Аннотация: The author of the article formulates a conclusion that picture of culture as opens perspective possibilities the integrated system and in research of legal reality. A right appears as a structural element of the single organized integrity, as element of common to all mankind culture. Exactly culture as steady and natural integrity will transform destructive inclinations of social contradictions in creative one, as only a culture possesses the strongest negetropiya characteristics. Right as sociocultur phenomenon to aim to organize the frame of society, eliminate any contradictions between separate its structural elements. It presents a certain stable mechanism in which each of its parts instantly reacts on changes in other part and in the system on the whole. Withholding of integrity of balanced, relative cociume of different scale and level (family, enterprise, public association, state), providing of their survival, functioning, and evolutions are general characteristic right as to one of forms of human culture. It is native characteristic right we suggest to name cociuocentrizm right. The idea of cociuocentrizm of right must become foundation of the culture going near a right. Sociumocentrizm right reveals to him dignities of prominent integrator of life of society. Due to it a sociuocentrizm right is formed by foundation of human culture; life of culture, its various forms in space and in time flows in socium, organized and saved a right. A right brings in in life of society good organization and order due to connection in him of specific lines (generality, normativeness, obligatoryness, formal definiteness) combination of which is not present in other phenomena of culture. A role is right as the phenomena of culture consists of providing of inheritance of social forms of vital functions, stability, relative duration of existence of concrete class associations, each of which is link of historical process. A right is the unique form of culture which originally, essence, to the functions of on withholding of integrity of the concretely-historical systems at inviolability of their cash constants. A right guards the general conditions of life of society, but only to the that historical moment, when a threat interests is: dominating class. A right guards interests of dominating class, but only to the that historical moment, when a threat the general conditions of life of human association is. Such is dialectics right. In the process of historical development of civilization sociuocentrizm potential of right will increase and space will attain necessarily, metasociuocentrizm level of the development.

Аннотация: The author gives the definition of the term “populism” in the present article and studies main ideas of this phenomenon, using points of view of populism founders – A.I. Herzen, N.P. Ogarev, N.G. Chernyshevsky, whose conclusions being either very close either complementing each other composed the whole system of standpoints and general program of state remodeling. The author investigates populism origin at different stages of historical development beginning from populism that emerged at the turn of 1850–60s, during the period of preparation and realization of the peasant reform. The author pays special attention to the consideration of the idea of the populism founders’ concern to envisage a peasant as a firm rural master, an active participant of economic and politics. We may call the populists the ideologists of “green revolution” in Russia who more than seventy years had successfully and purposively been protecting peasantry’s interests connecting with them their expectations to overcome “vicissitudes in our agriculture.” Hereafter the author describes the situation from the end of 1850s, when the populists was fighting against “feudal system” i.e. first against serfdom, and later against half-serf lawlessness that remained in the Russian village after 1861. The author pays attention to the priorities of the populism founders that are the following: task of remodeling of state structure, form of government and political regime and related questions referring to constitutional and municipal right, constitutional ideas of which were developing in the tideway of the most significant political achievements of XIX century. The author points out in the article that the critical target of the populism was a democratic legal community with socially oriented market economy. According to the points of view of the populism founders, realization of that target may open the gate for a higher stage of social development that got the title of “socialism” in XIX. A.I. Herzen and N.G. Chernyshevsky were among thinkers of XIX century who began convergence of liberal and socialist ideas as they saw in socialism not a destructor but an inheritor of liberal values – a natural addition of freedom ideas by the ideas of social justice. Besides, the author points to the occurrence of conditions of free, objective analysis of populism “inheritance” at the present time.

Аннотация: The author states in his article on the basis of Russian und foreign sources the history of the German and Austrian compensating payments to the Russian citizens-victims of the Nazi regime. A short review of the previous events is given: the mass forced deportation of civil citizens in the occupied soviet territory and soviet prisoners of war to the Fascist Germany and their enlisting to forced slave labour; the repatriation of this people after the war to the home country, where they were badly discriminated; the stubborn unwillingness of Germany and Austria for a long time to recognize the problem of compensation and the true reasons which made them to take a decision abort the compensating payments. An considerable part in the article is given to the analysis of the Russian and foreign basic documents for the compensating payments, in particular for the Acts about the establishment of a German Fund “Memory, Responsibility and Future” and of an Austrian Fund: “Reconciliation, Freedom and Collaboration” as well as of the practical activities of the Russian Fund “Mutial Understanding and Reconciliation” concerning the conducting of the compensating payments and the realization of international humanitarian programs for the victims of the Nazi regime in Russia. The German and Austrian payments were not a real compensation for all the privations und sufferings, for material and mental demage to the victims of the Nazi regime, the article says. At the very beginning from the compensation were excluded many categories of victims: soviet prisoners of war, who suffered most of all suffers from the war, the persons, who were replaced inside the occupied soviet territory and many others. Nevertheless the payments were one of the most remarkable events in the political relationship of Russia with Germany and Austria in the last century and nowdays. They permitted many hundred thausends suffers from the Nazi regime to get a financial and moral help, which they so much needed. An the some time these payments demonstrate the recognision of injustice of the Nazi system, flagrant violation of human rights and human dignity. The article is intended for historians und lawers, for those who are intresting in the history of the World War II and the afterwarperiod as well as for the people, whom the article is devoted to: for the living victims of the Nazi regime.

Аннотация: The Constitutional Conference transcript gives us a possibility to capture the actual authors of the provisions on the impeachment institution in Russia, disputes with regard to its establishment, alternative approaches by various authors of the Constitution and even, not least importantly, the environment, the “political climate” within which the draft Constitution of the country, including the article on renunciation of the Presidency, was being developed. The article is focused only on passive responsibility of the President of the Russian Federation, more precisely, on developing the Constitutional provision on renunciation of the Russian Federation Presidency within the framework of the Constitutional Conference. The Constitutional Conference transcript demonstrates the multiple attempts by S.A. Filatov, an author of the Constitution close to the first Russian President B.N. Yeltsin, not to establish such mechanism in Russia at all. S.A. Filatov’s position is clear-cut: “We should not be too keen on impeachment.” The pragmatic “Kotenkov’s concept” aimed at protection from future legislators prevailed at the Constitutional Conference. The concept provides for the procedure of renunciation of the Presidency in the Constitution, however, the procedure itself is extremely complicated and stipulated in much detail. Its pragmatic purpose is to avoid possible surprises on the part of yet unelected and, therefore, unclearly disposed towards the President legislators after the Constitution adoption. Eventually, A.A. Kotenkov and his “constitutional adherents” got the expected result: the option more convenient for the President – to provide for the impeachment institution at the same time stipulating it in the maximum possible detail “at home,” i.e. at the President’s Constitutional Conference, there and then, in order to keep the situation “under control.” It is common knowledge that the procedure of renunciation of the Russian Federation Presidency established by the Presidential Constitutional Conference in 1993 is extremely complicated. In our opinion, this article gives us a real classical example in the Constitution when the responsibility of the President is formally stipulated and implementable, however, both the article itself and the Constitution in general contain multiple effectively functioning mechanisms rendering the practical implementation of the supreme sanction with regard to the first person of the country difficult to the maximum extent. Minor likelihood of renunciation of the Presidency is not only due to a particularly complicated procedure described above. A number of other factors should also be mentioned. First of all, it should be reminded that half of the Federation Council chamber members are representatives of executive authorities of constituent territories of the Federation which, in their turn, are formed with direct participation of the President of the Russian Federation. It should also be noted that the President of the Russian Federation takes part in formation of the Constitutional and Supreme Courts and, as everyone knows, it is him and only him who nominates judges for approval by the Federation Council. So, specifically in order to understand the basic reasons for such an article in the Constitution, for such a result, we regarded it a priority to try recreating a really unbiased picture of the way the Constitution authors in 1993 wished to settle the impeachment institution. Each article of the 1993 Constitution has a separate story, its own background, its own “constitutional heroes.” Kotenkov’s, Mityukov’s Yakovlev’s, Filatov’s supporters and others have become the history of the Russian constitutional reforms of the 1990s and we need to asses them as the authors of the constitutional provisions in an impartial and unbiased manner. It’s time to find out “who is who?” in the Russian constitutional process. In our opinion, an attentive analysis of the Constitutional Conference transcript and of the not less important transcript of the Constitution Committee giving a significant impetus to the whole constitutional process in 1990s is the priority direction both for comprehensive research in the story of the Russian constitutional processes of the 1990s and at the same time for a more adequate study and understanding of the contents of the Russian Supreme Law. Proper study of the debates, of all the disputes around each provision of the Constitution at the time when such provisions were actually being developed allows more adequate and precise interpretation of each constitutional provision.

Аннотация: The article examines one aspect of the differentiation of civil procedure – its simplification. This trend is developing in theory as well as in judicial practice. It is important to distinguish the simplification of the process – as the direction of aspirations of the legislator (as well as of scholars, lawyers, making the appropriate proposal) and simplified procedure. It is also incorrect to speak about the simplification for the court, or simplification for the parties. While developing and suggesting simplified procedures we should take into account the most important parameter – the principle of simplification. It means that simplification may be conducted in every way which allows preserving the essence of the phenomenon itself. This principle follows from the rules and laws of dialectics and formal logic. In addition, a systematic approach and compliance of simplified procedures with objectives of civil procedure should be observed. While trying to answer these questions the author is addressing the concept of the civil-procedural form, analyzing it from historical standpoint and from the perspective of theory of law and procedural branch of legal science as well. The main specific idea of the article is that the simplification is regarded as modification, and the procedural form – as an element of the essence (an attribute) of civil procedure. It allowed to align the arguments according to the laws of dialectics and formal logic. The author does not support the view of some theorists of law on the loss of importance and the uselessness of the term “procedural form.” Instead of that relying on refined and updated definition of procedural form, the author puts forward the principles of simplification of civil procedure. As a result, the author concludes that the importance of civil-procedural form lies in the fact that it allows to define the limits of possible changes of procedures of dealing with civil cases, in particular, the limits of simplification. This is important for the legislator, and for the researchers.

Аннотация: Unlike the Soviet law that was based on the idea of legal positivism meaning that law is limited to a number of legal norms, the system of modern Russian law rests on the natural law concept, which presumes that there are certain ideas and principles going beyond and giving ground for existence of written legal acts. Article 15(4) of the Russian Constitution states that universally recognized norms of international law is a component of Russian legal system beside the ordinary legislation and international treaties ratified by the Russian Federation. Russia is also a party to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, providing that an international treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (a jus cogens norm). These provisions are very important for Russian labour law taking into account a big role of international sources in this branch of law. The International Labour Organization Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, 1998 names four basic rights and principles of labour law: the freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining; the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour; the effective abolition of child labour; and the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation, as fundamental ones and further states that each ILO member state is obliged to follow these principles and rights irrespective of the fact of ratification of any convention concerning these principles. This obligation is motivated by the statement that member-states have already undertook these obligations having ratified the ILO Constitution and ILO Declaration of Philadelphia (Declaration concerning the aims and purposes of the International Labour Organization, 1944) being an annex to the ILO Constitution. Nevertheless, it is impossible to find a clear statement in the texts of the ILO Constitution and the Declaration of Philadelphia that all four principles and rights must be respected by the member-states. This raises several questions: does the difference in contents of Declaration of 1998 and ILO Constitution and Declaration of Philadelphia mean that ILO’s position is in fact meaning that these four principles and rights should be treated as the jus cogens norms? Should any other principles of labour law be added to the list of jus cogens norms? The interpretation of these principles is also a very important issue. Should these principles be interpreted only in the limits of national legislation on their application, or it must be based on the interpretation by the ILO control bodies that goes far beyond the plain text of the ILO Conventions? Is it possible to make a statement that such interpretation is an unformalized source of labour law? The article is an attempt to give answers to these rather difficult questions, important both to Russian national and international labour law.

Аннотация: The question of the nature of criminal liability in the Russian jurisprudence neither can be considered well studied nor fully posed. For most researchers the spectrum of scientific definitions of liability rules out the need for its thorough study and reduces the analysis to selection of the definition most suitable for resolution of tasks at hand. The shift of exploratory interests towards techno-legal and semantic analysis results for the liability concept in the loss of its ontological and axiological nature, blurs the distinction between liability and other mechanisms of criminal law regulation, fails to clarify the analysis of the processes of criminalization of deeds and differentiation of liability. The ontological guideline was selected as the starting point for the analysis in order to compensate for the deficit in scientific understanding of philosophical and legal aspects of criminal liability. It allowed to trace back the evolution of theory and practice of criminal policy and determine the following philosophical and legal approaches for defining criminal liability: philosophical and social school of the classical school considers criminal liability as an element of social responsibility. The objective-subjective dualism of liability elements is the basis of the classical theory. The objective element manifests itself in the demands the society makes to the person’s actions and the subjective one – in consciousness of guilt (positive liability concept); whereas the classical approach attributes criminal liability to the ethical experience of the guilty person, the positivistic school views it as a retribution and intimidation tool. In the positivistic interpretation criminal liability is a legal consequence of the crime; limitations to the legal status of the person; limitations of personal and property nature etc. Not to deny justice to the mentioned evaluations, it is impossible to ignore that this approach deprives criminal liability of the dynamic nature, fails to define its functional properties and its place in the system of criminal law regulation; detailed elaboration of the normative criteria of criminal liability resulted in formation of the new techno-legal concept within the positivistic school. Supporters of the school single out material and procedural attributes of liability and identify it with application of sanctions and privations to the guilty person; propositions of the Marburg neoclassical school constituted the basis of the functional approach. Criminal liability is viewed in the light of the universal characteristics and interpreted as a legal tool for prevention and resolution of conflicts, specific method or instrument of pressure on the person guilty of committing a premeditated crime etc. Functional evaluation of liability allows to define its dynamic nature but does not display the mechanism of legal pressure; evolution of philosophical and legal concepts resulted in formation of eclectic scientific school. It consists of the following areas: 1) identification of criminal liability and criminal law relations; 2) limitation of liability by the nature of legal relations; 3) its identification with legal duty; 4) analysis of liability as a State power. The concept of criminal liability as an element of regulatory and protective criminal law relations is at embryonic stage of development. In regulatory relations the concept arises from the moment the criminal law is enacted and constitutes a way to enforce criminal law prohibitions, and in protective relations it constitutes the nature of relations between the State and the offender.

Аннотация: The article describes the most urgent problems of state control over the protection of agricultural lands as a means of providing for the ecological safety of the Russian Federation. Facts from various sources demonstrate how important and even necessary its to provide for such state control.These facts also speak about the unfavourable situation related to the reduction in agricultural lands, the withdrawal of such lands from the turnover of national economy and the degradation of the lands (worsening fertility and other aspects). So according to the statistics of 2008 there was a reduction in agricultural lands that was 864,1 thousand hectares less than in 2007. One of the basic laws for the complex control over agriculture is the Federal Law “On the development of agriculture.” According to that law the state carries out the state agrarian policy being one of the trends of the state social and economic policy aimed at steady development of agriculture and rural areas. The law and other federal target programmes are aimed preservation and reproduction of agricultural lands and other natural resources. To achieve the goals mentioned above it’s urgent to take measures for keeping up soil fertility, preservation and efficient use of agricultural lands and agrolandscapes. It is also necessary to provide for the increase in the manufacture of qualitative agricultural production by using regeneration and enhancement of soil fertility of agricultural lands. In conclusion it’s worth mentioning that the realization of those measures will lead to food and ecological safety of the Russian Federation. However it’s possible only in case of full-scale funding of all programmes of measures.

Аннотация: The conditional early release institute has originally had a time character. Time periods which are necessary to serve to get a conditional release are fixed in Criminal Code (s 79) and they depend on the category of crime. In spite of a long history of the institute and its detailed regulation there are a lot of disputable problems in theory and practice connected with correct operation of terms. These problems usually arise from uncoordinated or contradictory provisions of law or judicial practice which are devoted to questions of terms calculating. There are three Codes which are concerned with matter of handling of time periods. There is given an analysis of existing law rules and the author explains his position on this issue. The roots of the problem of incorrect terms handling have terminological grounds: many scientist suppose that an unserved term in conditional early release institute must have the same characteristics (also including a title) as a probation period in conditional release institute. That suggestion leads toward using of analogy with conditional release institute and establishing of time frames for the unserved term. We suppose that the present law provisions on this matter more suitable because they reflect that a general probation in conditional early release institute is fulfilled while a sentence is serving. For the purpose of establishing an unified attitude to this problem it is supposed to use in theory the “control term” which could be understood as the unserved term. The most difficult situation in terms handling is the appointment of an additional punishment. This question is not regulated by Criminal Code. The Supreme Court of Russia also does not provide unambiguous rules. The solution to this problem lies in the sphere of doctrine. There are several proposals on the definition of the control term, the most appropriate is this: if the person has served the whole primary punishment, the court may release the convicted person from serving the additional punishment and the control term will be equal to the unserved part of the additional punishment. If the court release the convict from the primary punishment the control period will be equal to the most longest of two terms.

Аннотация: The article covers the current problems of shaping the basics of the special theory of forensic examination of shot traces and circumstances. The author states that the results of forensic ballistic tests are often one of the most important source of evidence in investigation and judicial examination of cases concerned with firearms use. This circumstance determines the necessity of developing theoretical and methodological grounds for both forensic ballistic examination on the whole and its types: forensic examination of firearms and its cartridges and forensic examination of shot traces and circumstances. Ballistics is the source for shaping theoretical and methodological grounds of the types of forensic ballistic examination. The author states the importance of forensic ballistics and traces the development of ballistics from the Archimedes’s works to our days. It is emphasized that theoretical grounds and methods of shot traces study were developed simultaneously within the frameworks of forensic medical examination and criminal investigation technique, namely forensic ballistic examination. The main milestones of forensic examination general theory development are covered as they are reflected in the works of A.I. Winberg, A.P. Shlyakhov, N.T. Malakhova and the criticism of opponents S.P. Mitrichev, N.A. Selivanov, A.A. Eisman and Ye.R. Rossinskaya. The article is concluded with the characteristic of contemporary forensic examination general theory condition as an independent area of scientific knowledge, serving as foundation for shaping theoretical grounds for various kinds (types) of forensic examination within the framework of a single science. From this point of view, the relation between main concepts of the subject and the object of general and special theory is presented. It is underlined that the process of shaping the special theory of forensic ballistic examination was based on the basics of the theory of forensic identification, thus allowing the determination of the basics of the theory and its methodological grounds, while simultaneous creation of theoretical concepts of expert identification and diagnostics extended the basics of forensic ballistic examination theory. It is noted that an important component of the forensic examination general theory is the doctrine of the “language” i.e. the system of expert concepts and terms denoting them, with the problems of formalizing and unifying the expert language. The author’s conclusion is that successful development of forensic examination general theory will allow rethinking of conceptual basics of its special theories, including that of forensic examination of shot traces and circumstances.

Аннотация: The article notes that according to IMO’s information there are more than 50 large cases of abandonment of seafarers annually. In national legislation of states which have largest the tonnage of sea-ships (including Russia), there is no definition of abandonment. In IMO’s practice this term is understood as “abandonment without help.” Abandonment without help takes place when the ship-owner does not carry out certain basic obligations to the seafarers, concerning timely repatriation and payment of not paid compensation, granting of the articles of prime necessity, appropriate food, habitation and health services, and also in those cases, when masters of ships remain without any financial means intended for operation of a vessel. Guarantee of repatriation and the maintenance of seafarers in a case of abandonment without help, and also compensation payment should be a part of the rights provided by the work agreement, and-or the rights of seamen established by the legislation. When the shipowner does not carry out the obligations, seamen should have a possibility to apply about help to the flag state and, in certain cases, to the state whose citizen is the seafarer, or to the state in whose port vessel is found. The article analyzes the Guidelines on Provision of Financial Security in Case of Abandonment of Seafarers (Resolution А.930(22)) and the Guidelines on Shipowners’ Responsibilities in Respect of Contractual Claims for Personal Injury to or Death of Seafarers (Resolution А.931(22)). Both Guidelines were accepted by IMO Assembly at 22 Session on November 29, 2001 and came in force since January 1, 2002. In connection with acceptance of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 the author carries out comparative legal analysis of a balance of provisions of the Convention and Guidelines concerning abandonment of seafarers. In conclusion recommendations are given about improving the international legal regulation of this problem.

Аннотация: The citizenship of the European Union (also known as a “European citizenship”) is a relatively new and unique phenomenon in the modern legal history. It was established at the same time as the European Union itself (by the Treaty on European Union of 1992). Since then the European citizenship has become subject of intense discussions between academic lawyers and political scientists as to its “nature” and ‘content”. Whether it is a real citizenship while the EU is not a State? Practically, what it means for the citizens (nationals) or the EU Member States who are automatically recognized nowadays as a “owners” of this citizenship (“Union citizens”)? In other words, what is the raison d’être of this legal construction? Basing on the new version of the EU constitutive Treaties (as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon of 2007, in force from the 1 December 2009) and on the EU Court of Justice case law, the article proposes a new concept of the European citizenship. On the one hand, the European citizenship is an attempt to strengthen direct political ties between the peoples of the EU and the EU itself as a public entity endowed with legislative and administrative powers. The Treaty of Lisbon especially reflects this in the new title II introduced into the Treaty on European Union (title II “Provisions on Democratic Principles”). On the other hand, the European citizenship initially was and still rests first and foremost the particular legal form (or mechanism) to liberalize to the greatest possible extent the relations between the EU Member States at the level of their civil society. This is proved by the list of the EU citizens’ rights enshrined in the EU Treaties and Charter of fundamental rights before and after the Treaty of Lisbon. The core right in the abovementioned list included into the second part “Non-discrimination and Citizenship of the Union” of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (ex Treaty establishing the European Community of 1957 amended and renamed by the Lisbon Treaty of 2007) is the right to move and reside freely on the territory of all EU Member States. Furthermore, the migrant EU citizen (i.e. EU citizen residing in Member State of which he is not a national, for example a French citizen living in Germany) is authorized to exercise electoral rights in cross-border context such as a right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament as well as municipal elections. Most other rights in the abovementioned list are also granted to other natural and legal persons residing or having their registered office in the EU (such as right to complain to European Ombudsman). Henceforth they cannot be considered as EU citizens’ rights in the proper sense of the term. The article also attracts attention to the fact that after entry into force of the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union the number of economic freedoms proclaimed in 1957 as part of common market of former European Economic Community has acquired a new stature as fundamental rights in constitutional law sense (for example, free movement of workers or freedom of establishment for self-employed persons).

Аннотация: By adjusting the order of integration of people with expertise in litigation, as well as the use of the results of their work during the investigation, consideration and resolution of criminal cases, criminal procedure law (designed to achieve the goals that lead to the need for the criminal procedure law) does not regulate the activities of the expert in the study and draw conclusions from the study. At the same time, and criminal procedure and other branches of law, contain provisions that provide the opportunity and conditions for the production of certain actions, called “expertise,” uniformly determine its nature: regardless of the type used by special knowledge and variety of applications, examination of how work on the study of a particular object carried out by expert in order to obtain information of interest to the initiator of production involves the study and giving opinion on the request authorized by the agency, entity or person. The foregoing suggests that we are dealing with an independent social phenomenon. Public relations, arising from the need for some people to get interested in them information on issues whose resolution requires the use of knowledge, which they themselves (or at all to the necessary extent) do not possess and the possibility of other to grant such information on the results of the research. Since the judicial review could be requested to any person possessing special knowledge, we must recognize that the components of forensic work are equally as the work of government and non-expert agencies and the activities of persons designated by the experts from among those in their facilities is not working. Study of domestic legislation (criminal procedure, in the first place) shows that the production of examinations by any person designated by an expert in labor law is perceived as a payable. However, postulating that an expert can only be one who has the special knowledge, criminal procedure law, by virtue of their nature, considering the expert solely as a subject of criminal procedure, legal, granting the appropriate rights and responsibilities, the fact that his procedural functions are derived from the professional, proper attention is not paid – the question of how individuals appointed experts acquire “expertise” in demand in the proceedings, and to what degree at the time of their own, remains out of sight of the legislator. Meanwhile, an expert in the new millennium in 99% of cases – a professional who has chosen this type of activity motivation, as appropriate to his personal interests and preferences. The expert – a subjective, occasionally \"distraction from normal activities (including studying the problems of “big science”) the will of officials bearing the burden of proof on the wane. Today, therefore, issues related to improving the training of forensic experts in dire need of adequate modern legal realities of the settlement.

Аннотация: 30 октября 2009 года на кафедре философии Московской государ- ственной юридической академии имени О.Е. Кутафина состоялся круглый стол на тему «Власть в современном обществе», посвященный памяти М. Хайдеггера (1889–1976 гг.) и К. Ясперса (1883–1969 гг.). Открывая за- седание, заведующий кафедрой философии д-р филос. наук, профессор А.В. Водолагин предложил использовать категориальные ресурсы фунда- ментальной онтологии и экзистенцфилософии для осмысления феномена власти в массовом обществе.

Аннотация: