Nikolay Vlasenko
Doctor of Law
Professor,
department of History of Law and State
“Law must be moral in its content, like its creators.”
1978
Graduated from the Faculty of Law of Irkutsk State University.
1982
Completed full-time postgraduate course at Sverdlovsk Law Institute, Candidate thesis on: “Conflict of laws rules in Soviet law” in the specialty “Theory and history of law and state; history of doctrines of law and state” was defended.
1997
Doctoral thesis on: “Problems of accuracy of expression of the form of law (linguistic analysis)” in the specialty “Theory and history of law and state; history of doctrines of law and state” was defended.
1985 - 1992
The first head of the Department of the Faculty of Law of Tyumen State University, was invited to create the Faculty of Law (now the Institute of State and Law of UTMN).
1992 - 2001
Director of the Institute of regional legislation of the Irkutsk region administration.
2001 - 2008
Vice-Rector for research and Deputy head of the Department of Theory of Law, State and Judicial Power of the Russian Academy of Justice (now -the Russian State University of Justice, RSUJ).
2003
Gratitude of the President of the Russian Federation for services in strengthening the rule of law, training highly qualified specialists and contribution to legal science (2003, 2010).
2008 - 2015
Head of the Department of Theory of Legislation at the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, Professor of the Department of the Russian Academy of Justice.
2016 - present
Professor of the Department of Theory of Law and State of RUDN University; leading researcher at the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law (ILCL) under the Government of the Russian Federation.
Teaching
Gives to RUDN students of bachelor’s programme in General Studies “Legal Studies” and “International Law”, and to students of master’s and postgraduate programmes of the Law Institute lectures on the following subjects:
- Actual problems of the theory of state and law;
- Legal technique;
- Methodological bases of research in modern legal science;
- Modern doctrines of state and law;
- Paradigms of modern theory of law.
The author of the study guide:
- Vlasenko N. A. Theory of state and law. M.: NORM, INFRA-M, 2018.
The study guide is based on the standards of higher legal education and programmes for universities of the corresponding field for training bachelors and specialists in law. At the same time, it can serve as an auxiliary methodological material for lecturers conducting classes on the theory of state and law. It is based on the following principle: the plan of the seminar, the specific question and the specific answer to it, based on data of modern legal science. Each theme is provided with a list of recommended additional literature and self-monitoring questions. The Appendix contains educational and methodological complexes for all forms of education, where, in addition to the programme and plans of seminars, themes of course papers, essays, theses, educational literature, including pre-revolutionary, and others. This study guide is intended for independent training of students of all forms of education, lecturers, postgraduate students and all interested in this issue.
https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01009417398
Science
- Wrote one of the first regional comments on the Charter of the Irkutsk region (1995) and the law on local self-government in the Irkutsk region (2000).
- Justified the ratio of categories of legal activity, legal technology and legal technique. Works that reflect these conclusions - are the basis of the new science “Legal technique”, also the basis for workers of executive authorities who use the technique of drawing up a legal document or formalizing a legal decision in a legal act in their daily rule-making activities.
- For the first time attempted a comprehensive study of conflicts and conflict of laws as a necessary component of the legal system. Justified the improvement of the conflict of laws mechanism as a regularity of development of the legal system. Proposed to understand conflict as a conflict relationship between legal norms in the form of differences and contradictions. Expressed the point of view about the objective nature of conflicts, in some cases - their deliberate creation by the norm-setter (a conflict between general and special (exclusive) norms) in contrast to the widespread opinion in the legal literature about the negative, “destructive” nature of conflicts for the legal system.
- Studied the language of law, textual bases of legal documents, their grammatical and logical components.
- Justified the idea of uncertainty as an objective property of law and legal regulation.
- Studied the issues of the general theory of legal and judicial positions. Defined the need to discern the legal positions of courts and other judicial legal positions: the former includes decisions of judicial bodies, the latter - recommendations of judicial reviews, informational letters of the chairmen of higher judicial instances, etc.
- Considered the question of understanding law through the prism of reasonableness: reason and law are related and, in essence, represent the mental activity and its result. Regards intelligence as the key to the understanding of law because no reasonable rules and guarantees of the right may fail in action.
- One of the co-authors of the first editions of encyclopedic dictionaries-biographies: “Prominent legal scientists of Russia (the second half of the XX century)”, Moscow, 2006; “Legal science and ideology of Russia (XI - early of the XX century)”. Encyclopedia of biographies, Vol. 1. Moscow, 2009;
- Studies the problems of modern methodology of law and analyzes the reasons for proposals that justify new methodologies in law; criticizes the ostracism of dialectics and materialistic approach.
Scientific interests
- General theory of state and law;
- Philosophy of law;
- Legal technique;
- Conflict of laws;
- Methodological bases of research in modern legal science;
- Problem of uncertainty and certainty in law;
- Problem of reasonableness in law.
In article the bases of research of a phenomenon of a law concretization are considered. Are analyzed the logical and language maintenance of a law concretization as subject activity of the person. By means of features of category limits of activity of the person on a law concretization are "wrongly" illustrated. Are allocated a law concretization in law-making and its forms (subject and logical) and a law concretization in law application, in particular, is considered a law-enforcement specification in connection with legal qualification. The question of abuse of a law concretization is raised.
The article is devoted to the problems of conflict of laws in the Russian legal science. The scientific discussion is analyzed; different points of view and approaches are presented, as well as modern methodology in the study of conflict problems. The author concentrates on the place of conflict of laws in the system of Russian law, as well as on the coincidence of collisions and conflicts between conflict rules. The quality of scientific research in the field of understanding conflicts in law is illustrated. The conflict principles of modern Russian law are widely represented. It is a question of temporal conflict norms and exceptions from them. Preventive temporal principles are formulated. In addition, spatial, hierarchical and contentious conflict principles are researched.
A quarter of a century has passed since the adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation by a national referendum. The jubilee gives a reason to talk about the optimality of constitutional provisions, their effectiveness, and somewhere practical expediency. The article aims to analyze the points of view expressed in this regard in the scientific press, newspaper periodicals and other media. However, the author first refers to the history of the emergence of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in 1993. It is noted that the Basic Law, on the one hand, was a result of military-political com-promise between supporters of the parliamentary vision of the future structure of the country and sup-porters of a strong presidential power, on the other hand, allowed ultimately abolish the Soviet system and traditions. The mentioned situation and the factor of haste and hurry could not but affect the content and technical and legal quality of the document. The author has reduced the opinions expressed on the issue of modernization of the Constitution of the Russian Federation to three main positions: 1) The Constitution has not exhausted its potential and there is no reason to change its text; 2) a full-fledged constitutional reform is required, the current Constitution has exhausted its potential; 3) there is a need for precise partial changes and additions that can improve the Constitution. The article argues that the last position of the so-called precise partial changes is the most productive and allows to make the constitutional document adequate and relevant. In this regard, it is proposed to hold several round tables at the initial stage on the development of concepts for improving the constitutional foundations. One of them, the author calls promising and offers to prepare a list of proposals for the removal of ideologically and actually not confirmed in practical life provisions. These are provisions about Legal State (excluding the principle of separation of state power), Welfare State, etc. Another concept that also needs to be developed is institutional (the concept of the legal status of public authorities, their powers, checks and balances, etc.). These ideas, the author believes, should be a compromise between scientists, then become public and be implemented in the practice of constitutional construction.