The article examines the experience of government and business cooperation in eradicating piracy in China’s Internet space. The purpose of the work is to analyze the unique empirical experience of implementing state policy to restore the operability of mechanisms for the protection and protection of intellectual property rights in the information environment of the People’s Republic of China. The research methodology is based on the study of the system of legal measures taken by the legislator and implemented by the state regulator to overcome piracy relations, and their impact on the economic and legal models of leading Internet platforms. China’s strategy aimed at recognizing intellectual property rights, supporting creativity and innovation to build a high‑tech economy and a market for competitive cultural products has been systematically implemented for three decades. However, these efforts proved to be truly effective at a time when the goals of the State coincided with the commercial interests of large legal businesses competing with illegal exploitation schemes of protected works. As a result of the study, it was found that the interaction between the state and business has made it possible to qualitatively change the situation. The focus of lawmaking efforts, due to the scale of the market and the volume of offenses, was directed at the sector of technologically congruent online musical and audiovisual works expressed in digital form. The State has built a legislative framework to curb the illegal use of copyright objects and encourage their legal turnover. The Internet business, in turn, invested in improving the professionalism and technology of its legal staff to counter piracy practices. The competition of Internet platforms has become a determining factor for restoring law and order when using protected creative products in the Chinese segment of the global network.
The article examines the evolution of comparative legal methodology in the legal development of the Russian institute of insolvency (bankruptcy). Due to the break in the historical tradition that took place during the Soviet period, it is objectively necessary to turn to foreign experience in the development of legislation, doctrine, and law enforcement practice. A comprehensive comparative legal methodology in the field of bankruptcy is still being formed. Bankruptcy Laws of 1992 and 1998 were adopted with gross methodological errors in the use of foreign experience, which eventually led to the ineffectiveness of these regulatory legal acts. Modern legislative regulation of the institution of bankruptcy, although it has passed the test of time, nevertheless has many problematic aspects that it is advisable to resolve using the achievements of comparative jurisprudence. The study draws attention to the relevance of the theoretical concepts, ideas and approaches of Professor Yu. A. Tikhomirov (1931–2025) for the further development of Russian bankruptcy law. Scientists introduced the concept of “vector of legal development” into scientific circulation, and also proved that the development of law is multidirectional and implies many vectors (sometimes opposite). In this article, these conclusions are extrapolated to the institute of bankruptcy. In addition, Yu. A. Tikhomirov paid considerable attention to the methodological foundations of comparative jurisprudence, which are also of absolute relevance in the formation of comparative bankruptcy law as a new scientific field.
The article provides an overview of the 30th International round table organized by the Sevastopol Branch of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation together with the Club of Legal Doctrine and in collaboration with the journal “Law and Modern States”. The event, which brought together participants from different countries, was devoted to a comprehensive analysis of the use of sociological methods in legal science. The review reflects the key points of the reports of leading experts in the field of constitutional law, sociology of law, criminal law and Anti‑corruption, as well as the theory of state and law. The discussion points are analyzed and general conclusions are formulated, reflecting the current state of interdisciplinary research at the intersection of law and sociology. Special attention is paid to methodological problems, new challenges of globalization and digitalization, as well as the specifics of Russian and foreign experience.
On November 20, 2025, the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation held the XV International Congress of Comparative Law “Fragmentation of Law and Challenges of Overcoming It”. The review highlights the welcoming remarks and reports of the participants of the plenary session — leading representatives of Russian legal science, heads of state corporations and government authorities: T. Y. Khabrieva, A. A. Klishas, I. I. Rogov, A. Ya. Kapustin, Mo Jihong, A. Kh. Saidov, V. N. Rusinova, S. A. Belov et al. The key ideas and approaches expressed during the discussions at the тематические round tables are outlined: “New Legislative Trends”; “Comparative Law as a Tool for Overcoming the Fragmentation of Law”; “Judicial Constitutionalism: The Doctrine and Practice of Overcoming Legal Gaps, Fragmentation of the Rule of Law”; “Constitutional Identity and Legal Fragmentation: Challenges to the Legal System”; “Fragmentation of Financial Law as a Mirror Reflection of Public Finance in the Comparative Legal Dimension”; “Fragmentation of Environmental, Natural Resource, Land, and Agrarian Law: Causes, Consequences, and Ways to Overcome”; “Fragmentation in Labor Law and Social Security Law as a Result of Legislative Changes”; “Fragmentation of Private Law: Problems and Solutions”; “Overcoming Fragmentation of Criminal Law Regulation: Law, Doctrine, Practice”; “Self‑Determination in Modern International Law: In Search of Relevant Meanings”; “Fragmentation as a Trend in the Development of the Legal Space: From Historical Retrospect to Modern Theoretical Constructions”; “Fragmentation of Information Technology Regulation and Information Protection in National and International Law: A Search for Approaches to Harmonization and Unification”; “Expansion of Artificial Intelligence in Law: Risks to the Consistency of Legal Regulation”; “Priority National Projects as Institutions That Determine the Dynamics and Differentiation of Areas of Administrative Law Regulation: Current Problems of Consistency and Ensuring the Unity of Administrative Legislation”; “80th Anniversary of the International Military Tribunal: Lessons from Nuremberg and Tokyo”; “Law in the Digital Age: Strategies and Mechanisms for Overcoming the Fragmentation of Law”; “Governed Fragmentation of Law”; “Reintegration of Historical Territories of Russia in the Context of Modern Problems of Fragmentation of Law”.
The confrontation initiated by Western countries that began almost immediately after the end of World War II contributed to the division of the world. The collapse of the USSR, a global competitor to Western countries, ultimately led to the disruption of core international agreements that defined the principles of world order after World II. This, in turn, deprived modern international law of a unified core, turning it into a fragmented collection of rules. An example is the rules of international trade formulated in the GATT/WTO treaties. Tariff wars and the imposition of unilateral sanctions are destroying the international economic order. The attempts to minimize the role of the state by introducing the idea of limiting jurisdictional immunity and the transfer of certain public functions to non‑governmental organizations have contributed to the destabilization of the global legal order. Against this backdrop, associations of states, which have formed not only national legal orders but also systems of regional cooperation, are beginning to play an increasingly active role in international relations. This article, based on the authors’ presentations at the XV International Congress of Comparative Law, “Fragmentation of Law and the Challenges of Overcoming It” (the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, November 19–20, 2025), analyzes the traditions of Latin American countries, former British Empire states, and African states. The authors note that in these countries, the role of the state is not only unquestioned but, on the contrary, is viewed as a driving force for progress and prosperity. A comparative study of the legal systems of new states contributes to overcoming the fragmentation of modern law.
International financial organizations, such as the International Monetary Fund, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Development Association, international development banks, and others, enjoy judicial and other immunities in the jurisdictions where they operate. These immunities include immunity from lawsuits, enforcement of award and attachment against their property. They are enshrined in their founding documents, bilateral and other supplementary agreements, and are generally recognized by states and courts. The statutory documents of international financial organizations establish the procedure and grounds for filing claims against them, the place and other details of the settlement of such disputes, which significantly complicates the process of protecting the national interests of the relevant states from the harmful consequences of the activities of these financial organizations, and make impossible the enforcement of award or attachment against their property in order to receive compensation for the damage caused. The immunities of international financial organizations also remain in force in labor disputes with employees. The article shows that attempts to challenge the jurisdictional immunities of international financial organizations in the national courts of developing countries, as well as in the courts of the United States and several other developed countries, have so far led to the formation of a tendency to recognize these immunities as limited. The methods of analysis, synthesis, and comparative law were used in the work. The author concludes that, as a result of a number of lawsuits, including labor disputes, against international financial organizations, developing countries, as well as dismissed employees of these organizations, did not receive either financial or property satisfaction, but only legal and moral. Nevertheless, the theory of the inviolability of pro‑Western financial institutions has been shaken — a trend that may further develop in the context of the transformation of the global financial legal order.
The commented judgment of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Pindo Mulla v. Spain concerns a judicial authorization for a blood transfusion administered to a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses in an emergency situation, despite her formally and repeatedly expressed wish — based on religious beliefs — not to undergo a transfusion under any circumstances. The applicant lodged a complaint under Articles 8 (right to respect for private life) and 9 (freedom of thought, conscience, and religion) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court held that the complaint under Article 9 fell within the scope of Article 8 and found a violation of this provision under its procedural limb, focusing primarily on procedural shortcomings. The Court’s reasoning is based on the idea that, although Article 8 does not explicitly impose procedural requirements, the decision‑making processes affecting private life must be fair and ensure due respect for the protected interests. The judgment addresses complex issues at the intersection of philosophy, religion, health, law, and morality. According to the Court, the rejection of a blood transfusion cannot be equated with a rejection of life itself but rather constitutes an exercise of the right to therapeutic self‑determination. Consequently, the patient’s choice cannot be considered unlawful; instead, it represents an expression of religious freedom. At the same time, a refusal of treatment must not only reflect the patient’s clear and unequivocal will but must also remain relevant, ensuring a fair balance between two fundamental rights: on the one hand, the right to health and life, and on the other, the right to religious freedom and self‑determination. While the tenets of any belief system may be respected due to their religious nature, this does not preclude individuals from exercising free choice, making autonomous decisions by weighing the values of life and health against certain religious doctrines based on their merits.
The article is devoted to the study of new trends in the activities of the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), which have emerged recently. In particular, legal “facets” have appeared in the expert work of the Venice Commission, which, being new examples of doctrinal interpretation, deserve scientific study in a separate study. First of all, we are talking about a very “rigid” doctrinal interpretation carried out in relation to the analysis of the legislation of various states by the experts of the Venice Commission, which is objectified in the form of recommendations to States, but is directed much further than the classical “soft” law. At the same time, the “orbit” of such assessment often includes the sovereign rights of States, including amendments to the constitution and constitutional laws, the protection of human rights, the functioning of “branches of government”, and aspects of national security. In the article, this thesis is illustrated by the example of the legislation of Hungary, Georgia, and the Kyrgyz Republic.
In the context of the globalization of legal reality, comparative law is an important instrument for modern legal transformations. In the 21st century, Comparative law has ceased to be merely a tool for describing similarities and differences between legal systems and has become an instrument for dialogue, coordination, and harmonization of legal traditions. The article analyzes the changes in comparative law under the influence of globalization and legal fragmentation and examines its role in overcoming fragmentation and creating a unified legal space. It shows that the diversity of legal systems in contemporary conditions does not destroy but strengthens legal unity contributing to the unification, harmonization, and mutual enrichment of national and international legal institutions. The globalization of legal relations and the simultaneous complexity of regulatory frameworks are leading to a persistent multilayered nature of modern law and a growing phenomenon of fragmentation — the disintegration of coherent legal systems into specialized, partially incompatible regimes. This fragmentation increases the risk of conflicting norms, legal uncertainty, and institutional dissynchrony between the national, regional, and international levels, calling into question the predictability and consistency of law enforcement. The purpose of this paper is to substantiate the role of comparative law as a tool for managing fragmentation, aimed at reducing conflicts between legal regimes and strengthening legal coherence. To this end, the following objectives were set: to determine the relationship between global transformations and manifestations of fragmentation of law; to classify the positive and negative aspects of fragmentation of law; to identify mechanisms of comparative legal intervention that promote harmonization of legal systems; to propose practical recommendations for incorporating comparative law into national codification and lawmaking processes. A combination of comparative legal analysis methods was applied: a comparative method to identify typological differences in legal regimes; a systemic-structural approach to assessing the impact of new subsystems on the integrity of the legal framework; a normative-legal and doctrinal analysis of international acts and national reforms; and a case study and empirical analysis of individual processes of codification and the implementation of digital registries in national practice. A combination of theoretical generalization and practical expertise ensures the practical nature of the conclusions. The results of the research show that comparative law is no longer merely a descriptive tool and becoming an active mechanism for dialogue, coordination, and harmonization of legal traditions. Fragmentation is identified as a bipolar phenomenon: on the one hand, the expansion and specialization of legal instruments; on the other, the risk of conflicts and loss of consistency. Key mechanisms for mitigating these negative effects are identified: developing a legal culture of dialogue, actively using comparative legal research in codification, creating digital legal platforms for identifying and resolving conflicts, and developing educational programs in comparative law. For national practice (including Uzbekistan), it is recommended to systematically integrate comparative legal review into the codification process, create interdepartmental coordination mechanisms, and develop platforms for the prompt detection and resolution of regulatory conflicts. Fragmentation is recognized as a manageable resource if accompanied by institutional and methodological “bridges”.
One of the pressing issues related to the use of electronic evidence in criminal cases in the context of digitalization and the associated qualitative change in the state of crime committed using information and telecommunications technologies, which is increasingly becoming transnational in nature, is the acquisition of “electronic” evidence abroad. The imperfection of the current rules for the cross-border acquisition of electronic evidence relevant to the initiation, investigation, and resolution of criminal cases, which negatively impacts law enforcement practice, demonstrates the need for new scientific research into the standardization of the activity in question, taking into account best international practices, national characteristics, and the uniqueness of the development path. The purpose of this study is to examine the specifics of collecting and using electronic evidence obtained from a foreign state through an international request in criminal cases, identifying problematic aspects, and determining areas for the unification of cooperation regulations. This goal is achieved through solving a number of problems: studying the scientific developments of domestic and foreign scientists related to the use of digital technologies in criminal procedural activities; an analysis of cross-border electronic evidence collection practices based on the experience of Russia and China; a sociological survey of practitioners to identify problematic aspects of collecting and using electronic evidence obtained from abroad in evidence; and a summary of the data obtained and proposals for harmonizing international cooperation in the area under study. The study’s methodological framework included a dialectical method of cognition, sociological, comparative legal, formal legal, and legal-logical methods, enabling a comprehensive examination of the research problem. The study identified challenges in ensuring the legal validity of cross-border electronic evidence, assessing its validity and authenticity, and holding liable for executing international orders request. Directions for harmonizing international cooperation on obtaining electronic evidence in criminal cases are proposed and scientifically substantiated.
The article is devoted to the procedure for concluding and implementing international treaties by the BRICS member states: Brazil, India and South Africa. It is important for all BRICS member states to be familiar with each other’s legal systems, especially with interaction mechanisms with international law. Current approaches to the procedure for the conclusion of international treaties vary from State to State and depend on the system of organization of state power, the system of legislation, the role of courts and the force of court decisions taken on the conclusion of such treaties, as well as the powers of courts as bodies that are granted the right to officially interpret existing legislation aimed at regulating issues of concluding and implementing of international treaties in the countries under consideration. The purpose of the study is to analyze the legal mechanisms governing the international obligations of these countries. The objectives of the research include: the study of the national legislation of Brazil, India and South Africa regarding the procedure for concluding and implementing of international treaties; the analysis of judicial practice in concluding and implementing of international treaties, which influences the formation of approaches to legislative regulation of the conclusion and implementation of international treaties. The following methods were used by the authors: a comparative legal method that allowed them to identify similarities and differences in approaches to the procedure for concluding and implementing of international treaties in these countries, as well as methods of analysis, synthesis, and content analysis of documents regulating the procedure for concluding and implementing of international treaties in Brazil, India, and South Africa. The conducted research has a particular interest not only for Russian legal science, but also for practitioners in the field of international relations, due to the light of increased international cooperation with the member states of this organization, it emphasizes the importance of understanding the legal foundations of international cooperation for the further development of integration processes in the BRICS group.
In the modern world, law is not only a powerful mechanism for economic coordination, but also a means of establishing the states of dependence/connectedness of independent national legal systems and economies. This area remains unnoticed by legal scholars. To date, legal science has not provided justifications and explanations for the operation of even formal mechanisms of various forms of perception of ideas of foreign law, including borrowing, reception, and harmonization. There is also no answer to the main question about the actual degree of threat and risk to state sovereignty due to the continuity of foreign legal models. There is no description of the optimal process of perception of foreign law, which should be understandable and consistent. Initially, modern legal systems are linked both by their own traditions and the logic of the development of law, as well as by the framework of regional associations, which already excludes the free and arbitrary transfer of legal institutions in the dialogue of modern legal systems. The development of post‑Soviet law had its own significant features, which show the reasons for the lack of common principles and logic of the development of the law of the Commonwealth of Independent States, the stages of the formation of a new economic space through legal means. At the moment, it is possible to note the legal independence and at the same time the independence of the CIS member states in determining the priorities of the future development of civil legislation. At the same time, the claims about the absolutely free determination and choice by the CIS states of the directions and models of the development of civil legislation are not fully justified. The author saw the purpose of preparing this article in reviewing the general and particular features of the formation of civil law in the CIS, opening a discussion on the issues raised in search of optimal and alternative solutions.
This article examines the legal nature of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Recommendations as a source of international law in the context of combating money laundering and terrorist financing. Despite the originally non‑binding, recommendatory character of these documents, they have received near‑universal recognition by states. Consequently, it can be argued that the FATF Recommendations are gradually acquiring the status of customary international law norms. Although FATF lacks a formal international treaty and a founding statute, it exhibits several essential features typical of international organizations and plays a crucial role in the global anti‑money laundering and counter‑terrorism financing (AML/CFT) system. The mechanisms established by FATF and FATF‑style regional bodies—such as regular mutual evaluations and the application of sanctions by member states against non‑compliant countries—effectively transform the Recommendations into de facto binding obligations. The purpose of this study is to determine the legal nature of the FATF Recommendations as elements of international financial regulatory law, taking into account the specific legal status of FATF and its regional bodies, as well as analyzing the process through which these soft law norms transform into rules bearing characteristics of customary international law. The findings demonstrate that, despite the absence of a formal international treaty and classic legal personality, FATF operates as a global coordination mechanism. Through mutual evaluations, sanction pressure, and continuous monitoring, the FATF Recommendations are perceived by states as legally binding and are effectively integrated into national legal systems, thereby acquiring features of customary international norms. The article explores the conditions under which the FATF Recommendations become obligatory for domestic legal frameworks, emphasizing the role of the subjective element (opinio juris) and state practice in this transformation. Based on an analysis of international legal norms and national experiences, conclusions are drawn regarding the position of the FATF Recommendations within international law and their influence on national legal systems. Key aspects of FATF’s legal status, the mechanisms for adoption and implementation of the Recommendations, and the degree of their binding force for states are also discussed.
The contemporary development of transboundary criminality, the digitalization of criminal procedure, and the expansion of international cooperation highlight the need to clarify the theoretical and legal nature of the norms governing international legal assistance in criminal matters. Legal scholarship continues to exhibit conceptual inconsistency regarding their branch affiliation: alongside the approach that treats these norms as part of criminal procedure law, other views propose their classification as an inter‑branch construct or even as an emerging sub‑branch. This lack of doctrinal clarity hinders both theoretical systematization and practical application, particularly in the context of ongoing codification efforts in procedural legislation. The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive justification for classifying international legal assistance in criminal matters as an institute of criminal procedure law. To this end, the research examines the criteria of a legal institute as applied to this body of norms, compares the characteristics of an institute, a sub‑branch, and an inter‑branch formation, analyses the internal structure of the relevant regulatory complex with identification of its sub‑institutes, and clarifies the methodological foundations for its classification. The methodological framework of the study encompasses general scientific methods of analysis and synthesis, the formal legal method, comparative legal analysis, and a systems‑based approach. Additionally, the organisational and systemic model of A. Bogdanov (tectology) is employed to reveal the mechanisms of formation, evolution, and transformation of legal institutes. The findings confirm that the norms governing international legal assistance in criminal matters possess all the features of a legal institute, are functionally integrated into the system of criminal procedure law, and do not constitute either a sub‑branch or an inter‑branch construct. The structure of the institute includes several sub‑institutes that develop according to an internally coherent logic and ensure the systemic nature of legal regulation. A theoretically grounded recognition of the institutional character of international legal assistance contributes to clarifying the conceptual framework, improving legislation, and fostering a more consistent organization of the criminal justice process.
The Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) adopted by the European Union marks one of the milestones in the history of regulation in the context of human rights and environmental actors in corporate governance. This paper will provide a critical legal and policy assessment of the Directive and how it is able to meet its systemic risks associated with corporate operations and global supply chains. This is done by analysing the legal character of the Directive and the way it is to be enforced, and its compliance with internationally recognized norms, including the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which concerns whether the CSDDD offers a sound, enforceable mandatory due diligence framework. It also examines possible obstacles such as jurisdictional restrictions, the cost of compliance by small and medium‑sized enterprises, and the danger of regulatory fragmentation in the EU and in foreign markets. Based on the comparative approach, the paper has placed the Directive within the wider global trends in corporate accountability legislation and singled out best practices in the implementation of the Directive. The results indicate the transformative power as well as scope of practicability of the Directive and are therefore a provider of policy prescription in enhancing its enforcement, transparency of corporations, and making sustainability expectations to bring visible results of human rights and environmental impact.
In order to harmonize international private law, its development taking into account the modern legal spirit and thought, there is a need to analyze foreign experience in reforming the relevant legal institutions, as well as the approaches that have developed in relation to them in foreign doctrine and practice. The paper presents the results of a comparative legal study of the legislative design and application of the institute of renvoi in three Latin American countries — the Republic of Ecuador, the United Mexican States, and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The scientific novelty of the work is due to the lack of relevant comparative studies of the institute of renvoi in the legal systems of Latin American countries. The purpose is to build a systemic and comprehensive understanding of the institute of renvoi in these countries. The author sets the following tasks: to analyze approaches to understanding and assessing the institute of renvoi, as well as related issues, in the foreign doctrine of these states; to form a list of legal and successor features of the implementation of the institute of renvoi in each country; to highlight the advantages and disadvantages of the institute of renvoi in the respective countries. The methods used are the method of comparative analysis and the method of content analysis. The results of the work and individual conclusions can be borrowed for the development of the institute of renvoi in national systems. The practical significance lies in the possibility of using the main provisions when applying the law of the specified states, as well as when resolving disputes with a corresponding foreign element. The result of the study is the identification of three different approaches to renvoi: limited implementation of the institute in the absence of general provisions and narrow judicial discretion (Ecuador); consolidation of the first‑degree renvoi as a general rule, and second‑degree renvoi as an exception, as well as broad judicial discretion (Mexico); admission first‑ and second‑degree renvoi without additional conditions and narrow judicial discretion (Venezuela). A comparative legal analysis of the institution of backtracking allows us to conclude that the use of renvoi and related institutions is most successfully regulated in Mexican law, but it is in Venezuela that it is fully established without any restrictions.
The pharmaceutical sector, in the context of the peculiarities of intellectual property protection, is most in demand by patent holders and is well‑developed from a legal perspective, holding significant social importance for innovative drug provision. In patent law in Russia and abroad, special exceptions have been made for inventions used in medicinal products. At the same time, patent law and legal regulation of the circulation of medicinal products mainly exist in parallel, addressing different tasks, which raises many questions. This issue is global in nature and has been reflected in many foreign regulatory acts, which deserve attention when considering the modernization of domestic legislation. The article discusses aspects of the pharmaceutical market that need to be taken into account in the legal regulation of patent protection. Moreover, it specifies the main features of exclusive rights related to medicines. Special attention is paid to the introduction expediency of various variations of patent linkage in the Russian legal system. According to the author, the most appropriate and sufficient option is the “soft” patient linkage. The application of the Bolar’s Provision has been considered and it has been concluded that it is available to supplement the Civil Code of the Russian Federation with appropriate specific norms. It is also proposed to introduce in the Russian legal system the legal institute of state regulation of generics with the deferred introduction of them into civil circulation.
Modern constitutional and legal doctrine often uses the legal diffusion of ideas, models and concepts used in legal systems that were formed in fundamentally different historical and socio‑cultural conditions. This approach does not take into account the uniqueness of national legal traditions and the specifics of the relationship between the state and society in a particular country, which leads to a theoretical incompleteness of typification. The purpose of the study is to conduct a comprehensive comparative legal analysis of media regulation models in order to identify the limits of the applicability of typification and substantiate the need to supplement it. To achieve this goal, the following tasks were solved: the essential characteristics of the models were analyzed; the methodological limitations of their application to other types of legal systems were identified; based on the analysis of legislation, additional models are formulated and described — party‑corporatist and paternalistic (partnership), characteristic of the legal systems of individual states of East Asia and the Russian Federation, respectively. The methodological basis of the research was a combination of general scientific and private scientific methods. The comparative legal method was used as the main tool, which made it possible to identify different approaches to the legal regulation of mass media in countries with different legal systems. The formal legal method was also used to analyze normative legal acts and the historical legal method to study the genesis and evolution of legal institutions. Conclusion: the typification of Western models of media regulation, despite its scientific significance, is not universal. The author suggests supplementing the typification with models, in particular, party‑corporatist and paternalistic (partnership).
The article provides a characterization of the main institutions of the General Part of the new Criminal Code of Greece, which came into force on July 1, 2019, and is significant for expanding the understanding of foreign law in order to improve Russian criminal legislation. It shows the place of the Criminal Code in the system of sources of Greek criminal law, draws attention to the significance of the Greek Constitution of 1975 for the field of criminal law, as well as other normative legal acts that form the so‑called special criminal legislation. The norms regarding the effect of criminal law over time and space, the “intermediate” law, criminal acts and their elements, the classification of criminal acts into crimes and misdemeanors, circumstances excluding the unlawfulness of an act, and conditions are analyzed. The goal of the research is to form an understanding of the content of the main institutions of the General Part of the Criminal Code of Greece. The main tasks of the research consist in conducting an analysis of the specified institutions and identifying the features of their regulation. In preparing the article, general scientific and specific scientific research methods were used (dialectical, historical, system‑structural, comparative‑legal, and legal analysis of the text). Conclusion: Greece’s legal system, developing within the framework of the Romano‑Germanic (continental) legal family, was influenced by various doctrines, leading criminal law schools, and foreign criminal codes, which is why it can be classified as a mixed legal subsystem of the Romano‑Germanic legal family. The author of the article introduces new information into the scientific discourse regarding Greece’s criminal legislation.
The forced termination by the state of ownership of private property at the present stage of its development has been transformed to such an extent that each of the elements of this institution has undergone changes. As a result, nationalization and expropriation can be considered as legal synonyms, which differ from confiscation only in the absence of a counter‑representation within the latter; in that they are not a sanction for unlawful and unscrupulous behavior, and from requisition in that the basis for their application is not an emergency situation. This article analyzes the antinomies of the development of the institution of nationalization in international law, acts of legislation on the expropriation of property in South Africa and Brazil. The South African Expropriation Act No. 13 of 2024 entered into force in 2025, i. e. it is the most up‑to‑date regulatory act regulating the forced termination by the state of ownership of private assets. The legal regulation of similar legal relations in Brazil, on the contrary, is based on a legal act adopted more than 80 years ago and, despite numerous changes, has retained the features of the pre‑war approach to regulation. The article also evaluates the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on nationalization, their role in the modern procedure for the compulsory termination by the state of the real (property rights) of other persons in relation to the object of civil rights, and makes suggestions for changing their position in the system of legal regulation.
