Public organizations. Main types of public organizations and their functions

In public associations, the dependence of the status of public associations on their territorial sphere of activity has been established. Mandatory indication of the territorial scope of activity public association must contain in the name of the organization. There are four territorial types of public associations:

1. All-Russian public association can carry out its activities in the territories of more than half of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and has its own structural units- organizations, departments or branches and representative offices. Currently, the Russian Federation includes 85 constituent entities. Lack of required quantity structural divisions is a violation and may lead to the liquidation of the public association. Inclusion in the names of all-Russian public associations of the name Russian Federation or Russia, as well as words derived from this name,allowed without special permission.
2. Interregional public association operates in the territories of less than half of the subjects Russian Federation and has its own structural units there - organizations, branches or branches and representative offices. To obtain this status it is enough to have branches in at least 2 constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Interregional public associations have a special structure, which, as a rule, consists of regional and local branches.
3. Regional public association, the activities of such an association in accordance with its statutory goals are carried out within the territory of one subject. For example, the Moscow Public Organization for the Protection of Consumer Rights, as the name of the organization suggests, operates in Moscow.
4. Local public association operates within the territory of only one authority local government. For example, the Losinoostrovskaya Local Public District Organization of Motorists operates on the territory of the intra-city municipality of Losinoostrovskoye in Moscow.

Branches has the right to acquire the rights of a legal entity and also has the right to carry out activities on the basis of its charters, registered in the prescribed manner. At the same time, the goals and objectives of the branches should not contradict the charter of the parent public association. It is the possibility of a regional branch to become an independent legal entity that leads to the fact that when creating a regional branch, it must have at least three members- representatives of this region. Since a public association is created on the initiative of the founders - at least three individuals and (or) public associations.

1.3. ON THE QUESTION OF THE ROLE OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM OF SOCIETY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Pospehov Ivan Alexandrovich. Position: Chief Legal Adviser. Place of work: Regional branch of the All-Russian public-state organization “Voluntary Society for Assistance to the Army, Aviation and Navy of Russia” of the Republic of Mari El. Email: [email protected]

Abstract: The article is devoted to the analysis of a new institution for Russian legal practice - a public-state organization. The author examines the issues of legal regulation of the status of a public-state organization in the Russian Federation, as well as the conditions under which a public-state organization will fully reflect the interests of citizens. In conclusion, the article concludes that a public-state organization is a kind of connecting link between society and the state, created to solve problems at the intersection of the competencies of the state and civil society.

Key words: public-state organization, state, civil society, interests of society, tasks of the state.

TO THE QUESTION OF FUNCTIONS OF PUBLIC-STATE ORGANIZATIONS IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM OF THE SOCIETY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Pospekhov Ivan Alexandrovich. Position: chief legal adviser. Place of employment: DOSAAF Russia Regional branch of Mariy El Republic. Email: [email protected]

Annotation: The article is devoted to the analysis of the new to the Russian legal practice institute - the public-state organization. The author examines questions of the legal regulation of the status of the public-state organization in the Russian Federation, and also conditions at which the public-state organization will reflect to the full concerns of citizens. The author arrives at a conclusion, that the public-state organization is an original link between the society and the state created for the decision of tasks, taking place on a joint of competences of the state and the civil society.

Keywords: a public-state organization, a state, a civil society, concerns of citizens, state tasks.

According to one of the definitions given to us by the theory of state and law, the state is the only possible organization of society in which different and opposing interests prevail, according to their coordination, development and implementation of common goals of the whole society. And only a state that functions for the common goals of the entire society can be considered democratic and legal.

According to Part 1 of Art. 1 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, adopted by popular vote on December 12, 931, the Russian Federation is proclaimed a democratic federal legal state. However, to reconcile different

and the opposing interests of all citizens of our country - this is an enormous amount of work that is extremely difficult for the state to carry out directly.

The institution of public associations is called upon to solve the current problem, i.e. voluntary, self-governing, non-profit formations created on the initiative of citizens united on the basis of common interests to achieve common goals specified in the charter of the public association2. Through this institution, groups of citizens communicate their agreed interests to the state so that subsequent decisions more fully express the common goals of the entire society.

This mechanism is called civil society in science. There are many approaches to it. There are categorical points of view, according to which civil society is “an organized opposition state power"3. However, this position does not correspond to the realities of the Russian state and public construction. As noted in the speech of the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin at an expanded meeting of the State Council, a democratic state in Russia should become an effective instrument for the self-organization of civil society4. Thus, at the present stage of development, the state must promote the development of civil society institutions in order to fulfill its main purpose - the most complete coordination of different and opposing interests of the entire society, for the development and implementation of common goals.

One of the forms of such assistance can be the emergence in domestic legal practice of a new form of public association - a public organization.

In accordance with Art. 51 Federal Law dated

05.19.95 No. 82-FZ “On Public Associations”, pending the adoption of federal laws on state-public and public-state associations, these associations are created and carry out their activities in accordance with the regulatory legal acts of public authorities5.

In accordance with this article, one public organization was created in the Russian Federation.

This is the All-Russian public-state organization “Voluntary Society for Assistance to the Army, Aviation and Navy of Russia”, created in accordance with the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 28, 2009 No. 973 “On the All-Russian public-state organization “Voluntary Society for Assistance to the Army, Aviation and Navy of Russia””6.

2 Russian Federation. Laws. On public associations: Federal Law of May 19, 1995 No. 82-FZ // SZ RF. - 1995. -№21. - St. 1930.

3 Lysenko, V.V. Civil society: on the issue of legal understanding / V.V. Lysenko // History of state and law. - 2009. -№23. - pp. 43-47.

4 On the development strategy of Russia until 2020: Speech by the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin at an extended meeting of the State Council. - M.: Publishing House "Europe", 2008. - P. 22.

5 Russian Federation. Laws. On public associations: Federal Law of May 19, 1995 No. 82-FZ // SZ RF. - 1995. -№21. - St. 1930.

6 Government of the Russian Federation. On the All-Russian public organization “Voluntary Society for Assistance to the Army, Aviation and Navy of Russia”: Resolution of the Government

PUBLIC STATE ORGANIZATIONS

Pospehov I.A.

In this situation, several questions arise about the position of the public-state organization in the political system of society.

On the one hand, Art. 17 Federal Law dated

05/19/95 No. 82-FZ “On Public Associations” stipulates that interference of public authorities and their officials in the activities of public associations, as well as interference of public associations in the activities of public authorities and their officials, is not allowed.

This norm guarantees freedom for citizens to express their interests through public organizations. Otherwise, a situation may arise when the state, by interfering in the activities of public organizations, can create the appearance that it functions for the common goals of the entire society. However, the interests of citizens will not be taken into account, and citizens will not be able to convey them to the state. This state of affairs fundamentally contradicts the essence of a democratic state.

It turns out that public-state organization contradicts the essence of a democratic state?

The above-mentioned article of the Federal Law “On Public Associations” states that interference by government bodies in the activities of public associations is not allowed, except in cases provided for by the Federal Law “On Public Associations”. From this we can conclude that the legislator considers it possible in some cases for mutual interaction between public organizations and the state for the most complete compliance of the state with the interests of all its citizens. However, this influence cannot influence the process of coordinating the interests of members of a public organization and presenting their agreed will to the state.

Thus, we need to find out: what role does this public-state organization play in the political system of society? Is it created so that the state influences society, or so that the state and society jointly solve significant problems?

This question is answered by paragraph 2 of the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 28, 2009 No. 973 “On the All-Russian public-state organization “Voluntary Society for Assistance to the Army, Aviation and Navy of Russia””, according to which DOSAAF of Russia is entrusted with state tasks, namely:

a) patriotic (military-patriotic) education of citizens;

b) training of citizens in military registration specialties;

c) development of aviation and technical sports;

d) participation in development physical culture and military applied sports;

e) flight training for cadets of flight educational institutions vocational education, maintaining an appropriate level of training of flight and engineering personnel, as well as performing other types of aviation work;

f) participation in the preparation for military service of citizens in the reserve;

State Council of the Russian Federation dated November 28, 2009 No. 973 // SZ RF. - 2009. - No. 49 (2 hours). - St. 5969.

g) training of specialists in mass technical professions and development of technical creativity;

h) participation in eliminating the consequences of natural disasters, accidents, catastrophes and other emergency situations;

These tasks are closely related to ensuring the defense capability and security of the country. And since the functions of defense and security are inextricably linked with the possibility of the legal use of force, only the state can perform them.

At the same time, interests in maintaining security are among the interests that cover almost all members of society. In this regard, we can assert that society is interested in helping to strengthen the country's defense capability.

Moreover, the functions of the state in this public-state organization are clearly outlined by the above-mentioned Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation - to assist DOSAAF of Russia in the implementation of the tasks assigned to it. Thus, the state in this organization should not influence the coordination of the interests of its members, but should only assist them in realizing their common goals, which, on the one hand, are common to the vast majority of members of society, and on the other hand, - are one of the forms of implementation by the state of its exclusive function.

In this regard, we can assert that this public-state organization was created for the joint solution by the state and society of significant tasks that are at the intersection of the competencies of the state and civil society.

Thus, we can assume that the public-state organization is a kind of connecting link between society and the state, as the only possible organization of the entire society, in the process of developing and implementing the general tasks of the state that meet the interests covering almost all members of society.

Bibliography:

2. Russian Federation. Laws. On public associations: Federal Law of May 19, 1995 No. 82-FZ // SZ RF. - 1995. - No. 21. - St. 1930.

3. Government of the Russian Federation. On the All-Russian public-state organization “Voluntary Society for Assistance to the Army, Aviation and Navy of Russia”: Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 28, 2009 No. 973 // SZ RF. - 2009. - No. 49 (2 hours). - St. 5969.

4. Lysenko, V.V. Civil society: on the issue of legal understanding / V.V. Lysenko // History of state and law. - 2009. - No. 23. - pp. 43-47.

5. On the development strategy of Russia until 2020: Speech by the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin at an extended meeting of the State Council. - M.: Publishing house "Europe", 2008. - 28 p.

Review:

This work notes that the emergence in domestic legal practice of a new form of public association - a public-state organization is one of the forms of assistance to the state.

ties in the development of civil society institutions in order to fulfill their main purpose - the most complete coordination of different and opposing interests of the entire society, for the development and implementation of common goals. Until the adoption of federal laws on state-public and public-state associations, public-state organizations operate on the basis of Art. 51 of the Federal Law of May 19, 1995 No. 82-FZ “On Public Associations” and regulatory legal acts of government bodies. However, in this situation, several questions arise about the position of the public-state organization in the political system of society.

The author notes that a situation may arise when the state, by interfering in the activities of public organizations, can create the appearance that it functions for the common goals of the entire society. This state of affairs fundamentally contradicts the essence of a democratic state.

Pospehov I.A. notes that the state in a public-state organization should not influence the coordination of the interests of its members, but should only assist them in realizing their common goals, which, on the one hand, are common to the vast majority of members of society, and on the other hand , - are one of the forms of implementation by the state of its exclusive function.

The article concludes that a public-state organization is a kind of connecting link between society and the state, as the only possible organization of the entire society, in the process of developing and implementing the general tasks of the state that meet the interests that cover almost all members of society.

The author has studied issues about the role of public and state organizations in the political system of society of the Russian Federation, and given her own interpretation of the current legislation on the compliance of public and state organizations with the essence of a democratic society.

Doctor of Law, Professor, Head of the Department of Constitutional and municipal law Cheboksary Cooperative Institute (branch) ANO VPO CS RF " Russian University cooperation" A.I. Sidorkin

The idea of ​​creating a civil society arose in ancient times. The ancient Greek philosopher Plato (427-347) wrote about the principles of a harmonious structure of society, Aristotle (384-322) about the status of man and citizen, the role of property in maintaining the stability of public and state institutions, Cicero (106-43) about the state as a common cause of the people , on the role of civic duties and the law.

A lot of time has passed since the emergence of the first public organizations, and it is important to note that their activities and influence have since grown to a global scale. Today in world practice they play a huge role in solving social and other issues of a planetary scale. They are the link between the state and individual citizens. They actively participate in the formation and self-organization of civil society.

The activities of public organizations are usually classified as the so-called “third sector”, since it is believed that democratic societies are divided into three sectors:

• state;
• market;
• non-profit.

"Civil society": basic concepts

There are many definitions of the concept “civil society”. We can distinguish four main ideological and political doctrines of civil society:

• the doctrine of “state-bureaucratic socialism” - civil society is understood as an integral part of the system (an example is the position of trade unions in the USSR);
• the doctrine of “state capitalism” - civil society is considered as the sphere of private business, family, kinship and other non-state relations, which together form the socio-economic basis of the capitalist state; in this case, civil society is not actually a subject of politics;
• the doctrine of “liberal democracy” - civil society is presented, first of all, as an “economic society” in which the state is limited in its ability to regulate economic life and is controlled by public associations and movements;
• the doctrine of “democratic socialism” - here civil society is a set of socio-political organizations and institutions that, along with a democratic state, form the basis of social (economic, political, etc.) democracy.

Destructive public organizations: “uncivil society”

In the life of any society, destructive social formations arise. So, for example, for the political community these are illegal, terrorist organizations; for the economic - the mafia and criminal groups; for the NGO community - totalitarian religious sects, etc.

Destructive public organizations as a type of non-profit organizations can be classified as “uncivil society”. Uncivil society is understood as a set of associations of people who do not respect or comply with the laws of the state.

As noted by Yu. Toma, an expert at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union of Belarus and Russia, “at one time, on the initiative of the West, a sufficiently effective system of non-governmental structures was created and then developed in the post-Soviet space and in Russia itself. According to former US Secretary of State M. Albright, this is about 37 thousand public and political organizations, information and analytical structures. Today, their tasks are to promote the destruction of the cultural and historical identity and self-identification of the country’s population, to counter the formation and development of Russian statehood, and to prevent the strengthening of Russia’s influence in neighboring regions.”

Therefore, the existence of a reliable social organization of Russian civil society without pro-Russian, active and resilient public associations is impossible.

Public associations: terminology

The term “public association”, which is used by Russian constitutional law, corresponds to the concept of “association” in the constitutional law of foreign countries.

IN Western world public associations are classified as non-governmental organizations, which are abbreviated as NGOs - non-governmental organizations. In Russia, the term non-governmental organizations (NGOs) is not widely used and has not entered into legislative practice. This term is mainly used by public associations of Western origin involved in human rights and ecology. In the domestic lexicon, it is customary to call voluntary unions of citizens public or non-profit organizations (NPOs).

Constitutional basis for the activities of public associations in the Russian Federation

The legal basis for the formation and activities of public associations is the right to association guaranteed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, including the right to create trade unions to protect their interests (Article 30). The Constitution enshrines the basic principles of the formation and activities of public associations: voluntariness - no one can be forced to join or remain in any association; freedom of activity; equality of public associations before the law (Articles 13, 30).

The Constitution prohibits the creation and activities of public associations whose goals and actions are aimed at violently changing the foundations of the constitutional order and violating the integrity of the Russian Federation, undermining the security of the state, creating armed groups, inciting social, racial, national and religious hatred (Article 13, Part 5).

All public associations are equal before the law. They are free to determine their own internal structure, goals, forms and methods of their activities. This activity must be transparent. Intervention in it by government bodies and officials is not allowed, as well as interference of public associations in the activities of state bodies.

At the same time, as the encyclopedic dictionary “Constitution of the Russian Federation” notes, “it is hardly justified to unite in one legislative concept and give similar legal status to such different public associations as parties (actively participating in the political process and the struggle for power), on the one hand, and various kinds of sports, technical and other similar public associations - on the other.”

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS IN THE RF: LEGISLATIVE REGULATION AND PRACTICE

The emergence of Russian public associations as a form of emerging civil society was accompanied by a process of change in the country's political structure. The beginning of the 90s was marked by the rapid growth of public organizations in Russia. Citizens began to create sports, cultural, social, educational, trade union and other public organizations. Thus, by the beginning of 2002, about 200 thousand public organizations were already registered in Russia. Thanks to this, in terms of the number of public associations per million inhabitants, Russia, in comparison with other countries, is far from last.

Russian legislation uses three main concepts: “non-profit organization”, “public association”, “non-governmental organization”.

The basic concept is “non-profit organization” (hereinafter referred to as NPO). Legally, non-profit organizations include those organizations that do not have profit as the main goal of their activities and do not distribute the profits received among participants.

A public association is understood as a voluntary, self-governing, non-profit formation created on the initiative of citizens united on the basis of common interests to realize common goals.

The concept of “foreign non-profit non-governmental organization” in Russian legislation is used in relation to non-profit organizations created outside of Russia in accordance with the laws of a foreign state, the founders (participants) of which are not government agencies. Foreign NPOs can operate in Russia through their structural units (branches, branches, representative offices).

Legislative regulation of NPOs

The activities of non-profit organizations are regulated by a number of federal legal acts. The main ones are:

• Civil Code of the Russian Federation, part one (establishes general legal regulation of the status of all legal entities, including non-profit organizations);
• Law “On Public Associations”;
• Law “On Non-Profit Organizations”.

In the sphere of regulation of various organizational and legal forms of NPOs, the following laws apply: laws “On Autonomous Institutions”, “On Non-State Pension Funds”, “On National-Cultural Autonomy”, “On charitable activities and charitable organizations"; Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation “On approval of the regulations on the procedure for establishing and conditions of operation of foreign cultural and information centers on the territory of the Russian Federation.”

It should also be noted the law “On the procedure for the formation and use of endowment capital of non-profit organizations.” The law created the prerequisites for the development in Russia of the institution of endowment - a source of non-state funding for NPOs.

Legal restrictions and responsibilities of non-profit organizations

The restrictions, duties and responsibilities of non-profit organizations are related to such issues as registration of NPOs and their reporting, compliance of NPO activities with current legislation and stated goals, and expenditure of financial resources.

Structural units of foreign NPOs may be refused entry into the register if their goals and objectives pose a threat to the sovereignty, political independence, integrity, national unity and identity, cultural heritage and national interests of Russia. The creation and operation of branches of foreign NPOs and international organizations on the territory of a closed administrative-territorial entity is not allowed.

A branch of a foreign NPO may be liquidated in the event of liquidation of the corresponding foreign NPO; failure to provide information about their programs, receipt and expenditure Money and property; if its activities do not correspond to the goals provided for by the constituent documents.

The fund may be liquidated if the fund's assets are insufficient to achieve its goals; if the goals of the fund cannot be achieved and the necessary changes to the goals of the fund cannot be made; in case the foundation deviates from its statutory goals in its activities.

Registration of a public association may be denied if its charter contradicts the Constitution and legislation of the Russian Federation; if the documents required for registration are not fully submitted, are executed in an improper manner or contain inaccurate information. An organization can appeal the refusal to register in court or re-apply for registration after finalizing the documents.

According to the law “On Combating Extremist Activities,” the activities of public and religious associations and NGOs whose activities are recognized as extremist are prohibited.

Public associations are required to: annually publish a report on the use of their property; inform the registration authority about the continuation of its activities or changes in the statutory purposes; submit reports on your activities to the authorized bodies; assist representatives of the registration authority in familiarizing themselves with the activities of the association.

Also, public associations are required to inform the state registration authority about the volume of financial resources received from abroad, the purposes of their use and actual expenditure. Repeated violation of this requirement serves as the basis for the registration authority to apply to the court with an application to recognize the public association as having ceased its activities and to exclude it from the unified state register of legal entities.

Registration authorities have the right to conduct inspections of the compliance of the activities of a public association with its statutory goals (no more than once a year). And if violations are detected, issue a written warning to the governing bodies of the association indicating the deadline for eliminating the violation. Failure to eliminate the violation within the prescribed period serves as grounds for suspending the activities of the public association.

Discussions and changes in legislation on NPOs in recent years

Within the framework of the strategy of “global soft governance of the world,” control over NPOs occupies an important place along with the influence on national government structures and directly on decision makers.

The most pressing issue about the improper activities of some NGOs was raised in the Address of the President of Russia V.V. Putin to the Federal Assembly in 2004: “Thousands of civil associations and unions exist and work constructively in our country. But not all of them are focused on defending the real interests of people. For some of these organizations, the priority task has become to obtain funding from influential foreign foundations, for others - to serve dubious group and commercial interests, while the most pressing problems of the country and its citizens remain unnoticed.”

In May 2005, at the “Government Hour” in the State Duma, FSB Director N.P. Patrushev proposed strengthening the legal regulation of NPO activities: “Imperfections in the legislative framework and effective government control mechanisms create the ground for conducting intelligence activities under the guise of charitable and other activities.” The need for legislative regulation of the activities of NPOs was also justified by: the lack of transparency in the financing of NPOs and how they spend the funds they receive; the use of NPOs for legalization of income and tax evasion; attempts at foreign policy influence on the internal situation in Russia through NPOs; their role in the “color revolutions” in the CIS countries; the fight against extremism and terrorism.

In 2005-2006, a number of amendments were made to the legislation on NPOs (laws “On Non-Profit Organizations”, “On Public Associations”, “On Closed Administrative-Territorial Entities”). The main changes are presented in the comparative table.

Also in December 2006, amendments were made to the law “On Political Parties”, prohibiting NPOs from sponsoring parties from funds received from such Russian legal entities whose share of state, municipal or foreign participation in the authorized (share) capital exceeds 30% by day of transfer of funds.

The main complaints from international institutions and public figures regarding the legislation and practice of NPOs in Russia

Changes in Russian legislation on NPOs in 2005-2006. caused a number of complaints from the Council of Europe, PACE, the European Parliament, and the US Congress. The following complaints were voiced: problems with registering NPOs and preparing reports; high probability of abuse by supervisory authorities; restrictions for foreign NPOs in comparison with Russian ones.

Representatives of NGOs identify the 5 most common problems:

• insufficiently justified refusal to register NPOs, subjective interpretation of the law and its selective application. A more strict registration procedure requires the involvement of lawyers specializing in the field of NPO legislation in the preparation of a package of documents. Financial costs for registering NPOs have increased (state duty, payment for specialist services);
• lengthy bureaucratic procedures when registering changes in the statutory documents of NPOs;
• Rosregistration structures issuing unfounded warnings to NPOs on grounds that were previously interpreted as technical errors and did not entail sanctions. This often entails inspections of NPOs by authorized government bodies (lasting up to 30 days), including unscheduled ones, which complicate the work of NPOs;
• new reporting requirements, which a significant number of NPOs (especially small ones that do not have their own lawyers or accountants) find it difficult to comply with;
• exclusion of NPOs from the register of legal entities.

There are several high-profile cases where NPOs (including structural divisions of foreign and international organizations) found themselves in conflict situations.

On July 4, 2007, the Educated Media Foundation announced its self-liquidation. CEO Fund M. Aslamazyan was detained in January 2007 while importing an undeclared amount of 9.5 thousand euros into Russia. The Educated Media Foundation was the legal successor of the Internews organization, which was part of the international association Internews International.

In January 2006, Rosregistration filed a lawsuit to terminate the activities of the Russian public organization "Union of Committees of Soldiers' Mothers" (the organization did not provide timely reports on its activities). The claim was subsequently withdrawn.

In 2006, Rosregistration issued a warning to the International Society "Memorial" about violation of the law (non-compliance of the organization's activities with its statutory goals). Subsequently, the warning was recognized as unfounded by the Tverskoy District Court of Moscow.

In December 2007, Rosregistration filed a lawsuit to liquidate the Samara regional branch of the association in defense of voters' rights "Golos". The pretext was the organization's violation of reporting rules. Based on the results of inspections statutory activities Samara branch of the NGO "Voice" its work was suspended. The Samara Regional Court refused to liquidate Rosregistration's branch of the NPO; this decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

In December 2007, the Russian Foreign Ministry announced the suspension of the activities of regional branches of the British Council, with the exception of the Moscow office, from January 1, 2008. The basis for the termination of the activities of branches of the British Council was the lack of necessary legal framework for the organization's work in Russia.

It should be taken into account that after changes were made to the basic laws on NPOs in 2006, the majority of large non-profit organizations operating in Russia successfully re-registered.

As of August 1, 2007, 218,730 non-profit organizations were registered with Rosregistration and its territorial bodies.

For 7 months of 2007, the territorial bodies of Rosregistration made 37,560 decisions on state registration of non-profit organizations (in 2006 - about 32,000), 6,845 - on refusal of state registration (15.4% of the total number of decisions on state registration).

The possibility of simplifying legislation on NPOs was considered by the Human Rights Council under the President of the Russian Federation, the Public Chamber, and the Ministry of Justice. In 2007, the Ministry of Economic Development and the Ministry of Finance prepared a bill providing tax breaks for NPOs engaged in charity and providing social services.

Improving the activities of non-profit organizations in Russia

Non-profit organizations are considered as essential element civil society. V.V. Putin, while serving as President of the Russian Federation, noted that non-profit organizations “could become good, truly irreplaceable partners of the state in solving the most pressing problems, such as the fight against AIDS, drug addiction, homelessness, assistance in the social rehabilitation of people with disabilities, and the development of territorial self-government.”

At the same time, according to some estimates, out of more than 300 thousand registered non-profit organizations, less than 50 thousand are actively operating.

In 2006, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation began its work. There are regional public chambers and the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for promoting the development of civil society institutions and human rights. On December 12, 2007, the founding congress of the human rights movement “Man and the Law” took place, organized with the participation of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation. The movement is conceived as an all-Russian network structure with branches in every municipality.

The 2007 federal budget provided for the allocation of state grants to support NGOs involved in the development of civil society institutions in the amount of 1.25 billion rubles. In 2008, 1.5 billion rubles were already allocated for these purposes.

The main areas of grant allocation are: sociological research and monitoring the state of civil society (60 million rubles); humanitarian projects in the field of culture, art, education and public diplomacy (270 million rubles); human rights activities (about 136 million rubles); promotion of a healthy lifestyle (150 million rubles); social services for low-income citizens (400 million rubles); support for youth projects (230 million rubles).

In January 2008, branches of the Russian Institute for Democracy and Cooperation, which has the status of a non-profit organization, opened in Paris and New York. Its main task is to study the state of civil society, the electoral process, the situation with human rights and migration in the United States and Europe.

Despite Taken measures, it remains relevant to improve law enforcement in relation to NPOs, amend legislation (primarily by-laws), financial and institutional support for NPOs from the state, and tax benefits. The possibility of improving legislation on NPOs was considered by the Human Rights Council under the President of the Russian Federation, the Public Chamber, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry economic development and trade.

WITH THE RIGHT TO PROTECTION

Dmitry Medvedev raised the question of new legislation in the field of NPOs

Vladimir Kuzmin

Yesterday, President Dmitry Medvedev tried to establish a dialogue between the authorities and non-governmental organizations. Having invited a group of human rights activists to the Kremlin, the head of state proposed to find common directions for fruitful work.

Meetings of the Council for Promoting the Development of Civil Society Institutions and Human Rights have always been a difficult undertaking for government officials. No matter how hard the state tries, no matter what signals it gives, representatives of non-governmental organizations have always found and will find negative aspects in the life of the country, which in essence is part of their responsibilities.

The state would like help from human rights defenders rather than compliance and understanding. In any case, it was in this spirit that Dmitry Medvedev tried to build a dialogue with members of the renewed Council yesterday, offering a huge field for joint work. Working together the president will now conduct, for example, with such figures as the famous TV presenter Svetlana Sorokina, who once headed the Open Russia Foundation established by Yukos, Irina Yasina, the liberal political scientist Dmitry Oreshkin, and the famous human rights specialist Valentin Gefter.

At the same time, the president made it clear that the state does not intend to only ask non-profit organizations, but is ready to give them something in return. Medvedev himself raised the topic of legislation in the field of NGOs, which is strongly criticized by human rights activists. “I think you have questions about this legislation,” he noted. “It’s clearly not perfect, despite the fact that we’ve spent quite a lot of time improving it over the past years. I think that some changes in it are possible, and some are even necessary.”

Dmitry Medvedev also understands how difficult it is for NGOs to work in light of the barriers that officials often put up. And they do this, the head of state is sure, only because they see human rights defenders as a threat to their undivided rule.

Meanwhile, the state, at least according to the president, sees non-governmental organizations not as an enemy, but as a partner, but not everyone is ready to consider them partners. "You need to understand one thing simple thing“The state itself should protect rights, people who want to do this should protect rights,” Medvedev said. “Thus, as a result of joint activities, it may be possible to achieve better results.”

Traditionally, it fell to the Chairman of the Council, Ella Pamfilova, to set the tone for further conversation. “We thoroughly prepared for this meeting,” she smiled, although the stack of papers shown to the president looked threatening.

Pamfilova reassured the president: NGOs are really ready to take on many problems and are ready to monitor human rights. But human rights activists seem to have one question left unanswered: do they need this in the legislative conditions in which they have to exist? The legislation on NGOs, already constantly criticized by human rights activists, has again come under criticism. “Even the goal that legislators set—and many set the goal of putting non-governmental organizations under control—turned out to be unfulfilled,” Pamfilova calmly noted, although she could have said it triumphantly to the delight of her colleagues.

“In Russia, people save themselves from bad laws by not enforcing them,” she said. This is bad, but many organizations chose to take exactly this path - they did not register and operate semi-legally. Ultimately, the new legislation created mistrust between human rights activists and the state.

“We are raising the question of creating a different legal framework for NGOs, which would be built not on suspicion, but on trust,” concluded Pamfilova.

This was a kind of signal to action, after which the members of the Council began to systematically and clearly convey to the President the idea of ​​why it is necessary to correct the state strategy in relation to society and non-profit organizations.

After for long years First, the complete absence of such a strategy, and then the equal dialogue proclaimed in 2001; in 2004, it was replaced by a consistent government line, to which many human rights activists had no heart. It continued until 2008. “This is a strategy for the dominance of the state and the integration of civil society into the socio-political system,” said Alexander Auzan, president of the Association of Independent Centers for Economic Analysis. Two milestones of this strategy are the creation of the Public Chamber as the only channel of communication between the state and society and amendments to the legislation on NPOs in 2006, which Auzan directly called repressive towards the non-profit sector.

There is an explanation in the human rights community why such a policy freely gained the right to exist. “Practically, the basis was an unspoken social contract: the loyalty of the population in exchange for economic benefits for this population,” Auzan explained. This thesis was voiced in the presence of the first deputy head of the presidential administration, Vladislav Surkov, who earlier, at one of the meetings with experts from the Strategy 2020 club, warned that it is not entirely ethical to compare the Russian nation with the most despicable biblical character Esau, who renounced his birthright for lentil stew .

Today, in the wake of the crisis, Auzan believes, it is time for the state to think about changing its strategy. First of all, because there was an expansion of government functions, however high efficiency no execution is observed. In such a situation, some of the functions, and therefore responsibility, could be assumed by self-organized groups of citizens. This is the first of three changes to the state strategy regarding civil society that Auzan proposed to the president. The authorities must support self-organization in society, which means it is necessary to correct the mistakes of 2006 regarding reporting, registration and inspections of NPOs.

The rector of the Higher School of Economics, Yaroslav Kuzminov, undertook to explain the pointlessness of the enormous paperwork. He stressed that many non-profit organizations are completely insignificant in number, and red tape with reporting only slows down their activities. And Alexander Auzan believes that the state should support a system of public control and monitoring, the procedures for which have largely been created, but require the adoption of normative and budget solutions. The main thing is that some decisions should be made based on the results of this control. And the third task is the development of civic participation in various spheres of life.

— In the end, it seems to me that in this case we would work not only on the problem of the crisis, but on the future of Russia, because we are talking about value shifts, that if the state pays more attention to openness, provides more space for freedom, and in society the values ​​of solidarity, mutual assistance, justice will be stronger, then we Better conditions to enter modernization,” concluded Alexander Auzan.

Yaroslav Kuzminov supplemented his colleague’s strategic thoughts with specific legislative proposals to weaken control over NPOs, which would actually equate non-governmental organizations with small businesses. “First, NPOs in their field of activity should receive the same rights and benefits in government and municipal procurement as small businesses,” said the HSE rector.

The second proposal concerns the protection of property rights of NPOs. Over the past 10 years, Kuzminov noted, many regional public organizations have been evicted from rented premises from the city center to the outskirts, which naturally affects their work. And finally, the Council asked the President to create an easier regime for small daily charity.

There were many problems voiced by members of the Council to the President, but none of them became news. Many issues are discussed at meetings from time to time. Like, for example, corruption, which permeates society from top to bottom and has settled in most areas of life. “This, on the part of those in charge, is probably the core on which arbitrariness and violations of the rights of citizens in any area are strung - from the environment, blatant facts of violence against children to restrictions on political and civil rights,” stressed Council Chairman Ella Pamfilova.

The fight against corruption in conditions of total distrust of everyone can only become effective with broad civilian control. “As part of this crisis of trust, a kind of new Byzantium is being created, when real things are replaced with completely new meanings, and those things that we need to really combat corruption, to really establish civil control, such as transparency, accountability, decency, are replaced by some completely other meanings,” said Elena Panfilova, director of the Center for Anti-Corruption Research and Initiatives Transparency International Russia. And citizens do not understand when we are talking about civil society and when it is about civilian control. Even in the new anti-corruption legislation, the idea of ​​public and civil control, she noted, is mentioned more than once, but nothing specific is said about it.

The most interesting thing, Panfilova noted, is that all specific examples of corruption are mostly on the surface; you just need to go to the Internet and read the blogs of ordinary people. And in this regard, civil control as surveillance works quite well. But control as supervision and inspection is not. “With accountability—that’s exactly what we’re talking about when we use the word ‘civil control’—I think we need to look at it very seriously and put it on a completely new track,” she says.

Human rights activists are well aware that the main opponents of civil control were, are and will be corrupt officials, and today many seek power not to work for the good of the country and society, but to be closer to sources of illegal enrichment.

“The so-called Russian elite, we probably need to grow a new one,” Ella Pamfilova sighed doomedly at the beginning of the meeting. If she exists, the Chairman of the Council emphasized, then she should be given an example of focus on success, on the humanization of society, on the legal foundations of the state, on social justice, on the correspondence of words to real deeds.

In this sense, open declarations of income and property of the Russian ruling elite are a step in the right direction, but in the human rights community it is considered insignificant, because there is no civilian control over the reliability of the data provided. “It is also important where this property is located, in the country or abroad,” Pamfilova pointed out. - And more importantly, where do the children of our elite study and work, and do they go to serve in the Russian army by analogy with the grandchildren of the Queen of England, and are they even ready to connect their future with Russia, are they going to take root here or not? in London and somewhere else."

“These are the key problems, without which it is impossible to create a system of mutual trust between society and the people who determine our destiny,” she concluded her emotional speech.

Having accepted Dmitry Medvedev's proposal to discuss a wide range of issues, the members of the Council did not release the head of state for a long time. Advisor to the Chairman of the Constitutional Court, Tamara Morshchakova, naturally raised the problems of the imperfection of the judicial system. Member of the coordination council of the Union of Soldiers' Mothers Ida Kuklina - issues of military reform and the state of the army. The Chairman of the Moscow Helsinki Group, Lyudmila Alekseeva, complained about the virtual absence of the constitutional right of citizens to meetings, rallies and processions, and Svetlana Sorokina spoke out in defense of children. Irina Yasina preferred to talk impromptu in general about the humanization of Russian society and separately asked for the fate of the spouses Natalia Morar and Ilya Barabanov, who, as it seems to her, were separated due to the fault of our country.

FORMS OF NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS IN THE RF

In accordance with the Law “On Non-Profit Organizations”, the following organizational and legal forms of non-profit organizations are established.

Branch of a foreign non-profit non-governmental organization (structural unit).

Public and religious organizations (associations)- voluntary associations of citizens who, in accordance with the procedure established by law, united on the basis of their common interests to satisfy spiritual or other non-material needs. Public associations also include professional and creative associations, chambers of commerce and industry.

Communities of indigenous peoples of the Russian Federation— forms of self-organization of persons belonging to the indigenous peoples of the Russian Federation and united according to consanguinity or territorial-neighborhood principles. The purpose of creating a community is to protect the original habitat, preserve and develop the traditional way of life, farming, crafts and culture of small peoples.

Fund- a non-profit organization that does not have membership, established by citizens and (or) legal entities on the basis of voluntary property contributions and pursuing social, charitable, cultural, educational or other socially beneficial goals.

State corporation- a non-profit organization that does not have membership, established by the Russian Federation on the basis of a property contribution and created to carry out social, managerial or other socially useful functions.

Non-commercial partnership- a membership-based non-profit organization established by citizens and (or) legal entities to assist its members in carrying out activities aimed at achieving socially beneficial goals.

Establishment- a non-profit organization created by the owner (citizen or legal entity) to carry out managerial, socio-cultural or other functions of a non-profit nature (for example, a charitable institution, educational institution). Institutions are divided into private and public (municipal), while the latter can be of two types - budgetary and autonomous.

Autonomous institution– a non-profit organization created by the Russian Federation, a subject of the Federation or a municipal entity. Its purpose is to perform work and provide services in order to exercise the powers of state authorities and local self-government in the fields of science, education, healthcare, culture, social protection, employment, physical culture and sports.

Autonomous non-profit organization- a non-profit organization that does not have membership, established by citizens and (or) legal entities on the basis of voluntary property contributions. Its goal is to provide services in the field of education, healthcare, culture, science, law, physical culture (for example, a non-state university, a sports club, a medical and health institution).

Associations of legal entities(associations and unions) - voluntary associations of commercial and non-profit organizations for the purpose of coordinating their activities, representing and protecting common property interests.

ABOUT THE LEGISLATION OF RUSSIA, USA, FRANCE, FINLAND, ISRAEL AND POLAND REGULATING ACTIVITIES

NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOs)

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS: AWARENESS AND ATTITUDE

The phrase “non-profit organizations” seems to be gradually disappearing from the everyday vocabulary of Russians and from the media. Over the past six years, the proportion of respondents who heard this phrase for the first time from an interviewer has increased (35% versus 26% in 2001). The share of those who “heard something” about non-profit organizations, on the contrary, decreased during this time (35% versus 42%). Today only 20% of Russians are familiar with this phrase (previously 21%).

Respondents were asked how they understand the expression “non-profit organization” and what they think it means (the question was asked in an open form; 46% of respondents answered it).

Just like six years ago, many relate this concept to state and municipal structures (24%): “an organization subsidized by the local or state budget”; "not private, but state enterprise"; “This is an organization with 51% state shares.” They said that this is an organization that does not aim to make a profit or is not engaged in commerce, business, trade - 10% of respondents (“an organization that does not work for commercial gain”; “do not engage in sales, purchases”; “do not produce anything and they don’t sell”). It was assumed that this is not a state, but a private organization, 2% of respondents. Some (2%) said that this is an unregistered or simply criminal organization: “this is an organization that does not have a license and does not pay taxes”; “an underground organization, someone flogs the poor, sells burnt vodka, for example”; “illegal logging is a non-profit organization.”

About 9% of respondents correlated this phrase with public organizations or named specific examples of such organizations (church, dacha cooperative, trade unions, charitable foundations, parties): “where people work on a voluntary basis”; “probably the church relates to this”; "charitable foundations"; “all sorts of “green” ones and so on.”

Over the past six years, the proportion of respondents who are confident that non-profit organizations bring great benefits to ordinary citizens has noticeably decreased. Now 11% of respondents share this opinion (from 21%). 14% see little benefit in their activities (previously 18%). About a fifth of survey participants (19%) said that there was no benefit (it was 20%). The majority (56%) found it difficult to say whether or not there is any benefit from the activities of these organizations, and how great it is.

8% of respondents know about the work of non-profit organizations in their region (six years ago – 12%). Another equal number have “heard something” about it (it was 15%). Those for whom the activities of regional non-profit organizations are completely invisible were two-thirds of the respondents – 67% (from 48%). 17% found it difficult to answer this question.

Those who know or have at least heard something about the activities of non-profit organizations in their region were asked to name these organizations. 13% of respondents answered the question. 6% of respondents named organizations that ensure the functioning of the social infrastructure of settlements (hospital, police, social security, post office, kindergartens, social services, etc.). Mentioned manufacturing enterprises, banks, shops, etc. – 2%. Various public organizations (mainly charities) named 4%: “Memorial”; Doctors Without Borders; "Young Family Protection Fund"; “school environmental squad”; "church, probably."

Among the survey participants, 5% were aware of the work of non-profit organizations in other regions of Russia; those who “heard something” about it – 8%. The majority of respondents (70%) said that they knew nothing about the activities of such organizations; 17% found it difficult to answer this question.

Do you know, have heard or are you hearing for the first time the expression “non-profit organization”?

How do you understand the expression “non-profit organization”, what do you think it means? (An open-ended question. Asked by those who said they knew the expression “non-profit organization” - 55% of those surveyed.)

Do you think that non-profit organizations are beneficial for people like you or not? And if there is, is this benefit large or small?

Do you know, have heard something or know nothing about the work of non-profit organizations in your region (region, territory, republic)?

What non-profit organizations do you know or have heard about in your region (region, territory, republic)? (An open question. Asked to those who said they knew about the work of non-profit organizations in the region - 17% of the respondents.)

Do you know, have heard something or know nothing about the work of non-profit organizations in other regions of Russia?

Search more articles

Magazine pages: 24-29

ON THE. LYUBUTOV,

Postgraduate student of the Department of Constitutional and Municipal Law of the State University - Higher School of Economics

The issues of the legal status of the so-called state-public and public-state associations in the Russian Federation are considered. The thesis is proven that such organizational structures do not correspond to the characteristics of associations, the right to create which is guaranteed by Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

Key words: public associations, non-state associations, the right to association, state-public associations, public-state associations.

State and public associations: problems of legal status

Article is dedicated to analysis of the so-called state-public and public-state associations legal status. The author argues inconsistency of their status with characteristics of associations to which Article 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation guarantees freedom of association.

Keywords: public associations, non-governmental organizations, freedom of association, state-public associations, public-state associations.

Improving Russian legislation requires a revision of views on some legal phenomena that have their roots in the Soviet period. One of these should be recognized as the so-called state-public (public-state) associations (hereinafter - GPO).

This concept was first introduced into scientific and practical circulation by Ts.A. Yampolskaya, who considered “state-public bodies government controlled» as bodies designed over time to become bodies of power and management, in whose activities the public takes part.

In the current Russian legislation, the concept of civil society organizations is found in few regulations, and the issues of the activities of such associations are practically not regulated. GOOs are only mentioned in some acts at the federal level: in Art. 51 of the Federal Law of May 19, 1995 No. 82-FZ “On Public Associations” (hereinafter referred to as the Law on Public Associations), in Art. 15 of the Federal Law of August 22, 1996 No. 125-FZ “On Higher and Postgraduate Education”, in the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of February 21, 1996 No. 241 “On some measures to support the All-Russian Physical Culture and Sports Society “Dynamo”” (hereinafter referred to as Decree No. 241; in it, VFSO "Dynamo" is considered as a public-state association) and a number of others. In the legal literature, the issue of the legal status of such associations is also not developed in sufficient detail (the only modern fundamental research can be called the dissertation of M.A. Pimanova; issues of sectoral state educational organizations are touched upon in the work of S.V. Korshunov).

The current legislation does not disclose the content of the concept of GOO. Article 51 of the Law on Public Associations only states that, pending the adoption of federal laws on state-public and public-state associations, these associations are created and carry out their activities in accordance with the regulatory legal acts of public authorities. In practice, issues of the activities of civil society organizations in the constituent entities of the Federation are often regulated by administrative acts of executive authorities and local governments, which contradicts Art. 4 of the Law on Public Associations, according to which the activities of public associations are regulated by federal legislation.

M.A. Pimanova views GOO as independent species non-profit public legal organizations operating in the intermediary state-social environment of life, which perform certain government functions affecting the rights, freedoms, responsibilities and legitimate interests of citizens. She proposes to consider civil society organizations as a form of implementation of the constitutional right of citizens to participate in the management of state affairs (Article 32 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation) and divides them into two types: civil society organizations themselves (without fixed membership) and state-public bodies (formed with fixed membership). The first type of association is not characterized by the state appointing members of the association: anyone can take part in their activities (an example is the VFSO Dynamo). In associations of the second type, on the contrary, the authorized state body indicates a list of their members for further permanent joint activities (example - the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation).

It should be agreed that the participation of citizens in the activities of civil society organizations is a way and form of their participation in the management of state affairs. At the same time, it seems that the first of these M.A. Pimanova varieties of GOO (GOO itself) should not be considered as associations as such, since in the creation of an association in the sense of Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation the state cannot participate.

Among the signs of GOO are the following:

1) functioning in the field of public law;

2) as a rule, the dual purpose of creation (involvement of citizens in the management of state affairs and coordination of mutual interests);

3) the lack of a profit-making goal for the state educational organization;

4) as a rule, the absence of government powers;

6) state participation in the creation and activities of civil society organizations;

7) performing functions, as a rule, by non-state, non-authoritative means of influencing public relations;

8) as a rule, fixed membership;

9) appointment of members (participants) by state bodies (local government bodies);

10) competence clearly established by legal acts.

One should ask questions: firstly, how correct it is to call organizations created by state bodies or local governments “associations”, and, secondly, what should be understood by the concept of “association” in Russian law. To answer them, you should analyze the application this concept in the norms of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. In it, the word “association” appears 11 times, of which 10 - in the meaning of non-state associations and 1 - to denote an international legal association of states with the participation of the Russian Federation (Article 79). In various constitutional norms you can find the following phrases: “public association” (parts 4 and 5 of article 13, part 2 of article 19, part 1 of article 30, part 2 of article 46), “religious association” (part 2 Article 14), “citizens and their associations” (Part 2 Article 15, Part 1 Article 36), as well as simply “associations” (Part 2 Article 30). The generic concept is “union”. What was meant by this word when preparing the constitutional text?

An analysis of the draft Constitution of the Russian Federation prepared in 1990-1993, as well as transcripts of meetings of the Constitutional Commission of the RSFSR and the Constitutional Conference indicates that the right to association in the early 1990s was not considered a serious problem in discussions between representatives of various political forces . At the same time, the developers perfectly remembered the problems that existed during the Soviet period in connection with the absolute power of the CPSU, therefore in the text of the draft constitutions one can find norms by which any decisions of public associations are declared not to have an imperative nature for third parties and government bodies. For example, part 3 of Art. 62 of the draft constitution developed by the Constitutional Commission states: “Decisions of public associations do not have binding force on state bodies and local governments, their institutions and enterprises, as well as the employees employed in them when performing their duties.” Also various projects seemed to be united by a common tendency: there was no distinction between the concepts of “association”, “public association”, “legal entity”, etc. These concepts often overlapped in their content, replaced each other, so it was sometimes not easy to establish their legal meaning.

There are similar inconsistencies in the Constitution of the Russian Federation adopted in 1993. In its various norms, the concept of “association” is used in different senses. After analyzing the text, we can come to the conclusion that it means in various situations:

1) non-state associations of persons constituting an organizational unity (non-state legal entities, public associations - Part 4 of Art. 13, part 2 art. 15, part 2 art. 19, art. 30, part 1 art. 36, part 2 art. 46);

2) religious associations (Part 2 of Article 14);

3) groups of individuals and (or) legal entities that do not collectively constitute an organizational unity (for example, a group of persons who have acquired a land plot in common ownership - part 2 of article 15, part 1 of article 36);

4) any organizations, including state and municipal legal entities (Part 2 of Article 30 on the prohibition of forcing one to join any association).

To characterize the nature of the right of association, only the first and second cases of use of the term are important. If we allowed, for example, the extension of the concept of “association” only to public associations (in the original sense of the word), then it would turn out that any legal entity that is not a public association does not have the right to acquire land in Russia; that it is not equal before the law in comparison with a public association, etc. Thus, the characterization of an association by the Constitution of the Russian Federation as “public” only means that it has a non-state status, i.e. the basic law does not distinguish the status in the legal sense non-state associations and non-state public associations. In addition, the phrase “legal entity” is not found anywhere in the text of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, but in a number of cases the concept of “association” used also means a non-state legal entity, of any organizational and legal form and acting for any purpose (non-profit and commercial associations).

Apparently, the right to association in the sense of Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation extends its effect to all non-state collective entities of individuals and (or) legal entities. This conclusion follows from the following. Firstly, as we have already established, in the norms of the Constitution of the Russian Federation the concepts of “association” and “public association” are used as synonyms. Secondly, the concept of “association” in the Constitution of the Russian Federation is used in its constitutional and legal meaning, developed by domestic legal scholars back in Soviet times and denoting all types of non-state collective entities, including non-state legal entities. Thirdly, the concept of “association” (“public association”) in constitutional terminology includes the concept of “legal entity” (see, for example, part 2 of article 15, part 1 of article 36). This does not mean that all associations are legal entities, but all non-state legal entities created by two or more persons are “associations” in the sense of the text of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

System analysis Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation allows us to distinguish following signs non-state associations: 1) voluntariness; 2) the presence of common goals and interests; 3) the personal nature of the participation of members (participants) in the activities of the association; 4) non-state nature of the association; 5) organizational unity; 6) legality of creation and activity.

Taking into account these signs, it turns out that Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation guarantees the right to create: 1) actual public associations, 2) religious associations, 3) non-governmental non-profit organizations that are not public and religious associations (for example, non-profit partnerships), 4) non-governmental commercial organizations. But do state-public associations belong to organizations that meet the criteria of an association from Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation?

According to the above characteristics of non-state associations, the founders (members, participants) of any such association should not include the state, its bodies or local government bodies (which is most clearly manifested in the activities of public associations). If we compare non-state associations and civil society organizations from this point of view, we are obliged to admit that the latter are not an institutional result of the implementation of Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

What are the functions of such organizational structures? For example, the charter of the public-state association “All-Russian Physical Culture and Sports Society “Dynamo”” dated May 29, 1996 lists among the functions of the society such as “participation in the state system of ensuring law and order, the security of the individual, society and the state” (clause 2.2. 3). The society itself, in its organizational and legal form, is a public organization and operates in accordance with the provisions of the Law on Public Associations, and the state is indirectly recognized among its founders. In addition, Decree No. 241 and the joint order of a number of federal ministries and departments dated 05/06/1997 adopted in accordance with it, this association is allocated government funding to carry out its functions, as well as organizational and methodological assistance from government bodies at the federal level and the level of constituent entities Federation. It is obvious that these circumstances indicate a mixture in this association of the characteristics of a public organization corresponding to Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, with the characteristics of a state body, which obviously puts other participants in the turnover at a disadvantage. This state of affairs should also be considered as a direct violation of Part 4 of Art. 13 and Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as well as Art. 6 of the Law on Public Associations, since, firstly, government bodies do not have the right to be members and participants of public associations, and secondly, this violates the principle of equality of public associations before the law. Similar comments apply to other GOOs existing in the Russian Federation.

It should be noted that the institution of GOO as such is unknown to Western legal systems. Today, mention of such structures can only be found in the legislation of the CIS member states. Thus, in the legislation of the Republic of Belarus there is a separate organizational and legal form of legal entities - republican state-public associations. These organizations are created in order to fulfill the nationally significant tasks assigned to them. The archaic connection of this kind of attitude towards non-state associations as “drive belts” of the party, which are in the service of the state apparatus and actually discredit the constitutional right to association, is obvious.

Due to the fact that there is no detailed regulation of the legal status of civil society organizations in the current domestic legislation, the definition of any association as state-public or public-state is possible only if there is an appropriate indication in the regulatory legal act of the authority or in the statutory documents of such an organization, as well as according to the nature of the activities of this institute.

If we turn to the mechanism for creating any non-state association, it presupposes mandatory equality of subjects in relations with each other and in the activities of the association. Applying this principle to civil society organizations, one should ask the question: can the state and individuals (legal) persons have equal rights in relations with each other? At first glance it may seem not. Existing GOOs are not a way to implement Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation due to the fact that the state, in relations related to the activities of such associations, acts as a purely governmental institution, independently determining the directions of their work, exercising control over the participants of such associations, etc. It seems that the GOO could be a form implementation of Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation only if a number of the following conditions are met.

Firstly, it must be formed through a creation agreement with an already existing non-state association and (or) individuals. The adoption of a normative or administrative act in this case cannot be considered as an appropriate way to regulate such relations.

Secondly, government bodies participating in the process of creating a public organization should not independently determine the tasks and directions of its activities. All decisions must be made collectively, and the representative of the government body at the time of voting must have a vote equal to the votes of other members of the association.

Thirdly, financing of such associations cannot be carried out only from the state or local budget, since this will place the association in exclusive financial dependence on the actions of the state, which in itself means the loss of a significant share of independence.

Fourthly, control over internal activities associations should be carried out on a parity basis by both state bodies and citizens (or non-state associations) or internal control bodies created by them. This will avoid a situation in which such associations are actually “internal departments” of a particular government body.

If the above conditions are met, it seems that we can talk about the very possibility of the existence of civil society organizations as institutional manifestations of the right to association. In other cases, such structures can be considered only as a way to exercise the right to participate in the management of state affairs, when the public and non-state institutions provide support or assistance to authorities in the implementation of certain socially significant functions. It is not difficult to guess that associations corresponding to the above characteristics exist: these are commercial organizations, shares or shares in the authorized (share) capital of which are owned by both private individuals and state authorities or local governments. But then the question arises: why is the GOO category needed in principle?

One of the drafters of the text of the Law on Public Associations explained to us in a personal conversation that when developing the draft law, the authors were faced with the problem of already existing public associations and could not “fit” this category into any of the legal structures existing in the legislation, but rather liquidate such associations into one moment was impossible. Therefore, in Art. 51 of the Law on Public Associations, a reservation was made that the activities of these associations are regulated by acts of state authorities until the adoption of the relevant federal law. This, however, did not mean recognition of such structures as associations in the sense of Art. 30 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

State public organizations in most cases duplicate the functions of advisory commissions, councils, chambers and other advisory bodies under state authorities and local self-government. This type of organization seems to be a relic of the Soviet system and does not correspond to the spirit of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, therefore, from our point of view, it is subject to exclusion from the current Russian legislation.

Bibliography

1 In this article, we consider the concepts “state-public association” and “public-state association” as synonyms. Their only difference can be seen only in the subject that initiated the creation of such an organization: a government agency or individuals (non-state associations). In addition, the concept of “state-public association” can also be applied to municipal-public associations.

2 See: Yampolskaya T.A. Public organizations and the development of Soviet socialist statehood. - M., 1965. P. 81; It's her. Public organizations in the USSR. - M., 1972. S. 124-143.

3 See: Pimanova M.A. Legal status state-public associations (constitutional and legal research): Author's abstract. dis. ...cand. legal Sci. - Tyumen, 2007.

4 See: Korshunov S.V. State-public associations in the Russian engineering education system. - M., 2005.

5 See: Pimanova M.A. Decree. slave. P. 9.

6 Ibid. P. 11.

7 See: From the history of the creation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Constitutional Commission: transcripts, materials, documents (1990-1993): In 6 volumes / Under general. ed. O.G. Rumyantseva. - M., 2007-2009.

8 Constitutional meeting: Transcripts. Materials. Documents: In 20 volumes / Ed. ed. S.A. Filatova et al. - M., 1995.

9 From the history of the creation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Constitutional Commission: transcripts, materials, documents (1990-1993). T. 3: 1992. Book two (July-December 1992) / General. ed. O.G. Rumyantseva. - M., 2008. P. 541.

10 A.V. Markitantov identifies the following characteristics of non-state associations: 1) independence, 2) voluntariness, 3) goal orientation, 4) formal status, 5) continuity of activity, 6) public utility (see: Constitutional Law of Russia: Textbook / Responsible editor A N. Kokotov, M. I. Kukushkin - M., 2008, pp. 202-203). It seems that the sign of independence of associations is an integral part of the sign of voluntariness, since a voluntarily created and operating association cannot depend on public authorities or other entities, and the signs of formal status and continuity of activity are a consequence of the sign of the organizational unity of the association.

11 http://dynamo.org.ru/dinamo/ystav/index.html

12 Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, State Customs Committee of Russia, FPS of Russia, FSB of Russia, SVR of Russia, FSNP of Russia, FAPSI, FSO of Russia, Minatom of Russia, State Courier Service of the Russian Federation, Main Directorate of Special Programs of the President of the Russian Federation, Central Council of the public-state association “All-Russian Physical Culture sports society “Dynamo” dated 05/06/1997 No. 276/240/280/178/25/138/85/144/292/256/13/26 “On measures to implement the decrees of the President of the Russian Federation on the activities of the public-state association” All-Russian Physical Culture and Sports Society “Dynamo” // SPS “Garant”.