The paper is devoted to the analysis of various aspects of the legal regulation of ownership to sunken property located within the territorial waters of the Russian Federation. The following areas of application of the rules governing the ownership to sunken (submerged) property are considered as the subject of regulation of ownership to sunken property and geographical arrangement in relation with regard to maritime areas. The author justifies the expediency of the Russian Federation’s accession to the International Convention on the Removal of Wrecks of 2007 that regulates the universal mechanism of liability insurance for the removal of wrecks. It is concluded that it is necessary for Russian courts to take into account the judicial and arbitration practice of dispute resolution arising from the application of unified norms that have accumulated in the States Parties to international treaties on the law of the sea. Numerous legal gaps have been identified in the special legal regulation of ownership of sunken property that are proposed to be eliminated by legislative amendments. The author dwells on the necessity of defining a clear procedure for the removal and destruction of sunken objects, ways of exercising the rights of persons who accidentally raised sunken property, as well as consideration of the issue of submerged ships and vessels that plays an important role in the protection of the environment from pollution by harmful substances and ensuring the safety of navigation at the state level by adopting a federal program in Russia on raising, removal, disposal of sunken property also as an objective before different departments. As a conclusion, the author emphasizes the need to register all submerged objects in the territorial waters of Russia on a specialized account in order to prevent unauthorized work on such objects, declare by a special government decree all submerged ships and vessels containing the remains of the soldiers killed in action as military graves, as well as conduct systematic scientific and technical studies of all submerged objects in order to identify the real environmental safety of the marine environment.

The paper is devoted to the legal and factual function of the family law agreements. The paper analyzes the views concerning the legal and factual possibilities of agreements in general and family law agreements in particular. The author concludes that despite the fact that family law agreements are not independent grounds for the emergence of legal relations between its parties, they carry out the legal-factual function. The paper describes the legal-factual function with its inherent static and dynamic aspects manifested, among other things, in the ability of family law agreements to entail non-contractual consequences of a private and public legal nature: some agreements in family law are involved in the acquisition of a particular family legal status of persons participating in them; family law agreements are able to directly generate rights and obligations of its parties in relation to other persons; a family law agreement may affect the exercise of the rights of third parties in relation to its participants (or otherwise become a legally significant circumstance in relations with other persons). Since one of the practical tasks of experts is to determine the moment of occurrence of the legal consequences of making of a family law agreement, the author touches on the practical aspects of determining the moment of occurrence of legal consequences under a marriage contract and an agreement on the division of common property of spouses. The author thoroughly analyzes the deferred effect of the marriage agreement that, at the same time, brings specifics to the limitation period calculation for claims of invalidity of the marriage contract. The paper also considers the problem of determining the moment when the legal regime of immovable property (or other property, the rights to which are subject to registration) changes due to the conclusion of a marriage agreement or an agreement on the division of common property of spouses.

The paper deals with the legal issues of the complex use of artificial land plots together with real estate objects located on them and other related (natural) objects. The legal parameters of the use of these objects as a whole should constitute a single ecological and legal regime that is aimed at the implementation of the social function of the development of territories by their owners. The formation and development of this ecological and legal regime requires the use of both administrative and civil legal means in the course of legal procedures for the creation and use of facilities. As the social function (development of the territory) is implemented, there is a gradual change in the legally significant properties of the objects being created and used (documentation, construction objects, immovable things) that are combined into property complexes for certain legal purposes. Environmental legal relations for the creation of these complexes and their use arise and they are further transformed based on a set of legal facts and actual structures, in the structure of which an administrative agreement on the creation of an artificial land plot is of key importance. An administrative contract is used as a legal means to regulate relations concerning the complex development of the territory, a special case of which is the creation of an artificial land plot and the construction of real estate on it. The terms of the administrative agreement concerning the creation of an artificial land plot should determine the mechanisms for the public authority to take actions to ensure the planning of the territory, assistance in obtaining permits for the construction of facilities and their commissioning, participation in accounting and registration procedures and the performance of other public duties. In pursuance of the administrative contract, a single immovable complex should be created from an artificial land plot and buildings and structures located on it.

The paper attempts to resolve the issues that arose in connection with the introduction in 2019 of amendments to the Federal Law «On Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure with the Participation of a Mediator (Mediation Procedure)" in terms of endowing a notarized mediation agreement with the force of an execution order: whether this agreement is capable of replacing a marriage contract, an agreement on the division of common property of spouses, an agreement on the payment of alimony, i.e. agreements subject to mandatory notarization. Also, the paper dwells on whether mediation agreements achieved in a dispute concerning the child’s place of residence and determining the order of communication of the child with a separate parent without transferring this dispute to the court after their notarization acquire the force of an execution order.

According to the author, not every agreement adopted as part of the out-of-court mediation procedure can be attributed to mediation agreements subject to notary certification and having the force of an enforcement document. A marriage contract and an agreement on the division of common property of spouses concluded as a result of the outof-court mediation procedure, as well as an agreement on determining the place of residence of the child generating the personal non-property right of the parent, cannot constitute the content of a mediation agreement. A child support obligation cannot arise and cannot be enforced on the basis of a mediation agreement due to special rules concerning a single contractual basis for the emergence of a child support obligation (a child support agreement). A mediation agreement may not include conditions defining the procedure for exercising the rights of a parent living separately from a child protected by the power of enforcement.

The 2020 constitutional reform resulted in introduction of the “Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation” definition into the Constitution of the Russian Federation. It contains conceptual provisions that, according to the author, contribute to the expansion of knowledge about the public law institute named “prosecutor’s office”.

Defining the ‘prosecutor’s office’ of the Russian Federation through the closest genus “system of bodies” allows us to distinguish between the concepts “Prosecutor’s office as a single federal centralized system of bodies” and “Prosecutor’s office system as a single federal centralized system of prosecutor’s offices and organizations”. This makes it possible to exclude the conflict of norms of Part 1, Article 129 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the Federal Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation”. The substantive difference between the prosecutor’s office as a system and the prosecutor’s office system is due to their different elemental composition and structure; it also manifests itself in the sources (forms) of regulatory regulation. Federal law determines the procedure for the activities of the prosecutor’s office. Regulatory acts of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation regulate the issues of organizing the activities of the prosecutor’s office system.

The constitutional and legal function of prosecutorial supervision, by virtue of the direct effect of the Basic Law, can be carried out in almost any sphere of legal relations, regardless of the legal status of their parties. As for legislative expansion of the legal subjects supervised by the prosecutor’s office, it is proposed to focus on the conceptual model of prosecutorial assistance, in which the prosecutor primarily embodies the source of legality, providing everyone with the opportunity to carry out their activities in line with the law on the basis of objective and reasoned information, including in the form of an act of prosecutorial response.

The function of criminal prosecution is implemented by the prosecutor’s office both in the judicial stages of criminal proceedings and in pre-trial proceedings in a criminal case, within which it is separated from the function of public prosecutor’s supervision.

The constitutional and legal novel on the prosecutor’s office’s own powers requires their specification in the federal law and harmonization with the powers of the prosecutor’s office of the Russian Federation and prosecutors.

The author analyzes the norms of Federal Law No. 59-FZ dated 02.05.2006 «On the Procedure for Considering Applications from Citizens of the Russian Federation», amendments made to this Law in 2010, 013, 2014, 2015, 2017 and 2018, and their justifications. The author identifies its problems and contradictions, analyzes the works of scientists and judicial practice, including positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, expressed in numerous definitions and resolutions. The formulated proposals for amendments to the Law under consideration are based on scientific and practical analysis of the studied materials. In particular, the author justifies the proposals on the need to extend a number of important legal provisions regarding written applications to applications in the form of an electronic document and oral applications, to settle the issue with oral applications (including those submitted by phone), to specify in the law the terms in working days, and not in calendar days, to regulate and expand the possibility of applying the termination of correspondence with citizens, introduce legal regulation of «multiple (‘fan’) applications» and «mass applications», to establish a common understanding of the concept of «obscene or offensive expressions». The publication was prepared on the basis of the general scientific dialectical method. The special methods used in the preparation of the publication are: system-structural, formal-legal, logical and comparative-legal. The author raises the question of the need for legal certainty, the use of the most understandable norms of legislative regulation in the implementation of the right of citizens to appeal. In this article, the citizens’ applications are understood as applications of citizens, associations of citizens, including legal entities.

The paper is devoted to the consideration of issues related to the unification of financial law norms, which govern public relations on the internal distribution and redistribution of budgetary funds, into a single independent legal institution of financial law within its main sub-branch, namely budget law. The system patterns of law inherent in financial law and its structural elements became the conceptual basis of the research. It is established that the norms regulating the activities of public legal entities of the Russian Federation on budget regulation represent an independent complex financial and legal community and are a separate part of budget law. In the course of the study, various factors that determine the formation of a complex legal institution of budget regulation are identified. The author considers and formulates general and special principles of functioning of this legal institution, studies the main sources containing relevant financial and legal norms, analyses the structure of the legal institution of budget regulation and single out its sub-institutions. It is determined that the legal institution of budget regulation is a set of financial and legal norms regulating inter-budgetary relations arising in the process of distribution and redistribution of funds between the budgets of the budgetary system of the Russian Federation. The author concludes that the considered pool of legal norms united by a single purpose, due to their fragmentation, is of a complex character and dialectically includes legal norms of various legal entities of financial law. These include the norms of the Institute of budget revenues, the Institute of budget expenditures, individual norms of the sub-branch of tax law, the institute of legal regulation of state extra-budgetary funds, the Institute of public credit and debt, as well as the integrated financial and legal institute «budget process».

The paper explores the problem of out-of-procedure influence on the accused when he is making a decision if it is necessary to consider his case in court with the participation of jurors. The author considers various points of view of practicing lawyers, the results of judicial statistical data and makes the following conclusions. Since the procedure for considering a criminal case with the participation of jurors in terms of complexity, costs of both organizational and material nature far exceeds the ordinary procedure of legal proceedings, there has formed a vicious practice of illegal restriction of the freedom of choice of the accused. Thus, the accused is warned that in case of choosing a trial with the participation of jurors he will get the maximum possible punishment if they render a guilty verdict. As a result, the accused either does not file a petition for consideration of his case with the participation of jurors at all, or refuses an already filed petition. Thus, it is necessary to consolidate the guarantees of the accused’s free choice of this form of legal proceedings at the regulatory level. It is necessary to develop a mechanism that excludes the possibility of out-of-procedure influence if the accused wishes to involve representatives of the citizens in the consideration of his case. To solve this problem, the author proposes the following model. At the request of the defendant, representatives of the citizens should be involved in resolving the issue of sentencing him. In the event of a guilty verdict, two randomly selected jurors, together with the presiding judge, decide all the issues necessary for sentencing. The proves that with this approach, illegal influence on the accused loses all meaning, since all participants in the process will be aware of his right to involve his fellow citizens in the sentencing procedure, his individualization.

The high profitability of consumer credit activities, supported by growing demand, has determined the formation of an illegal sector of financial services provided by entrepreneurs on behalf of an individual. Not being among the entities authorized to provide consumer credit services, these persons are not only not burdened with the Bank of Russia control, but are also invulnerable to the law. In order to protect the rights of consumers of financial services, in 2021 the legislator criminalized illegal activities for the provision of consumer loans (loans) (Article 171.5 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and changed the content of the related Article 14.56 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. Having deviated from the rules of legal writing when formulating Article 171.5 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and burdening the composition with administrative prejudice, without eliminating the reasons for the low effectiveness of the application of Article 14.56 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, the legislator blocked the implementation of Article 171.5 of the Criminal Code in practice. According to the author, the inevitability of administrative liability of illegal creditors can be ensured by excluding restrictions on the subject from Part 1 of Article 14.56 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, as well as changing the approach to determining the end of the specified offense, linking it not with the date of conclusion of the contract, but with the date of presentation by the creditor of documents for the organization of enforcement of court decisions on debt collection. The implementation of administrative responsibility, as well as a change in the judicial practice of debt collection in favor of the pawnbroker, which excludes the «interests» of the illegal creditor from the sphere of state protection, will prevent illegal actions in the financial market, and eliminate the need for a criminal ban. The preservation of the criminal act will require changes in Article 171.5 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the author’s version of which is proposed in the paper.

The paper analyzes the constitutional reform in Russia with an emphasis on the constitutional amendment on the interaction of the norms of international law and national legislation within the domestic legal system. Constitutional provisions and doctrinal approaches enshrined there play an important role in ensuring stable and predictable international relations. The paper discusses the possibility of applying two classical doctrines on the relationship between international and national law (dualistic and monistic) to the definition of the characteristics of amendments to Article 79 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The authors substantiate the necessity of introducing constitutional amendments from the point of view of the development of international relations and the maturation of domestic political, economic and social conditions over the past decades. Some doctrines of interpretation of international treaties of interstate bodies and the possibility of determining the parameters of their execution in the legal system of Russia are considered. It is concluded that the new model of interaction between international and Russian law corresponds to the principle of sovereign equality of states enshrined in the UN Charter. The authors summarize that the supplement of the constitutional norm under consideration clarifies the constitutional model of the relationship between international and Russian law. It allows for the full implementation of the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as well as the execution of international legal acts, including decisions of interstate bodies that comply with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which eliminates possible threats to destabilize the rule of law of the state. Thus, we are not talking about adopting a radical model of the primacy of national law over international law, but rather about adapting the doctrine of dialectical interaction between Russian and international law to the needs of modern development of our state.

The paper is devoted to one of the clearest examples of misconceptions and falsifications known to the science of the theory of state and law — the ongoing identification of the Soviet (Marxist-Leninist) legal understanding with Marxism. The relevance of the topic is also due to the need to correct the prevailing ideas about «Marxist» (materialistic) concepts of legal understanding and the theory of the origin of the state and law. The subject of the study is the process and general causes of the distortion of the Marxist legal understanding in Soviet jurisprudence in the 1920s-1930s. The aim of the work is to identify the main differences between the authentic Marxist legal understanding and the quasi-Marxist Soviet legal understanding, as well as to attract attention of the scientific community to the problem of their unjustified identification.

Based on a wide range of legal literature of the early Soviet period, the course of the development of the Marxist debate on the understanding of law and the reasons for the appearance of the quasi-Marxist definition of law from 1938, which became the ideological basis and model for subsequent definitions for several decades, is considered. The main contradictions between the Marxist and Soviet understanding of law are shown, primarily related to the «nationalization» of the institution of law, the identification of law and law, ignoring the production and economic conditionality of law, as well as recognition of the key role of state power, force and coercion in the genesis of law.

According to the author, the authority of the Lenin’s works, then Stalin’s ones initially influenced the Soviet legal understanding. It later developed along a simplified positivist path and significantly distanced itself from Marxism, because the Soviet theory of state and law was formed post factum on the foundation of state legal practice, consolidating and sacralizing decisions developed during not scientific, but political discussion.

The sphere of science is one of the important spheres of economic development ensuring the effective functioning of the state. Science has a direct impact on the pace and direction of economic development, thus, it can contribute to improving the socio-economic condition of the citizens. Therefore, science requires the attention of the state at the highest level. In this aspect, the constitutional and legal regulation of relations in the field of science plays an essential role, determining the priorities of state building.

The purpose of this work is to study the specifics of the constitutional and legal regulation of the sphere of science in modern states and to identify the features of the national constitutional legislation of the Kyrgyz Republic in the light of the constitutional reform carried out on April 11, 2021. In the course of the study, a comparative historical method was used, which made it possible to consider the problems in retrospect. The use of the statistical method demonstrated the peculiarities of state support for science in various countries. The comparative legal method contributed to the comparative analysis of the constitutional and legal regulation of the sphere of science in a number of foreign countries and the reflection of the general and specific in this matter, which allowed us to develop practical recommendations for improving domestic constitutional legislation.

The author summarizes that the states claiming leadership in science and education in the global context understand that these areas form the basis of the post-industrial innovation economy, and, therefore, define them as priorities in state building. This is expressed, firstly, in the constitutional consolidation of the state policy in the field of science and education; secondly, in the institutional support of the sphere of science; and thirdly, in sufficient funding of the sphere of science. Constitutional and legal norms presuppose the development of a mechanism for their implementation. In this aspect, one of the important conditions for their implementation are financial and economic guarantees, which, unfortunately, remain insufficient in Kyrgyzstan, which causes low rates of development of domestic science and insufficient representation of its results on the world stage.