Abstract: This article is devoted to the means for ensuring the opposition of majority and minority parties, used in the State Duma of the Federal Assembly and in the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States. The object of this research primarily concentrates on the means provided by the rules of both chambers and its realization. The aim of the article is to reveal the similarities and the differences of the realization of the idea of opposition in the lower chambers of these parliaments and the reasons thereof. The author reveals the means used in both parliaments such as the organization of majority and minority, possibility to express the majority and minority opinion, as well as their formal equality. It is concluded that the means, consolidated in the rules of the both chambers, are similar but there is a difference in the accents: ensuring the opposition in the House of Representatives and the possibility to express all the opinions in the State Duma.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the specific constitutional control on complaints of the citizens in the Constitutional Council of France and Constitutional Court of Russia. The purpose of this work is to determine the specific aspects of constitutional control with regards to citizens’ complaints from the perspective of its doctrinal and value bases. In this context, a review is made of the notions such as “human rights” and “general (public) interest” and their meaning within the practice of the reviewed branches and doctrine. A special attention is given to the values that express these notions, as well as the analysis to the correlation of these notions. The author concludes that specificity of the subsequent control on the citizens’ complaints consists in the approach, which involves private interest into the argument. At the same time, the branches of constitutional control are searching for a balance between protection of human rights and public interest, both of which simultaneously represent value categories.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the specific constitutional control on complaints of the citizens in the Constitutional Council of France and Constitutional Court of Russia. The purpose of this work is to determine the specific aspects of constitutional control with regards to citizens’ complaints from the perspective of its doctrinal and value bases. In this context, a review is made of the notions such as “human rights” and “general (public) interest” and their meaning within the practice of the reviewed branches and doctrine. A special attention is given to the values that express these notions, as well as the analysis to the correlation of these notions. The author concludes that specificity of the subsequent control on the citizens’ complaints consists in the approach, which involves private interest into the argument. At the same time, the branches of constitutional control are searching for a balance between protection of human rights and public interest, both of which simultaneously represent value categories.