The article analyzes challenges which exist before constitutionalism in the conditions of warfare using the Russo-Ukrainian war as an example. It has been revealed how the transformation of the legal system and state institutions is carried out in the conditions of warfare, which is mainly a threat to constitutional identity. The latter is of fundamental importance for Ukraine since the loss of the first phase of the war with Russia (1917-20) caused the Holodomor of 1932/33, directed by the Kremlin, and organized by the obedient Creole administration of the Ukrainian SSR. The state's ability to resolutely and promptly repulse the aggressor performs a dual function in the conditions of war -the sense of safety and security of the civilian population and the mobilization of the necessary resources to resist and defeat the aggressor. First of all, the spread of unconventional ways of waging warfare, which is accompanied even by waging warfare in space, leads to transformation of constitutionalism. At the same time, the rationalization of power in conditions of limited resources becomes a main priority, which is always a consequence of wars. Constitutionalism must produce certain safeguards against the barbarization of wars. The basis of this is an institutionally capable state, which relies on stable institutions, rules and procedures for the protection of the civilian population and effective repulsion of the aggressor. At the national level, the components of this are the tools of militant democracy and parliamentary oversight and judicial review, as well as the effective distribution of powers between authorities in the field of national defense. The state is considered an institutional space for the security of civilians, which is especially felt in conditions of external aggression. The purpose of the relevant such a case is effective control over the territory, protection of the civilian population and effective governance, in particular the allocation of limited resources. An important component of this system is the formation of a mechanism to prevent aggression, which should combine national and international legal means.

ЧоМу Можна ставити питаннЯ про конституціоналіЗМ Чисто теоретиЧно та тиМ БільШе про глоБальний конституціоналіЗМ? (реценЗіЯ на виданнЯ ЄлиЗавети львової «глоБальний конституціоналіЗМ: теоретиЧні підХоди та правові виклики до форМуваннЯ» 1 ) савчин М.в., доктор юридичних наук, професор, директор Науково-дослідного інституту порівняльного публічного права та міжнародного права ДВНЗ «Ужгородський національний університет» https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9551-1203

The purpose of this study was to find out the differences in the attitude of young people who reached adulthood toward their health during a period of moderate (epidemic) and strong (wartime) deprivation of comfortable life and a surge of national consciousness that changed egocentric accents to subjective general ones. The use of methods of theoretical, systematic and comparative analysis, supplemented by statistical and correlational research, has shown: young people have hardly changed their own SCH after the deployment of tragic actions in their country: they have accumulated and directed the mental potential to achieve freedom, national self-identity and passionarity. At the same time, SCH has receded into the background and has not given way at all to the mass life-saving, protective or other egoistic patterns expected at the beginning of the study. The international significance of the article is that, for the first time in science, the authors have begun to study SCH in the context of a global conflict that has unexpectedly affected personal self-preservation motives and increased attention to one's health.

No abstract

No abstract