that has developed in the state, the effectiveness of the functioning of the State structures focused on protecting the interests of minorities, the threats posed to cultural identity of titular nationalities, etc. The author comes to the conclusion that integration should be aimed not only at facilitating the existence of minorities in an "alien" cultural environment of a titular nation, but also at preservation of this environment, i.e. at ensuring the mutual solidarity of title and minority peoples. In this connection, the author makes certain suggestions with regard to the improvement of Russian legislation in this field.

This article discusses the concept and objectives of the sate national strategy, in particular, strengthening of national unity and integrity of the Russian State, as well as preservation of the cultural identity of its peoples, especially of the state-constituting Russian people. In this regard, the author examines the evolution of the theory of federalism in Western countries as well as in the domestic science during pre-revolutionary and Soviet periods. The contribution of Nadezhda A. Mikhaleva into the development of this branch should also be noted. Considering the history of the federative relations development after 1993, she stressed that a destructive practice of regional tendency to sovereignty has been overcome so far, the constitutional basis of the state national strategy of the Russian Federation is to preserve its national unity and integrity. The State integrity means unconditional recognition of the State sovereignty of Russia, which is expressed in the unity of the Russian society, its constitutional and legal systems, the supremacy of federal legislation in the subjects of exclusive jurisdiction of the Federation and its constituent entities, the unity of the status of an individual under constitutional law, common principles of organization and functioning of state and municipal authorities, unified monetary and customs systems, common historical, cultural and information environment, a single State language, and national armed forces. In addition, in accordance with paragraph 11 of the State National Policy, our State was created as a unity of peoples a forming nucleus of which has always been the Russian people. On the ground of preservation and development of the Russian culture and language, historical and cultural heritage of all peoples of Russia, the contemporary Russian State brings together a unified cultural (civilization) code, which is characterized by a special calling for truth and justice, respect for the individual traditions of peoples living in Russia and the ability to integrate their best achievements in a single Russian culture. A strong sovereign State, competitive economy, the well-being of the people, overcoming of depressive indifference of citizens, enhancing of the overall culture, education, and legal consciousness of the people, international and interconfessional consensus, clear prospects of the State Strategy, overcoming of a huge gap in the level of material welfare of citizens, corruption and bureaucracy elimination serve as prerequisites for solving all domestic problems, including consolidation of national unity. In addition, in our view, all these reforms should not contradict civilizational foundations of the Russian State.

The article deals with some problems of a representative nature of legislative organs of the RF constituent entities arising during these organs formation and functioning, a deputy status, and a nature of a deputy mandate. The author believes that the combination of unity and diversity of organization models of the legislative power in constituent entities of the Russian Federation derives from both the peculiarities of the federal nature of the Russian State and the effective implementation of the state power. The author proposes to analyze individual elements of legal regulation of the procedure of formation of legislative (representative) organs of the RF constituent entities state power. According to the author, the federal legislator should not permit the possibility of holding elections of deputies to the legislative (representative) organs of the state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation exclusively by means of the proportional electoral system, because in that case we may encounter insurmountable difficulties in implementation of the passive electoral rights of citizens. The author identifies a positive trend towards widening regional discretion in choosing the ways of formation of state power authorities in the RF constituent entities. Also, she shows different approaches of the regional legislator to the legal regulation of the structure and competence of the legislative (representative) bodies. The paper notes the positive experience of passing regional laws with regard to Houses committees (commissions), thereby increasing the credibility of these bodies, stabilizing their status and strengthening parliamentary review. The paper also deals with some elements of the status of an MP and legal regulation of withdrawal of MPs. The author considers different theoretical approaches to notions of an imperative and free parliamentary mandates, especially the status of an MP elected within a party list. The author concludes that the existence of elements of an imperative mandate in regional legislation, unlike federal one, seems quite logical and does not violate the representative nature of the legislative bodies of the RF constituent entities.

The article examines the issues related to delegating the right to participate in making decisions of state importance to the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The author describes the basic forms of co-ordination of interests of the Federal Center and regions in the process of elaborating the following decisions: delegation of representatives of the RF constituent entities to participate in the work of the federal public authorities (or in the work of coordinating organs ensuring elaboration of their decisions) and to participate in elaborating and enacting legal acts of the Russian Federation. The author analyzes the peculiarities of formation and functioning of the system of bodies representing the interests of constituent entities at the federal level. Special attention is paid to the Federation Council as a key organ of regional representation, as well as coordinating and advisory and consultative structures under the Federal Government formed both at the initiative of the Federation and its constituent entities. The author reveals the meaning of safeguards of taking into account views of the RF constituent entities when making federal laws and bylaws. These safeguards include: first, advancing aw-making initiatives by regions (their representatives in the Federation Council); second, a possibility to veto legislative initiatives advanced by other constituent entities. The author makes analysis of the problems and perspectives of legislation development in the area at issue, makes recommendations for its improvement in order to ensure efficient combination of the common and specific in one State.

This article analyzes and compares the content of norms and particularities of enshrining local self-government in the constitutions and charters of the RF constituent entities as the basis of the constitutional order of the country, as a kind of public authority, and as a subjective right. Examining implementation of human rights in constitutions and charters of the RF constituent entities, Nadezhda A. Mikhaleva made a classification by distinguishing socio-political rights and freedoms rather than traditional political rights. The author of the article examines the reasonableness of using the term "petition", applying specific mechanisms and procedures for its implementation in the constituent entities of the Federation. On the basis of an analysis of the provisions of the effective legislation of the RF constituent entities the author of the article concludes that entrancing a petition as a form of the rule of the people can be considered as an additional safeguard of realization of democratic foundations of regional statehood in modern Russia. The article justifies the opinion with regard to a single idea and affinity underlying such forms of direct democracy as a collective appeal, petition, public initiative, a mandate, and differences in a scope of issues and a number of initiators' signatures, in an application form (oral or written) and design, addressee, and procedures. The comparative analysis of the rules of modern constitutions and charters of constituent entities allowed the author to propose an extension of the list of socio-political rights compiled by Nadezhda A. Mikhaleva by means of including the rights to the people's initiative, mandate, public hearings, debates, territorial public self-government, voting on border changes and reformation of municipal entities.

On the basis of the analysis of the normative legal acts of the Soviet and post-Soviet periods the author focuses on federal reforms in Russia in 1990-1993, and traces the formation of Magadan Region as a full constituent entity of the Russian Federation. On the basis of archival materials, the history of the adoption of the Charter of the Magadan Region is presented. The Charter of the Magadan Region had been creating for two years in a challenging environment, including the confrontation between the legislative and executive branches of the Magadan Region. The article traces the idea that the Constitution of the Magadan Region of the Russian Federation as an independent subject is inextricably linked with the renewal of Russian statehood, reform of federal relations in Russia, the implementation of the principle of separation of powers into the political and public life of our country. Magadan Region, like other regions, has gone from an administrative-territorial unit of a higher level within the RSFSR to a full-fledged constituent entity of the Russian Federation. Having developed and adopted its first fundamental normative legal act, Magadan Region thus implemented constitutionally enshrined power to the Charter, which, together with the Constitution of the Russian Federation is determined by its status.

The purpose of this article is an attempt to analyze the fundamentals of the constitutional order of the Russian Federation enshrined in the constitutions and charters of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation using the methodology of the analysis of constitutions and charters of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation applied by N.A. Mikhaleva. This article discusses controversial issues of modern Russian federalism and the problems of two-tiered constitutional legislation. The author provides different opinions, and on their basis the author draws a conclusion concerning the transitional nature of modern Russian federalism. The article analyses different points of view of Russian scholars regarding the concept and content of the constitutional system foundations. The conclusion is made that, except the categories of power, man, state, the concept of constitutional order should include the category of a legitimate law that is an essential element of the rule-of-law state Analyzing constitutions and charters of the RF constituent entities, decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the author determined the following principles of consolidating the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation in the constituent acts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation: federalism, the unity of the foundations of the constitutional order, impossibility for the RF constituent entities to establish their own -- differentfrom the Russian Federation -- foundations of the constitutional order, possibility for the RF constituent entities to fill the foundations of the RF constitutional system with legal provisions without violating constitutional regulations.

This article discusses the constitutional basis for the restriction of human and civil rights and freedoms in the Russian Federation. The author considers the line between lawful restriction of rights and freedoms and the actual denial. The work justifies the idea that restrictions should be set by the legislator not arbitrarily, but based on the Constitution, its principles of Justice, equality and proportionality. The work examines international instruments on the subject, the laws of the Russian Federation, Rulings of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The author outlines and examines a group of restrictions caused by the peculiarities of the legal status of certain categories of persons, the so-called "professional" restrictions. He also analyses the statutory limitations in the implementation of passive and active citizens suffrage. In addition, the restrictions of human and civil rights, and freedoms in a state of emergency are discussed. Through the introduction of state of emergency, the temporary concentration of all control levers of all coercive means in the framework of official authorities is possible. At the same time, the Constitution and the Federal Constitutional law provides two important safeguards to prevent misuse of the emergency regime. First, a compulsory consent of the Federation Council on the imposition of a State of emergency is an important requirement. Secondly, (ch. 3 art. 56) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation provides for important rights of a citizen, which shall not be restricted under any circumstances. These are the rights and freedoms: to life; the dignity of the individual; privacy; the right to protection of personal data; freedom of thought, conscience and religion; freedom of entrepreneurial and other legal economic activities; the right to housing; the right to judicial protection, the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals, legal aid, the presumption of innocence, the right to justice, humanism, right to protect the interests of victims, on the application of the existing law. The article proves that, despite the diversity of scientific opinions, the goal of the State is the adoption and promotion of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen as a fundamental priority of the idea expressed in the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

The modern Russia has seen mixed trends in the territorial organization of the State, constructing and functioning of public authorities. Until recently, virtually all aspects of territorial-power organization of the Russian State were analyzed in the context of the theory of federalism and local government theory. However, Russian and foreign political and legal practices indicate that not all doctrinal design clusters of public Dominion fit into the boundaries of the detailed theories of form of the territorial organization of the State (federalism, regionalism, unitary) and local self-government (local government). The public-imperious mechanism operates not only in the territories, public law entities (Federal State as a whole, the subjects of the Federation, municipalities), but also in other areas (administrative-territorial, administrative units), established by taking into account various, including non-legal factors (so it has been throughout the history of Russian statehood, including monarchical and Soviet periods). The examples of administrative-territorial units in the Russian Federation are Federal districts, administrative (management, educational) district in some subjects of the Russian Federation, territorial development zones, the territory of rapid socio-economic development, Skolkovo Innovation Centre, free port of Vladivostok, Russian Arctic Zone, urban agglomerations, etc. The modern Russia de facto introduces new levels of public authority and public administration - subfederal (interregional), subregional (intermunicipal), submunicipal (intersettlement). In addition, the Russian Federation is a party to a number of intergovernmental institutions, recognizing the jurisdiction of the relevant supranational bodies. In the prevailing realities on one and the same territory, public authorities can simultaneously operate at various levels, as well as non-State actors (including businesses) with separate powers. In this regard, the problem of extraterritorial jurisdiction and inter-level interactions between different public authorities is becoming more topical. The article not only formulates some theoretical judgments on the designated theme, but also the possible directions of doctrinal and enforcement problems (in particular, in relation to the municipal level of publicly-imperious mechanism).

The company may not function properly if the state does not create necessary conditions, both of institutional and regulatory nature. Modern field of constitutional law has given rise to many legal mechanisms of constructive relationships between civil society and public authorities. Some of them are state and public formation. Based on the analysis of the constitutional legal acts, it is concluded that modern public chambers, community councils and public control commissions shall not be referred to public bodies, nor to public associations from a formal point of view, therefore, form a separate block of subjects of constitutional legal relations. To this end, the article identifies signs of state bodies and public associations, analyzes each of the state and public formations for conformance with these characteristics. The author formulates the definition of state and public formation and highlights the main signs to which it corresponds. The research analyzes the situation of many regulations of the federal, regional and local acts, considerable attention is given to the local documents which, in recent years, are subject to a lesser exploration by legal professionals, a large amount of scientific literature on a specified topic has also been researched.

The Constitution, as known, is the main source of law in general and of constitutional law in particular. In the domestic literature, the Russian Constitution and the constitutions of foreign countries are usually analyzed separately. The article attempts to consider the constitution as a holistic phenomenon of modern civilization. Based on the analysis of the constitutions of Brazil, Switzerland, India, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Germany, France and the Russian Federation some conclusions are drawn. The trends in the development of modern constitutions include the increase of constitutions, broadening the range of controlled public relations, including the constitutionalization of the relationship of reproductive medicine and gene technology in the human sphere. It is stressed that, in the modern period, when the use of transplantation medicine will only increase, the issues of protection of human dignity come to the fore. It is noted that the Constitution of Switzerland is quite unique concerning these matters. The article draws attention to the fact that the largest constitutions are most frequent to be altered, which might not have a positive impact on the stability of the constitutional order. The author evaluates the usefulness of amendments into the Constitution of the Russian Federation on lengthening the terms of the Presidential Office in Russia and the State Duma of the Russian Federation. The author notes that in democratic countries, there is quite a widespread use of the five-year term of Parliament, whereas the term of the Presidential Office tends to be lower than that in the Russian Federation. Additionally, the author refers to forms of modern constitutions, in particular the question of the advisability of the unwritten constitution. The question of legal protection of a constitution (constitutional control) is addressed. Concerning the question of the relationship between the spirit and the letter of a constitution, it is concluded that the spirit of a constitution is a deep sense of the totality of its principles and rules focused on its main purpose, and any interpretation of the letter of a constitution must come from its spirit.

This article analyzes the main approaches to theory and practice of the conclusion of the coalition agreements between political parties in foreign countries. According to the author, this experience can be useful in Russian practice. Separately, the author deals with the question of the justiciability of these agreements, thus he reflects Israeli and German legal doctrine on the matter which have not been studied in the Russian legal science yet. It is noted that there is also a problem of enshrining policy decisions in their legal form. For example, the political elite makes a decision according to which certain political forces should not be accepted for representation in Parliament. This political decision could be made in the form of specific legislative acts. Of course, it is rather a negative example, but it shows that the law, indeed, can act as a tool of legitimation of political decisions. Another example: the model of decision-making process, which is used inside a political party, can be transformed into a mechanism at the legislative level. The following components that are usually present in the coalition agreements can be found: fundamentals of the state policy in various spheres; the distribution of government posts, procedural matters, including the formation of a coalition of various bodies and decisionmaking rules. It is concluded that the subject of an agreement between the political parties in the State Duma may be perhaps the only joint actions, in particular, a vote on certain bills either for or against particular candidates (except the President of the Government), whose appointment falls under the authority of the Lower House, for example, when voting on the approval of the candidate of the Chairman of the Accounting Chamber of the Russian Federation. Another thing is that such agreements are likely to be a verbal agreement concluded ad hoc (despite the fact that the State Duma's legislative work plan shall be approved in advance), while the negotiating process will be very quick in nature.

Russian legal literature offers a range of scientific publications on the form and essence of constitutions, as well as the efficiency of the legislative process in the Russian Federation. One of the authors who have made a significant contribution to the resolution of these problems is Professor N.A. Mikhaleva. These problems were the determining directions of all scientific work of this famous national scientist-constitutionalist and are covered in this article. These problems have always caused and will cause vivid scientific interest, but not only because there are many great states with different socio-economic systems. Governance, public regime, political and territorial structure and functioning are regulated by the constitutions in different ways. But also because states themselves, constitutions governing their activities, their content, form and substance are in constant development. The existing scientific publications regarding these issues suggest different solutions to these problems. For example, N.A. Mikhaleva justly connected the problem of effectiveness of the highest government bodies in the legislative process with the effectiveness of the activities of the subsidiary organs of the state. Other authors attribute this to the form of Government established by the Constitution. This article attempts to reconcile this problem not only with the form of Government, but actually folded within each form of Government, regimes that develop under the influence of various factors. The authors suggests a thesis that under such a variety of the state regime as presidentialism, under semi-presidential form of Government, we should talk about an effective adoption of laws as political "associates" of different branches of power can easily "negotiate" among themselves, but the effectiveness of the implementation of the provisions of such legislation will largely depend on the quality of their content. In other cases of the state (a dualist or parliamentary presidentialism), on the contrary, we can talk about the known difficulties with the adoption of the federal laws (because of the difficulty of compromise between the opposing political forces in the different branches of Government), but the possible effectiveness of their implementation through reached compromises and reconciling the language.

The article examines the features of State sovereignty of the Common States parties, namely Russia and Belarus, uniqueness and originality of which is defined by the presence of the confederate, federal and international links between them. The problem of the sovereignty of the state parties to the Common State, its partial restrictions is in extraordinary demand in today's world. The article analyzes the process of consistent passing phases of increasingly close integration of rapprochement of Russia and Belarus: participation in the Customs Union (1995), the Education Community of Belarus and Russia (1996), the Union of Belarus and Russia (1997) and, finally, the last major milestone (December 1999)-signature of the Treaty on the Union State. The article reveals the characteristics of the created supranational bodies formed under the Treaty on the Union State between Russia and Belarus. The analysis of the difficulties of their proper functioning is carried out. The article also examines the ratio of legal personality of the State unions with legal personality. It is concluded that the combination of the legal personality of the Common State, formed by Russia and Belarus, with universal legal personality of state parties of the Union allows specified subjects of international relations to be self-sufficient participants in foreign relations and at the same time interact successfully in foreign policy, on issues of mutual (in the global community, across Europe, in the framework of the CIS, in between relationships) interest. The Common State formed by Russia and Belarus is believed to possess the general right to participate in international relations. At present, however, this right is not regulated by relevant provisions, forms of participation of the Federal States in the activities of international organizations are not refined (full, associate membership, cooperation on a contractual basis, responsibility for compliance with international obligations).

The article discusses the Canadian experience of coordination of law-making activities of the Privy Council Office, the Department of Justice and the Parliament of Canada. The article identifies the benefits of centralized provision of legal services to government performance, including a clear definition of the subjects of the coordination and legislative drafters, measures for their professionalism, quality control. Nine-year-old experience of the Canadian model of organization and functioning of the Legal Department of the administration of the Lipetsk region and sociological researches of the author based on the results of the experiment, enable us to reach the following conclusions: lawyers involved in legal support of activity of the specialized bodies of the Executive power, feel independence, resulting in: a) they are involved in the process of elaborating legal acts from the first days that had a positive effect on compliance with deadlines and implementation of standard-setting activities; b) they were able to improve their skills at a proper level, use the legal experience of others as a result of the exchange at conferences, meetings, trainings. Real options have appeared: a) career growth; b) reallocation functions more effectively between staff of the legal service; c) forming some common legal positions). This contributed to the fact that, for example, in 2008-2015 none of the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation, where the experiment was held, has not been challenged in court. Thus, the analysis of the use of Canadian expertise in activities of executive bodies of State power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation suggests the desirability of disseminating Canadian model coordination lawmaking at the federal level.

The article is devoted to one of the problematic issues of parliamentary control in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation - legal regulation. Based on the analysis of the legal expertise of the different constituent entities of the Russian Federation on regulation of parliamentary control, the author notes some differences in approaches of constituent entities of the Russian Federation. This article discusses the forms of legal regulation established in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. According to the author, since the monitoring function is inherent to the regional parliaments, it should be reflected in their constitutional (statutory) features. In most constituent entities of the Russian Federation, legal regulation of the monitoring function of the legislative (representative) organs of state power is performed at the level of their respective regulations. This approach of regional legislators is traditional and most adaptive to legislative novelties at the federal level. The author examines the experience of a number of constituent entities of the Russian Federation on the legislative regulation of the supervisory powers of the regional parliaments. The article provides suggestions to improve regulatory control of parliamentary control.

The article analyses, including through stenographic documents, the discussion process and the adoption of the rules of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. After changing the order of formation of the Federation Council, the adoption of new Rules was inevitable and objective consequence. The author examines the principles, which are the basis for working out a new project, different points of view of scientists, experts, members of the Federation Council on institutional functioning of the house. The article discusses the feasibility of including permanent commissions to the house, allocates the functions of the Chairman of the Federation Council, focuses on changes in the regulations in connection with the position of the first Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council. The author also analyses the legal regulation, whereby the house of parliament prohibits the establishment of formalized fractions and parliamentary associations, i.e. legalization of political associations is not allowed. The thesis that this approach meets the objective functioning of authority, representing the federated entities is justified. The article further discusses the composition, powers and procedure of meetings of the Council of the house. The article deals with the competences of the committees of the houses of the Federal Assembly, and notes that their powers have grown over time, and is consistent with the expansion of State structures and institutions of civil society. The author makes a proposal to establish the composition of the upper house of the Federal Assembly of the RF Federation Council Committee on ethics as the body interacting with the media. The subject of reference of this Committee should include the elaboration of proposals for legislative control of policy in the field of parliamentary ethics and ethics of the media; resolution of disputes arising during coverage of the work of the Council of the Federation in the media, etc. This specifies the inadmissibility of censorship by the upper house of the Parliament in relation to the media.