Национализация (экспроприация) собственности иностранных инвесторов: актуальные проблемы

The subject. Foreign investments in the economy of states play an important role. As a consequence, priority should be given to the protection of foreign investments and the creation of favorable and stable conditions for the investors activities. This is especially important in cases of an unfavorable political environment, various internal and external conflicts. Crossborder investment activity is risky, and one of the possible risks is the nationalization (expropriation) of the property of foreign investors by the state-recipient of investments. This method of seizing private property is regulated by the state both at the international legal level and at the national level. The institution of (nationalization) expropriation of the property of foreign investors has its own specifics in Russian legislation in terms of terminological features and legal regulation with certain problematic aspects inherent in it.The purpose of the article is to determine the content and correlation of the concepts of "nationalization" and "expropriation" in Russian law; to describe the main international approaches to regulation of these issues as well as Russian model. The authors try to describe the existing problems inherent in this institution in private international law in general and in Russian legislation in particular and suggest possible ways to solve them.The methodology. The research was carried out using formal-logical, systemic, comparative, formal-legal methods, analysis and synthesis.The main results, scope of application. The content and correlation of the concepts "nationalization" and "expropriation" in Russian law is determined, it is proposed to consider them synonymous. International approaches to regulating the nationalization (expropriation) of the property of foreign investor are examined. The regulation of this institution in Russia is considered; certain problems inherent in nationalization (expropriation) are investigated, possible ways to solve them are suggested.Conclusions. It is now necessary not only to create conditions for attracting foreign investments, but also to ensure their safety in view of the development of cross-border investment activities. In particular, this can be achieved by establishing a detailed regulated procedure for the nationalization (expropriation) of the property of foreign investors, providing guarantees of compensation and legality in such seizure of their property. The institution of nationalization (expropriation) of property in private international law should be considered as one of the possible risks in the implementation of investment activities, which means that states should take measures to minimize risks in order to increase investment attractiveness. It can be achieved through detailed legislative regulation at the national level and a conclusion of international treaties (the “force of law” should be upheld, not the “law of force”).Определено содержание и соотношение понятий «национализация» и «экспроприация» в российском праве, предложено считать их синонимичными; изучены международные подходы к регулированию национализации (экспроприации) собственности иностранных инвесторов; рассмотрено регулирование этого института в России; исследованы отдельные проблемы, присущие национализации (экспроприации), предложены возможные способы их решения. Сделан вывод о том, что институт национализации (экспроприации) собственности в международном частном праве следует рассматривать как один из возможных рисков при осуществлении инвестиционной деятельности, а значит, государствам в целях повышения инвестиционной привлекательности следует предпринимать меры по его минимизации, в том числе посредством подробного законодательного регулирования на национальном уровне и заключения договоров на международном (отстаиваться должна «сила права», а не «право силы»)

Пределы ограничения прав и свобод человека при обеспечении безопасности (постановка проблемы)

The subject. The world faced a coronavirus pandemic in 2020. Many states, including Russia, adopted harsh measures that were largely based on restricting human rights and freedoms in an effort to counter pandemic spread. Inter-State borders were closed, restrictions were imposed on the operation of public catering organizations and the holding of sports and entertainment events was suspended, some of the fundamental rights were heavily con-strained. This resulted in the growth of public disaffection, falling of incomes and a worsening of the overall economic environment. As a result, the problem of the permissibility of restrictions of human rights and freedoms for the sake of public security, as well as the requirements for such restrictions, had once again become relevant.The purpose of the article is, firstly, to learn what is the concept of “freedom” nowadays, to define the conditions and principles of application the permissible restrictions on human rights and freedoms, their aims and purpose. The authors dare to analyze the laws and regulations establishing the possibility of restricting human rights and freedoms and to give a description of the procedure for imposing restrictions in situations of greater danger.The methodology of research includes formal legal interpretation of legal acts, systemic approach to cognition of social relations, analysis and synthesis.The main results, scope of application. The definition and concept of freedom, its limited character, the regulation of the possibility of its restriction for the purpose of protecting society have been studied and defined. Russian and international legislation on the restriction of human rights and freedoms has been analyzed. The principles on the basis of which it is permissible to restrict human rights and freedoms have been identified. The principle of the inadmissibility of restrictions on all rights and freedoms; the adequacy of the imposed restrictive measures to the existing threat; the principle of economic efficiency; the principle of detailed regulation of the imposed restrictions are among them. It has been found out that there is a threat of establishing tyranny with arbitrary restrictions on human rights and freedoms.Conclusions. In today’s world, the restriction of human rights and freedoms should be considered as a necessary measure to ensure the security of the individuals and of society as a whole, especially in the situations of a great danger to public interests. At the same time, the imposing restrictions should be strictly regulated and, moreover, possible abuses should be avoided in order to minimize the negative consequences and avoid establishing totalitarian regime.Рассмотрено содержание понятия «свобода», определены условия, при которых ограничения прав и свобод человека можно считать допустимыми, их цели и задачи, принципы и пределы установления таких ограничений. Проведен анализ нормативных правовых актов, устанавливающих возможность ограничения прав и свобод человека, описан порядок введения ограничений в ситуациях повышенной опасности. Сделан вывод, что в современном мире ограничение прав и свобод человека допускается как необходимая мера, которая позволяет обеспечивать безопасность как отдельно взятого человека, так и общества в целом, что наглядно проявляется в критических ситуациях, при этом вводимые ограничения следует жестко регулировать и не допускать возможных злоупотреблений в этой сфере для минимизации негативных последствий и избежания угрозы установления тоталитаризма