Political regime is a system of methods, means and means of exercising political power. Any changes that occur in the essence of a state of this type, first of all, are reflected in its regime, and it affects the form of government and the form of government.
The concept of a political regime is key to the formation of ideas about the main systems of power. Based on it, the true picture of the principles of organization of the political structure of society is judged. The political regime characterizes a certain political climate existing in a particular country during a specific period of its historical development.
Signs of a political regime:
The degree of participation of the people in the mechanisms of formation of political power, as well as the very methods of such formation;
The relationship between the rights and freedoms of man and citizen with the rights of the state;
Guaranteed rights and freedoms of the individual;
Characteristics of real mechanisms for exercising power in society;
The degree to which political power is exercised directly by the people;
The position of the media, the degree of openness in society and transparency of the state apparatus;
The place and role of non-state structures in the political system of society;
The nature of legal regulation (stimulating, restrictive) in relation to citizens and officials;
The nature of political leadership;
Taking into account the interests of the minority when making political decisions;
The dominance of certain methods (persuasion, coercion, etc.) in the exercise of political power;
The degree of rule of law in all spheres of public life;
Political and legal position and role in society of the “power” structures of the state (army, police, state security agencies, etc.);
A measure of political pluralism, including multi-party system;
The existence of real mechanisms for holding officials, including the highest, to political and legal responsibility.
The overwhelming number of state scientists do not classify the political regime as a form of state, but consider it a separate institution. A political regime can completely, fundamentally distort the form of government, therefore this is the most important manifestation of the essence of the state. All modes are divided into: democratic And undemocratic.
Concept "democracy" means democracy, the power of the people. However, a situation in which the entire people would exercise political power has not yet been realized anywhere. It is rather an ideal, something to strive for. Meanwhile, there are a number of states that have done more in this direction than others (Germany, France, Sweden, the USA, Switzerland, England) and which other states often focus on.
Signs of a democratic regime:
1. The population participates in the exercise of state power through direct (when citizens, for example, in a referendum, directly make decisions on the most important issues of public life) and representative democracy (when the people exercise their power through representative bodies elected by them);
2. Decisions are made by the majority, taking into account the interests of the minority;
3. Election and turnover of central and local government bodies, their accountability to voters, transparency;
4. Methods of persuasion, agreement, and compromise dominate;
5. Law reigns in all spheres of public life;
6. The rights and freedoms of man and citizen are proclaimed and actually ensured;
7. Political pluralism, including multi-party system;
8. Separation of powers.
9. Developed cultural level of people, willingness to cooperate, compromise and consent.
Democratic regimes are divided into: bourgeois-democratic, social-democratic, patriarchal-democratic, liberal-democratic regime.
Signs bourgeois-democratic regimes:
1. The supremacy of the constitution and parliament.
2. Multi-party system (parties must be developed).
3. Diversity of forms of ownership (leading - private).
4. Introduction of a system of separation of powers into the entire state mechanism.
5. The presence in the constitution of an extensive system of democratic rights and freedoms.
6. Pluralism of ideology and pluralism of expression.
Signs social democratic regime the same as that of the bourgeois-democratic one, the difference is one, but significant: in such countries the main emphasis is on the social protection of the individual, on the implementation of enormous social programs; in its pure form, this regime exists only in Sweden.
Patriarchal-democratic regime(Kuwait, Brunei, Swaziland, Bhutan) - customs and traditions prevail as sources of law.
Liberal democratic regime - weakly progressive. Liberal values are the protection of human rights, the priority of universal human values, and integration with the world. The state with such a political regime is headed by the intelligentsia and carries out progressive reforms, but there are no material and financial means to realize national interests. Such a political regime exists in Namibia and India.
Non-democratic political regimes:totalitarian, authoritarian, fascism. The main difference between non-democratic regimes and democratic ones is that there is absolute dominance of the executive branch over the legislative branch.
The concept " totalitarianism"in the literal sense of the word means "whole", "whole", "complete". In each of the countries where a political totalitarian regime arose and developed, it had its own specifics. At the same time, there are common features inherent in all forms of totalitarianism and reflecting its essence. Totalitarian regime characterized by absolute state control over all areas of public life, the complete subordination of a person to political power and the dominant ideology (a state of a purely fascist type).
Signs:
1. In the process of regime formation, the nature of the law changes, which is considered as a form of expression of violence. The expansion of power was facilitated by the creation of a huge state apparatus. Power is usurped either by one person or by a small group of people.
2. Unification and ideologization of public life. There are no independent public organizations - children's, youth, and adults.
3. State-bureaucratic monopoly in the economy: the absence of private property leads to the fact that the state is the only employer.
4. Declarative nature and limited rights and freedoms of a citizen. Totalitarianism is based on statism; the source of rights and freedoms is the state, which grants rights and freedoms in accordance with its goals.
5. Violence and terror as a means of control.
6. Isolation from the outside world.
In turn, the totalitarian regime is divided into:
Tyranny- power belongs to one who creates the laws himself, but does not obey them. The army and the punitive apparatus play a big role.
Dictatorship- power in the state belongs to a certain estate or class; all other layers of society are declared hostile, legality is replaced by expediency. Examples are the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, the Jacobin Dictatorship, the Paris Commune.
Military dictatorship- the state is headed by the highest command ranks and the entire economy is subordinated to the development of the military complex. Such regimes existed in Japan and Greece.
Junta(Chile) - the state is headed by the military, but the government is created from the rest of society (liberal government).
Cult of personality- extreme degree of totalitarianism, genocide of one’s own people is carried out, a combination of repressive methods, persecution of dissidents. Such regimes existed in the USSR (Stalin), China (Mao Zedong), Yugoslavia (Bros Tito), Turkmenistan (Saparmurat Atayevich Niyazov), etc.
Racist political regime- at the head of the state are representatives of one race or nation. According to the ideology of racism, there is a struggle between races until the superior race defeats the inferior. Society is divided into certain racial groups.
Theocratic (religious regime)- such a regime poses a huge threat to its own people and other peoples and countries. The head of state is also the head of the church (the king in Saudi Arabia). There is only one state religion in the country, the rest are prohibited under threat death penalty(Afghanistan, Iran). The sources of constitutional law are the sacred scriptures and traditions (Koran, Sunna, Vedas, Bible, Torah). The role of judicial law (in a broad sense) is played by canon law. Special religious courts are being created. Special religious spiritual punitive bodies are being created.
Regime of nomenklatura democracy- this regime has established itself throughout the entire post-Soviet space, with the exception of the Baltic countries and Turkmenistan.
Fascism- a regime in which the state ideology is extreme nationalism, manifested in the fact that the state has decided to take care of the prosperity of its nation at the expense of the destruction and enslavement of other states. The consequence is genocide against Gypsies, Jews, Slavs, who were subject to physical destruction. Repressions are not directed within the country, as with the cult of personality, but against other countries and peoples.
The state is headed by a leader (the Fuhrer, Duce, etc.), and there is a party system (with the exception of Japan during the Second World War). In fascist states, the party and state apparatus completely merge. The role of representative government bodies is reduced to nothing. All power is exercised by the leader and his apparatus. A simplified legal procedure is being introduced, i.e. coercion is carried out not by a permanent court, but by emergency bodies.
Authoritarian regime- a state-political structure of society in which political power is exercised by a specific person (class, party, elite group, etc.) with minimal participation of the people.
The main characteristic of this regime is authoritarianism as a method of power and management, as a type of social relations (for example, Spain during the reign of Franco, Chile during the reign of Pinochet), Azerbaijan, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Zimbabwe, Jordan, Iraq, Yemen, Cameroon, Kenya , Laos, Malaysia, etc. - today. An authoritarian regime can be seen as a kind of “compromise” between totalitarian and democratic political regimes
Signs:
1. In the center and locally, there is a concentration of power in the hands of one or several closely interconnected bodies, while simultaneously alienating the people from the real levers of state power;
2. The principle of separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial is ignored (often the president and executive and administrative bodies subordinate all other bodies to themselves and are endowed with legislative and judicial powers);
3. The court acts as an auxiliary body, along with which extra-judicial authorities can be used;
4. The scope of the principles of election of state bodies and officials has been narrowed or eliminated;
5. As methods government controlled command and administrative ones dominate, at the same time there is no terror, mass repressions and harsh violent methods of exercising political power are practically not used;
6. Partial censorship remains, there is no complete total control over all spheres of public life, as under a totalitarian political regime;
7. There is no single ideology.
8. There is partial pluralism, opposition is not allowed, only an imitation of a multi-party system can exist;
9. The rights and freedoms of man and citizen are mainly proclaimed, but are not actually ensured in their entirety (primarily in the political sphere);
10. The individual is deprived of security guarantees in relations with the authorities;
11. Security forces are practically uncontrollable by society and are sometimes used for purely political purposes;
12. The role of the leader is high, but unlike totalitarianism, he is not charismatic.
Each state consistently and gradually moves from one type of regime to another.
State (political) regimes, depending on the set of methods and means of state power, are divided into democratic and anti-democratic.
Democratic regime is a way of exercising government power, characteristic features which are: the formation of government bodies by election; political pluralism, guaranteed existence of political rights and freedoms of citizens.
The concept of “democracy” means, as is well known, democracy, the power of the people. However, the situation in which all the people would exercise political power, but has not yet been implemented anywhere. It is rather an ideal, something that everyone should strive for.
Signs of a democratic regime:
· recognition of the people as the main source of state power;
· freedom of enterprise and recognition of private property;
· real guarantee of human rights and freedoms;
· exercise of state power based on the principle of separation of powers;
· decentralization of state power;
· a real opportunity for citizens to participate in the formation of state bodies and control over their activities;
· absence of a generally binding official ideology, multi-party system, freedom of opinion and belief;
· presence of legal opposition.
The types of democratic regime are:
1. Liberal democratic regime.
Exists in those countries where market relations have developed. Examples include the industrialized countries of Europe and the United States. This regime is now being established in Russia. A liberal state not only proclaims rights and freedoms, but also promotes their enjoyment. In a liberal state there are many parties of various political orientations, including opposition ones. Government bodies are formed on the basis of free elections, when each person is given the right to express his opinion regarding a particular candidate.
State power is exercised on the basis of the principle of separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial. This is what reduces the possibility of abuse of power.
2. Proper democratic regime.
This is a more developed and freer regime for people. They came close to him Scandinavian countries(Sweden, Finland, Norway). Main distinctive features such a regime are: the solution of many state issues by taking into account the opinions of the people expressed in referendums, during polls, with the help of popular initiatives; high level life, humanism and morality of people.
Anti-democratic regimes.
Among the anti-democratic regimes most often called totalitarian and authoritarian.
1. Totalitarian regime.
The term “totalitarian” translated from Latin means “whole”, “whole”, “complete” was introduced into political circulation by B. Mussolini in 1925 to characterize the fascist movement. Like a political regime totalitarianism represents comprehensive state control over the population, all forms and spheres of social life and is based on the systematic use of violence or the threat of its use.
The totalitarian regime existed in the former USSR, now in Cuba, in North Korea, Iraq. The essence of a totalitarian regime is manifested in the control of power over all aspects of human life. Not only a person’s views on the social order are controlled, but even his personal life. And if a person’s beliefs do not coincide with the guidelines of the authorities, then coercive measures are applied to him. Let us remember that, for example, Alexander Solzhenitsyn served a sentence in Stalin’s camps only because he wrote a letter to a friend from the front, where he doubted the correctness of Stalin’s policies.
The center of a totalitarian system is the leader. His position is akin to divine. He is declared to be the wisest and most infallible, fair, constantly thinking about the good of the people.
In a totalitarian state, a person’s rights and freedoms are limited, although formally they can be proclaimed in the constitution.
Fascism is considered a type of totalitarianism. Its characteristic feature is the oppression of people on ethnic grounds.
Signs of a totalitarian regime:
· ideologization of all public life on the basis of the official ideology for the entire country;
· intolerance of dissent;
· monopoly on information;
· suppression of human individuality, mass terror against the population;
· merger of the state and party apparatus;
· centralization of power (often headed by a leader);
· denial of private life and private property, dominant position of state property.
Such a regime is considered more “democratic” compared to a totalitarian one. Its main specificity is that the state is led by a narrow circle - ruling elite, which is headed by a leader and enjoys great privileges and benefits. Such a regime existed in the USSR during the reign of L. Brezhnev and M. Gorbachev.
Under an authoritarian regime, the authorities do not so openly trample human rights and freedoms. For example, the authorities did not dare to imprison academician Andrei Sakharov for his views, in particular for his condemnation of the war in Afghanistan. A. Sakharov was exiled to the city of Gorky, where he lived in an ordinary city apartment, but under the constant control of the KGB, without the right to leave the city.
Under authoritarianism, a parliament may exist, but it does not play any role in the state. In reality, public life is directed by the party (religious) leadership. The decisions of the central government do not take into account the opinion of the people, and therefore coercion must be used to implement them. That is why in such a state the power of punitive agencies (police, security agencies) and the army is strong.
· the power of the elite is not limited by law;
· the people are removed from government and cannot control the activities of the ruling elite;
· V political life the existence of a multi-party system is allowed, but there are really no opposition parties;
· the presence of spheres free from political control - the economy and private life. The political sphere is mainly subject to control;
· priority of state interests over personal interests.
In addition to the above types of anti-democratic regimes, there are other types:
3. Despotic regime.
It existed, for example, in Egypt during the time of the pharaohs, in Babylon, in Assyria, in Russia under Ivan the Terrible.
In despotism, power is exercised exclusively by one person. The despot entrusts some administrative affairs to another person who enjoys special confidence in him (for example, a vizier in the East). The will of the despot is arbitrary, and sometimes autocracy borders on tyranny. The main thing in a despotic state is obedience, fulfillment of the will of the ruler.
Under despotism, any independence, discontent, indignation and disagreement of the ruled are brutally suppressed. The sanctions applied in this case shock the imagination with their severity (hanging in the square, stoning, burning, quartering, wheeling, etc.). The authorities strive for visibility in the application of punishment in order to sow fear and ensure obedience.
A despotic regime is characterized by complete lack of rights for its subjects.
4. Tyrannical regime.
Based on individual rule and characterized by the presence of a governor. Typically, tyranny was established in the process of territorial conquests (Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire, etc.), accompanied not only by physical and moral violence against people, but also violence against the religion and customs of the people. Thus, in the Ottoman Empire, a part of the population that opposed the spread of Islam was literally slaughtered.
The power of a tyrant is cruel. In an effort to suppress resistance and sow fear among the population, he executes not only for expressed disobedience, but also for discovered intent in this regard. Tyrannical power is perceived by the people as oppression, and the tyrant is perceived as an oppressor, a tormentor.
5.Military regime.
This is a political regime in which the head of the state is a military group (junta), which gained its power as a result of a coup d'etat.
The political regime is the most important, dynamic and relatively autonomous element of the state form. This is expressed in his ability to determine the nature and methods of interaction between government, society and the individual and change the form of government and government structure.
Political regime- this is a system of methods, methods and means of exercising political power, reflecting the state of rights and freedoms, the attitude of public authorities to the legal foundations of their activities.
According to researchers, the main features of a political regime are:
· the degree of participation of the population in the mechanisms of formation of political power;
· electoral system, i.e. the rules by which candidates are elected to the highest bodies of power;
· the party system, which determines the essence of the political regime;
· the principle of legitimacy of public authorities;
· methods of making political decisions;
· the relationship between the rights and freedoms of man and citizen with the rights of the state;
· guarantee of individual rights and freedoms;
· the degree of rule of law in all spheres of society;
· the nature of legal regulation (stimulating, restrictive) in relation to citizens and officials;
· principles of relationships between society and government;
· the place and role of interest groups (lobbies, pressure groups, trade unions and other organizations) in the political system of society;
· political and legal position and role of state security forces in society.
Depending on the degree of social freedom of the individual, the guarantee of her rights and freedoms, the nature of the relationship between the state and society, three types of regimes are distinguished: totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic.
Totalitarianism(from Latin totalis - whole, whole, complete) - this is a regime of complete control by the state over all spheres of society and every person through direct armed violence.
For totalitarian regime The following signs are characteristic:
· complete absorption by the state of the entire society and a specific person;
· extreme degree of centralization of power in the hands of the leader, relying on the ruling party, or a narrow group of people from the ruling elite;
· formation of state power in a bureaucratic closed way and its inaccessibility to control by society;
· regulation of social relations based on the principle “only what is directly permitted by law is permitted”;
· the dominance of a single mass party that proclaimed itself a leading and directing force and actually merged with the state;
· denial of natural human rights, recognition only of rights granted by the state, which are of a declarative, formal nature;
· the presence of a monopoly official ideology, which is recognized by everyone and acts as a mechanism that shapes the needs and motives of individual behavior and integrates society around priority goals;
· active mobilization of the population to carry out political and social tasks through fear, violence, and coercion;
· power monopoly on information, complete control over the media;
· general police surveillance of society, designed to suppress any manifestations of dissent and dissent, systematic terror against opponents;
· a powerful military-industrial complex, a large army as the main support of the regime.
Totalitarianism has two varieties.
1. “Left” totalitarianism existed in the form of Soviet communism in the USSR and similar regimes in socialist countries.
2. “Right” totalitarianism was represented by Italian fascism, German National Socialism, Japanese militarism, Spanish and Latin American fascism.
Authoritarian(from lat. antoritas-power) regime is a type of regime, the basis of which is the dictatorship of one specific person or group. Authoritarianism is a kind of “compromise” between totalitarian and democratic political regimes. The essential feature of this regime is the nature of the relations between government and society, the state and the individual, built more on coercion than on persuasion.
· alienation of the people from the real levers of power;
· concentration of certain powers in the hands of one person (monarch, political leader) or group (military junta, religious clan);
· reducing the role of parliament and other government bodies to the position of purely formal institutions, strengthening the role of executive and administrative bodies;
· the circulation of elites occurs through co-optation, that is, their volitional introduction into governing structures on the basis of personal sympathy and devotion to the leader;
· refusal of complete, total control over all spheres of public life. The authorities retain full control over their own security, national defense, public order and foreign policy. Economy, culture, religion, private life remain out of control. The principle “everything is allowed except politics” applies;
· basic methods of public administration - command, administrative; Mass repressions are practically not used, there is no terror;
· monopolization of politics, which means banning the political opposition, political parties, public organizations and other political subjects. In some cases, “limited pluralism” is allowed in the form of a limited number of trade unions and political parties operating under the strict control of the authorities;
· lack of a single “sacred” ideology imposed on the entire society, reliance on a vague concept of “national interest” and populism;
· the rights and freedoms of man and citizen are proclaimed, but are not actually ensured. Basic civil rights mode suppresses;
· security forces are outside the control of society and are used for purely political purposes.
"Democracy" (demos-people, tcratos-power) translated means democracy, the power of the people.
However, nowhere in the world has a situation been realized in which the entire people would exercise political power. This circumstance should be taken into account when considering a democratic political regime.
Democracy is the most complex type of political regime, which has the following characteristics:
· the source of power is the people;
· decisions are made by the majority taking into account the opinions of the minority: the people have the right to influence the development of political decisions;
· political power is legitimate and is exercised in accordance with adopted laws;
· the principle “everything that is not prohibited by law is permitted” applies;
· recognition and real implementation of the principle of separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial;
· methods of persuasion, agreement, compromise dominate; forceful methods used in exceptional cases;
· security forces are under democratic control of society;
· high degree of realization and guarantee of human rights;
· institutional and political pluralism, which presupposes the activities of various legal institutions, competition among political parties, movements, mass associations, associations, and interest groups.
Modern democracies exist in approximately 35 countries and are considered to be quite effective form relationships between authorities and citizens (Switzerland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, etc.).
The concept of “political regime” in the literature they are interpreted within the framework of narrow and broad approaches.
IN in the narrow sense concept of "political regime" is considered as a state regime, which is understood as a set of methods and tools for the implementation of state power.
At broad approach concept of "political regime" reveals the political atmosphere of society, which is formed as a result of the interaction of state power, various political forces and institutions of society.
In practical terms concept of political regime is the most important characteristic of the state, since the real political atmosphere, the level of its economic and legal status are truly important for a person.
It should be noted that the same political regime can be implemented under different forms and types of government. For example, in terms of the form of government, England is a constitutional monarchy, Germany is a parliamentary republic, France is a presidential republic, but the type of political regime in these states is the same - bourgeois democracy.
It should be noted that a change in the type of political regime often leads to a change in the form of the state and vice versa.
To understand the nature of these relationships, it is necessary to take into account the entire political situation in the state, as well as the enormous impact on political regime all institutions of civil society.
Depending on these factors political regime usually divided by two kind: democratic and non-democratic (authoritarian and totalitarian) .
In the history and practice of statehood development, there are various examples of types of democratic regimes, but their essence is invariably manifested in democracy.
Overall modern look democratic regime the following are typical features:
Acceptance of the will of the people as the only source of state power;
Implementation of state power based on the principle of separation of powers;
Election and rotation of representatives of public authorities;
The presence of political and legal mechanisms that guarantee direct or indirect participation of citizens in government;
A wide range of real rights and freedoms for individuals and society;
Political pluralism;
The presence of real opposition forces.
The most important feature of a democratic political regime is the systematic and peaceful change of state leaders and the ruling party.
Authoritarian regime is a type of state-political structure of society in which political power is exercised by a certain political figure (party, elite group, etc.) with little or minimal participation of the population.
At all levels of government, the real levers of control are concentrated in the hands of one or several interrelated bodies and officials;
The principle of separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial is not observed;
The real power capabilities of representative bodies are noticeably limited;
The court is used by the real leaders of the state as an auxiliary body;
The principles of election of officials and their accountability are significantly limited;
Administrative methods of public administration predominate;
Limited censorship and partial pluralism are practiced;
Human rights and freedoms are not guaranteed in their entirety, etc.
The term “totalitarianism” was introduced into political circulation by Benito Mussolini in 1925 when describing his own movement. It began to be actively used in scientific literature in the 30s of the 20th century.
Let's consider the concept of “totalitarianism,” which is characterized by a set of certain features. Totalitarianism is a political regime, the essence of which is comprehensive and constant control over the population, which involves the systematic use of violence or its threat.
Totalitarianism how a political regime is characterized by the following features:
Monism (i.e. lack of pluralism), which presupposes the presence of one (usually expressed by the state) only correct position on the understanding of certain issues from various fields public and state life;
All power is concentrated in the hands of the apparatus of one party;
The activities of all other types of political parties and organizations are prohibited;
Consistent and strict centralization of power, headed by the leader;
Implementation of a common ideology for the entire population at the state level;
Active dissemination of the equalizing principle in all spheres of society;
Monopoly possession of truth by representatives of the totalitarian system;
Sacrificing private and personal interests in the name of fulfilling national objectives;
Intolerance to any kind of dissent, dogmatism;
State monopoly on the creation and dissemination of information, complete control over the media.
Authoritarian and totalitarian types of regimes differ in a number of parameters. Firstly, totalitarianism characterized by universal control, and authoritarianism- partial. Secondly, when authoritarian regime tactics of selective terror are used in order to prevent the emergence of effective opposition, when totalitarian regime systematic terror is being implemented against opponents of the government.
Thus, the above types of political regime reflect the main approaches to organizing the life of the state and society, which were implemented in practice.
- Back
- Forward
There are many types of political regimes, since one or another type of political regime is influenced by many factors: the essence and form of the state, the nature of legislation, the actual powers of government bodies and the legal forms of their activities, the balance of socio-political forces, the level and standards of living and the state of the economy , forms of class struggle or class cooperation.
A significant influence on the type of political regime is exerted by the historical traditions of the country, and in a broader sense, by a kind of socio-political “atmosphere” that sometimes develops contrary to the wishes of the dominant layer in the state or contrary to directive forecasts.
The appearance of a political regime can also be influenced by the international situation. At different historical stages, different political regimes are formed; they are not the same in specific states of the same time.
Thus, the period of slavery was characterized by despotic, theocratic-monarchical, aristocratic, oligarchic regimes, and the regime of slave-owning democracy. During the times of feudalism, the characteristic regimes were absolutist, a regime of a kind of “feudal democracy,” clerical-feudal, militaristic-police, or a regime of “enlightened absolutism.” Under capitalism there are liberal, bourgeois-democratic or constitutional, Bonapartist, military-police, fascist, as well as “fascism-like”, for example, corporate or racist-nationalist, as well as dictatorial-monopolistic and puppet, in some Islamic countries - clerical -fundamentalist.
The experience of socialism testifies to the possibility of the manifestation of people's democratic, national political regimes, liberal, but at the same time authoritarian, totalitarian regimes, the regime of a workers' and peasants' dictatorship.
A certain continuity and the presence of some fundamentally unchanged substantive characteristics make it possible to reduce the entire variety of political regimes to two large varieties: democratic And anti-democratic political regimes.
Democratic regime presupposes a fairly wide range of actually secured rights and freedoms of man and citizen, protection of the individual from arbitrariness and lawlessness, the implementation of state activities only on the basis and within the framework of the law, etc.
The mechanism of the state is not only the main, but also the defining link of the political system. It ensures the functioning of all spheres of public life. The mechanism of the state can have both positive and negative effects on the processes occurring in society.
The modern state is rather a mechanism for coordinating the inevitably different needs and interests of citizens and their organizations in order to ensure the common good, rather than “an apparatus of violence of one class over another.”
The structure of the state mechanism is diverse and changeable, it includes government bodies with authority, government agencies that do not have authority, organizational and financial means and coercive force (police, troops, correctional labor institutions).
An element (cell) of the mechanism of state power is a person (person) - a subject (bearer) of state power. Elements of the mechanism are combined in various ways to form institutions (bodies, forms of direct democracy, etc.). These are state institutions, and therefore they do not include institutions of civil society, including political parties, “pressure groups”, and the media that have an (real) influence on the process of formation and implementation of state power.
But in order to become state, political power must become public, i.e. political will, reflecting the dominant social group interests in society. It must be given a generally binding, legally enshrined character. Political will must be channeled through the rules of law established by the state. Mechanism modern state is characterized by a high degree of complexity, diversity of organs and institutions.
Summarizing approaches to the study of the mechanism of the state, we can identify three most significant concepts regarding the concept of “mechanism of the state”.
First of them is a concept of a broad and narrow interpretation of the mechanism of the state, defining it in a narrow sense as an apparatus of state power, and in a broad sense as a political system of society.
Second concept- traditional, considering the mechanism of the state only as an apparatus of state power.
Third concept— expansionary, characterizing the mechanism of the state as a system of all government bodies, organizations, enterprises and institutions.
The state mechanism has the following features (properties):
- Official apparatus- as a specific part of society. It consists of a special group of people who have separated themselves from society, do not coincide with it, and for whom management is the main occupation. They are vested with authority, have special training and are subject to special rules established by the state.
- Unity and Subordination of structural elements. WITH The organs that leave it, despite their different competence and structure, are parts of one whole, are interconnected, and form a system. Hierarchy implies the construction of a state mechanism in the form of a pyramid, where higher authorities have more powers than lower ones and are able to influence their activities, and lower authorities are obliged to carry out the decisions of their superiors. Relationships between government agencies can be built both on the basis of coordination (between Federal Assembly- the Parliament of the Russian Federation and legislative bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation), and on the basis of subordination (prosecutor's office).
The isolation of individual parts of the mechanism and their transformation into a dominant force is in itself an indicator of the crisis of political power that states periodically experience.
- Special powers. Each body has imperious powers that are binding on everyone. Speaking on its own behalf, the state body acts as a government authority.
- The presence of a coercive apparatus. The presence of organizational and material instruments of coercion is mandatory. Coercive apparatus - "power structures": army"; internal affairs bodies; Federal Security Service; intelligence, counterintelligence; border service; apparatus of bailiffs; penal system; other bodies performing coercive functions.
- Unity of goals and objectives for all components of the state mechanism. It is created to carry out the functions of the state, and this connection is most noticeably reflected in the specific structure of the state apparatus. The state mechanism can be called “state power” or “public power”.
Separation of powers theory
The mechanism (apparatus) of a modern rule-of-law state is built and functions on the principle of dividing state power into three independent branches of power - legislative, executive and judicial powers.
For a long time, the theory of separation of powers was considered by Soviet science exclusively as bourgeois (reactionary), as “an absurdity like squaring a circle” and for this reason was rejected.
The principle of separation of powers is a rational organization of state power in a democratic state, in which flexible mutual control and interaction of the highest bodies of the state are carried out, as parts of a single government, through a system of checks and balances. (Alekseev S.S. et al. Theory of State and Law. M. 1997. P. 139).
This principle was most fully and consistently reflected first in the state constitutions (Virginia - in 1776, Massachusetts - in 1780, etc.), and then in the federal Constitution of the USA in 1787.
The founders of the classic version of the theory of separation of powers are J. Locke and C. Montesquieu.
JohnLocke (1632-1704) - English philosopher. In his works, in particular “On the State,” he divided state power into legislative, executive and union. Legislative power belongs to the parliament, which issues laws, executive power belongs to the king, who ensures the execution of laws, and also exercises union (federal) power, i.e. resolves issues of “war and peace”, international relations. John Locke does not distinguish the judicial branch separately. John Locke wrote: “When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same man, or in the same body of magistracy, liberty is impossible, for fear may arise that the same monarch or senate may introduce tyrannical laws, use them in a tyrannical manner."
Charles Montesquieu (1689-1775) - French thinker who, in his writings (“On the Separation of Powers”) substantiated the idea that to ensure political freedom it is necessary to separate powers into legislative, executive and judicial. He singles out the judiciary as one of the branches of government. All three powers have counterbalances and constrain each other.
Thus, the main requirement of the principle of separation of powers, formulated by D. Locke and C. Montesquieu, is that To establish political freedom, ensure the rule of law and eliminate abuse of power on the part of any social group or individual, it is necessary to divide state power into legislative power - elected by the people, designed to develop a strategy for the development of society and regulate social relations, executive power - appointed legislative body and involved in the implementation of adopted laws, judicial- acting as a guarantor of restoration of violated rights.
Moreover, each of these authorities, being independent and mutually restraining each other, must carry out its functions through a special system of organs.
Among the highest government bodies that carry out their activities on the basis of this principle, there must be a body occupying a leading position. This is necessary, first of all, in order to eliminate the possibility of struggle between them for leadership, since struggle and discord can weaken state power. The founders of the theory of separation of powers gave the “palm of primacy” to legislative (representative) bodies.
Executive power carried out by the head of state (president, constitutional monarch, shah, emir, etc.), the government, various ministries and other central institutions (committees, commissions, departments, inspectorates, services, bureaus, etc.). d.), local government executive authorities. The main function of the executive branch is to organize the execution of laws adopted by the legislative branch. The President and the government manage the system of government bodies and other executive bodies subordinate to them, ensure the implementation of the Constitution and laws, and also perform other functions assigned to them by the Constitution and law.
In contrast to the legislative power, which is of a primary, supreme nature, the executive (administrative) power is essentially secondary, derivative in nature. This, by the way, follows from the etymology of the concept “administrator” (“administrare” - “to serve for”; “ministrare” is a verb derived from “ministris” - “servant”, the genitive form of the stem “minus” - "minus"). The root “minus” indicates that the administration is always in a subordinate position, there is someone above it who holds power. The tasks of the administration remain unchanged in nature and consist in the execution of instructions given to it by the bearers of power, and in resolving private issues in accordance with this.
The essential features of executive power are its universal and substantive nature. The first sign reflects the fact that the executive power and its bodies operate continuously and everywhere, throughout the entire territory of the state. In this they differ from both legislative and judicial bodies. Another sign means that the executive power, also unlike the legislative and judicial power, has a different content, since it relies on human, material, financial and other resources, uses an instrument of career advancement and a reward system. In the hands of the executive branch there is a very formidable force, because the existence of state power finds its expression precisely in its officials, the army, the administration, and judges. Among this force, a special role belongs to armed formations: the army, security agencies, militia (police).
Judicial branch- is a system of independent state bodies - courts, called upon to administer justice on behalf of the state, to resolve all arising disputes and conflicts in court sessions. The system of judicial authorities includes courts of general jurisdiction, constitutional and arbitration courts. Judges are independent and subject only to the constitution and law. Legislation in a rule of law state, as a rule, provides for the irremovability and immunity of judges.
The court occupies a special place in the system of government bodies. This special place is determined by the very tasks of the court, its purpose, as well as the principles of organization and implementation of judicial activities. An essential feature of the judiciary, which determines its fairness, is the special procedure (methods) for its implementation. It boils down to the fact that, as a prominent Russian statesman wrote, B. N. Chicherin, hold the scales equal for both sides, sort out the rights and demands of each and finally pronounce your verdict.
The court performs a specific (belonging only to it) state function - the implementation of justice. It considers criminal and civil cases in accordance with the procedure established by law, and decides the guilt of persons brought to justice. As a rule, the result of judicial activity is the application of state coercive measures to offenders. Thus, the court ensures the implementation of the rules of law, and with its own specific means and methods.
The exclusivity of the judicial power is manifested in the fact that only the court (and no one else) administers justice.
The judiciary is an independent branch of government, exercised through public, adversarial consideration and resolution of legal disputes in court sessions. The role of the judiciary in the separation of powers mechanism is to restrain the other two powers within the framework of constitutional legality, primarily through constitutional supervision and judicial control.
State bodies of all three branches of government are independent within the limits of their powers; they interact with each other, restrain and balance each other.
State bodies of the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government ensure the fulfillment of the functions of the state, which requires their clear interaction, since each of the authorities has the main and final goal of their activities are the interests of the person, the citizen. Without a clear relationship, this goal cannot be achieved.
For the judiciary, law-limiting means are determined in the Constitution, procedural legislation, its guarantees and principles (presumption of innocence, the right to defense, equality of citizens before the law and the court, etc.)
In relation to the legislative branch, a rather strict legal procedure of the legislative process is used, regulating its activities from legislative initiative to the signing and entry into force of a particular legislative act. In the system of restraining factors, the president can play an important role, signing laws and having the right to use a suspensive veto in case of hasty decisions of the legislative branch.
The activities of the Constitutional Court can also be considered as restraining, since it is obliged to repeal all unconstitutional acts. The executive power (government) is limited to the limits of departmental rule-making, prohibitions on the adoption of acts affecting such relations that should be regulated only by law.
The principle of separation of powers is not absolute; the state-legal forms of its implementation depend on national traditions in a broad sense, on the specific socio-economic and political situation.
Summarizing the consideration of the mechanism of the state, built on the principle of separation of powers, we can formulate the following organizational and legal features:
The sole sovereign power belongs to the people;
There is no body in which the fullness of state power—legislative, executive and judicial—would be concentrated;
The independence of the three branches of government and the state bodies implementing it is relative;
A system of checks and balances limits the power of each organ of government and prevents the concentration of power within any one branch of government to the detriment of the other two branches.
Fundamentals and features of the rule of law
As human civilization develops, the state gradually transforms from a primitive “barbaric” coercive and repressive entity into a democratic and humane organization of political power based on the rule of law.
At the same time, law plays a dominant role only when it is the measure of freedom of an individual and all members of society, when it appears as the embodiment of the moral, spiritual and humane principles of its state organization.
The developed legal system of the state does not yet indicate the presence of legal statehood in society. In totalitarian states, legal acts were regularly issued and their strict implementation was ensured, but many laws contradicted the law. Administrative and disciplinary offenses were recognized as criminal offenses (absenteeism or being late for work entailed criminal penalties), as well as acts that, due to their insignificance, only formally bear the signs of a crime (theft of one or two kilograms of grain - several years of camps).
The laws violated fair and objective legal categories and principles (for example, the administration of justice only by the court), generally accepted moral norms (children are not responsible for the crimes of their parents). USSR legislation provided for criminal liability of “members of the families of traitors to the Motherland,” for whom special camps were created, for example, the notorious ALZHIR (Akmola camp for the wives of traitors to the Motherland).
Constitutional state is a state limited in its actions by the law that protects freedom and other individual rights and subordinates power to the will of the sovereign people. The idea of a rule of law state is associated with two fundamental principles: the legislative order in the state and the security of the citizen. For its assertion and strengthening, legitimate power takes the form of law. As noted L. Dugis, the state is nothing more than a force given to the service of law.
A state brought under the control of law is a state of law, an all-encompassing political organization of society based on the rule of law. The rule of law means that no government agency, party or public organization, enterprise or official, no citizen is exempt from the obligation to obey, observe and fulfill the law. This also means that all other legal acts adopted by various government bodies must be based on the law and not contradict it. This is the meaning of the highest legal force of law in the hierarchy of legal acts.
Fundamentals of the rule of law
The fundamentally important prerequisites and conditions for the creation and strengthening of the rule of law are the following elements that form the foundation of the rule of law.
Economic basis of the rule of law are certain production relations based on the development of various forms of ownership, free enterprise, the fight against economic monopoly, etc.
Social basis a legal state presupposes: the presence of a civil society, free citizens, equal before the law, with wide social rights. Creation in society of the conditions necessary for each person to realize his creative and labor potential, ensuring personal rights and freedoms of a person and their guarantee.
Moral basis The rule of law is formed by the universal human principles of humanism and justice, equality before the law and personal freedom, its honor and dignity.
Political basis rule of law is most fully manifested in its
sovereignty. The rule of law is a sovereign state, in other words, it concentrates the sovereignty of the people and nations inhabiting a certain country.
Thus, we can conclude that the purpose of the existence of a modern rule of law state is to create, within the framework of the law, conditions for optimal personal development.
So, a state can be recognized as legal if its functioning is based on law and whose main activity is the observance, provision and protection of human rights and freedoms.
Principles of the rule of law
The rule of law has features that are inherent in every state. However, in addition to them, the rule of law is characterized by the following features.
Modern approaches to understanding the rule of law can be reduced to the following basic principles:
1. Democratization of society;
2. Law supremacy;
3. Legal protection of a person;
4. Separation of powers and establishment of legal foundations for state-building.
These and other principles are the fundamental ideas that define the model of the rule of law.
The basis of the rule of law model is a combination of several provisions:
Recognition of a person as the highest value and goal of the state, and not as a means of solving certain state problems;
The reality and priority of individual rights and freedoms in relations with the state, ensuring the free development of the individual: “It is not man who exists for the state, but the state that exists for man”;
Democratic lawmaking, ensuring the consolidation of the will of the majority in law, taking into account the interests of the minority;
The supremacy and direct effect of the constitution and law in all spheres of public life. “The law is strict, but it is the law”;
External and internal sovereignty of the state;
Compliance of domestic legislation with generally recognized principles and norms of international law (or direct effect of international norms);
The people, their sovereign will, is the only source of state power;
Concentration of all state powers in the system of state institutions created on the basis of universal, equal and direct elections of the entire population;
Mutual responsibility of the state and the individual;
The state is bound by law, its status as a subject of law and equality in this capacity with other subjects, primarily with the citizen;
Separation of powers in the organization of public administration;
Availability of effective organizational and legal means of control and supervision of society over the activities of government bodies at all levels and the implementation of laws;
Preventing monopolism in politics and economics;
Unity of rights and duties of citizens;
The presence of a developed civil society.
Rule of lawOnly such an organization of political power in the country can be recognized that is based on the supremacy of a humane, fair law, operates strictly within the boundaries defined by law, and ensures social and legal protection of its citizens.
Signs of a rule of law state
With the development of state legal institutions and their theoretical understanding, the main, essential issue of a legal state becomes the problem of the relationship between power and personality. The solution to this issue leads to the emergence of the idea of popular sovereignty, which, in fact, is the main feature of the rule of law.
The sovereignty of the people is the basis and source of state sovereignty. State sovereignty means the supremacy, independence, completeness, universality and exclusivity of the power of the state.
The sovereignty of the people means that only the people are the source of all the power that the state has. This very bold idea for its time was put forward by a famous medieval scientist Marsilius of Padua. The author of “Defender of Peace” believed that the sovereign in the state is the people-legislator. This was a completely new humanistic understanding of man - the creator and creator of his own destiny.
This concept was adopted J.-J. Rousseau and got my further development. The Rousseauist interpretation of sovereignty is based on the fact that the state (republic) is the result of a social contract. Sovereign power should be understood as an expression of public interest. In a state, each person acquires civil freedom in exchange for his own independence. For Rousseau, the “general will” inevitably acquires a legal character and fits into the framework of natural law.
Associated with sovereignty is such a feature of a rule of law state as the rule of law. The activities of the state as a legally organized social whole must necessarily be carried out only in legal forms and in accordance with the law.
In a rule-of-law state, not a single government body, official or public organization, not a single person has the right to infringe on the law. They must bear strict legal liability for violating it.
In a rule-of-law state, the subject of litigation can be not only a legal dispute, but also the law itself. For this purpose, the state has a Constitutional Court.
Mutual responsibility of the state and the individual
The state, while establishing the measure of human freedom in legal laws, at the same time limits itself in its own decisions and actions: “Everything that is not prohibited to an individual is permitted to him.” “Everything that is not permitted to the authorities is prohibited to it.”
The obligatory nature of the law for state power is ensured by a system of measures that are designed to limit its arbitrariness:
Legal liability of government officials at any level for failure to fulfill their duties;
Political responsibility of the government to public authorities;
Political responsibility of deputies to their voters, etc.
On the same legal grounds The responsibility of the individual to the state must be built.
Separation of powers
One of the important features of a democratic state is the separation of powers . Separation of powers - This is a legal principle, the essence of which is preventing the concentration of all state power in the hands of any one of its branches: legislative, executive or judicial, thereby preventing the possibility of abuse of power.
The founder of the concept of separation of powers is considered to be the French educator Sh.-L. Montesquieu, although similar ideas were expressed before him J. Locke, even earlier Polybius, at the beginning of the separation of powers, the state structure of the Roman Republic was founded.
One of the variants of the concept of separation of powers involves the creation of a so-called “system of checks and balances”, when each of the authorities has many opportunities for mutual control and limitation of each other. “There is a need for an order of things in which different powers could mutually restrain each other,” argued the outstanding French thinker Charles-Louis Montesquieu . It's about about the so-called system of checks and balances, where the balance of legislative, executive and judicial power is determined by special legal measures that ensure not only interaction, but also mutual limitation of branches of government within the limits established by law.
Such a state-power mechanism operates in the United States. Another option assumes the priority of one of the branches of government - the legislative branch, which is typical, for example, for England.
In theory, the legislative branch should pass laws, the executive branch should organize their implementation, and the judicial branch should resolve a dispute about law on the basis of a law adopted by the legislative body.
Unlike a unitary state, in a federal state, along with the “horizontal” separation of powers, the principle of “vertical” separation is applied : between the federation and its subjects.
Along with the three traditional branches of government (legislative, executive, judicial), one should keep in mind the functioning of the constituent power; the authorities of public opinion (press); control power; material power associated with such state institutions as the army, police, prison, etc.
Real provision of individual rights and freedoms and their guarantee
This feature of the rule of law is a constitutional principle enshrined in Art. 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993: “Man, his rights and freedoms are the highest value. Recognition, observance and protection of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen is the duty of the state.” The state is obliged not only to respect human rights and freedoms, but also to create conditions for their real implementation.
Human rights are the essence of a rule of law state, most important factor in the development of society as a whole. Famous Sophist Protagoras(481-811 BC) derived an extremely important formula for subsequent eras: “The measure of all things is man.” Over time, an understanding has come that the best guarantee of human rights can be a law that protects the most important interests of the individual, expressed in the form of rights.
In the first third of the 19th century. The German philosopher was called the greatest theorist of the rule of law I. Kant(1724-1804). It is distinguished by the moral justification of law. According to Kant, law is not only a formal condition of external freedom, but also a form of its existence. Kant calls the rules of behavior generated by reason imperative. One of the editions of the categorical imperative is as follows: “Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, both in your own person and in the person of everyone else, as an end, and never treat it only as a means.”
Continental Europe is dominated by the German construction of the rule of law, based on the rationalist tradition. She places emphasis on the philosophy of Kant, and in particular Hegel. The latter understood the evolution of humanity as the consistent development of freedom through the overcoming of arbitrariness. The jurisprudence of many countries tends to interpret law, state, freedom as certain inseparable and to some extent identical categories.
Other important features of the rule of law include:
Presence of a developed civil society;
Creation of institutions of political democracy that prevent the concentration of power in the hands of one person or body;
The supremacy and legal effect of constitutional law, the establishment in law and implementation in practice of the sovereignty of state power;
The rise of the court as one of the means of ensuring legal statehood;
Compliance of laws with law and legal organization of the system of government, etc.
