Methodology of Chrono-Discrete Mono-Geography Comparative Law in the Study of Judicial Reforms in the Russian Empire and the Russian Federation

Abstract

The article proves the expediency of applying the methodology of chrono-discrete mono-geography comparative jurisprudence when studying judicial transformations in the Russian Empire and the Russian Federation. The author proves that the judicial reforms of Emperor Alexander II and the judicial transformations late XX - early XXI century in their totality represent a chrono-discrete phenomenon. Examines the basic principles of the scientific school of chrono-discrete mono-geography comparative jurisprudence as applied to the study of Russian judicial reforms in the Russian Empire and the Russian Federation. In the paper it notes that the judicial transformation as a phenomenon include items such as 1) conceptual framework, ideas of reform; 2) judicial institutions; 3) theoretical and practical problems of implementation; 4) results; compliance, what happened, what was intended by the reformers; 5) attitude of the legal community and the public to reform on the whole and its separate institutions. The essential core of any judicial reform are newly constructed or transformed its institutions. Speaking of chrono-discrete judicial institutions, the author proposes to divide them into classical and non-classical. The first is the Institute of magistrate’s court, the juries and the Institute of bailiffs and institute of appeal. To non-classical chrono-discrete institutions include prosecutors and the legal profession. As the main comparable problems, characteristic for the studied periods, the author sees 1) the reforms “from above”; 2) the issue of financial support for reforms; 3) personnel problems; 4) problem of implementation of judicial reforms in space and time; 5) constant and numerous adjustment of normative legal acts, regulating the structure and activity of the relevant judicial institutions.

Review of the dissertation by S. I. Cherepanov “Comparative-legal study of the jury institution in the Russian Empire according to the 1864 judicial reform and the advocacy institution in the Russian Federation” (Nizhniy Novgorod, 2018. 192 p.)

“…23] и в последние годы получает все большую популярность среди исследователей. Наряду с комплексом работ теоретико-методологического характера [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11], активному изучению стали подвергаться различные хронодискретные институты: суд присяжных [12][13][14][15][16], мировой суд [17][18][19], прокуратура [20,21], апелляция [22,23], судебные приставы [24,25], Государственная Дума [26,27] и другие, а также концепции и идеи [28,29] и хронодискретные явления [30]. Что касается института адвокатуры, то в ряде наших статей были обоснованы положения, что адвокатура является институтом гражданского общества и одновременно выступает в качестве неклассического хронодискретного судебного института [4,31,32].…”