Рус Eng Cn Translate this page:
Nota Bene. Books, journals, publishing technologies.
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate ☒
Library
 Your profile
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Back to contents

Law and Politics
Reference:

Closed administrative-territorial formation: business and legal aspect

Chereshneva Irina

Junior Scientific Associate, Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences

119019, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. Znamenka, 10

iachereshneva@gmail.com
Other publications by this author
 
 

DOI:

10.7256/2454-0706.2024.9.71681

EDN:

ETJOKS

Received:

11-09-2024

Published:

25-09-2024

Abstract: In the course of the study, the author gives a brief digression into the history of the development of the Closed administrative-territorial formation (CATF); examines existing doctrinal approaches to the legal nature of the CATF; presents an entrepreneurial and legal view of the legal nature of the CATF, defining the latter as one of the types of territories with a special regime of entrepreneurial activities. The methodological basis of the research is the general philosophical (dialectical method), general scientific (for example, generalization and abstraction, induction and deduction, analogy, analysis and synthesis) and private scientific methods (formal legal, historical and legal) methods of scientific cognition. The main conclusions of the conducted research are: 1) at the present stage of development of our state, the relevance of the issue acquires a new "sound", which is due to the need to overcome challenges, both political and socio-economic in nature; 2) the existing variety of approaches to the legal nature of the law (mainly constitutional and legal orientation) enrich both doctrine and legislation, as well as contribute to the development of this legal regime. However, in order to realize the potential inherent in it, it is proposed to consider CATF from a business and legal perspective, i.e. as one of the types of territory with a special regime of entrepreneurial activities; 3) analysis of key features of territories with a special regime (a special regime of entrepreneurial activities, a separate territory; a purpose; a special subject of a public organization of entrepreneurial activities) makes it possible to classify them as territories with a special protective regime of entrepreneurial activities, which, in turn, act as one of the types of territory with a special regime.

Keywords:

closed administrative-territorial formation, CATF, the legal regime of entrepreneurship, carrying out entrepreneurial activities, special entrepreneurial regime, the territorial aspect of entrepreneurship, federal territories, administrative-territorial unit, legal nature, organization of public authority
This article is automatically translated. You can find original text of the article here.

1. The modern challenges faced by Russia require the state to promptly develop a set of necessary and sufficient measures [1, 2] of various orientations (political, economic, social, moral), their "seamless" (as far as possible) implementation into the existing social "fabric", as well as early adaptation to constantly changing conditions of the surrounding world. At the same time, in order to overcome them, it is necessary to "take oneself into support", i.e. the main focus of the state should focus on the use of internal resources in order to ensure the realization of the national interests of the Russian Federation and strategic national priorities (in accordance with Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated July 02, 2021 No. 400 "On the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation" (hereinafter – The National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation)). In our opinion, closed administrative-territorial entities (hereinafter referred to as BUT), the legal regulation of which is carried out within the framework of the Law of the Russian Federation dated July 14, 1992 No. 3297-1 "On Closed Administrative–territorial Education" (hereinafter referred to as the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT"), could be a good help for this. After all, "intellectual, innovative, and industrial resources are concentrated on the territory of the state, which gives them special value in the overall strategic development of society, in ensuring economic growth, defense capability, and state security." [3].

This becomes especially relevant in conditions of constant imbalance in the legal space, when "the political and economic interests of individual states begin to prevail in bilateral and multilateral relations, when "resource" expediency and the desire for dominance prevail to the detriment of the principles of relations and agreements." [4]. In this regard, the problem of ensuring the political and economic sovereignty of our state is brought to the fore [5], including by increasing the number of knowledge-intensive industries and high technologies, the functioning of which not only requires a material and technical base, but also appropriate human capital in the person of high-level specialists, for activities (both professional, and personal) which require a developed infrastructure. All this determines the appeal to the legal study of the law, the methodological basis of which is the general philosophical (dialectical method), general scientific (for example, generalization and abstraction, induction and deduction, analogy, analysis and synthesis) and private scientific (formal legal, historical and legal) methods of scientific cognition.

In addition, it seems important to reflect an entrepreneurial view on the problems of the legal regime of the state, since the legal research of the latter, as a rule, focuses on constitutional law (for example, S.N. Baburin's doctoral dissertation "Territory of the state: theoretical and legal problems" [6], I.V. Mikheeva's scientific works devoted to various manifestations of the regime BUT [3, 7, 8], A.A. Novikov's dissertation research "Constitutional and legal aspects of the formation and development of municipalities of closed administrative-territorial formations (BUT)" [9]), administrative and legal (for example, D.Y. Baydarov's dissertation research "Features of the legal regime of closed administrative-territorial formations entities in the Russian Federation" [10]) and financial and legal (for example, in the work of A. L. Borenstein, E. V. Pozdnyakova [11]) planes, i.e. within the framework of public law. While business law, which "presupposes "intersectoral" thinking, and in conjunction with the categories of a market economy" [12], contains both private law and public law principles.

2. BUT the historical roots can be found "in the structure of the Arakcheev military settlements (they operated in some southern and western provinces of Russia from the beginning to the middle of the XIX century.); military fortresses can also be attributed to them: Kronstadt, Kars or Sevastopol (XIX - early XX centuries.)." [13]. In turn, in the USSR, "the first BUT were created back in the late 1930s." [13], however, their main development took place in the post-war period, which was associated with the need for "high-security work (for example, the creation of atomic weapons), the deployment of strategic military forces; subsequently, landfills and spaceports, as well as those settlements where the disposal and elimination of chemical weapons took place." [14]. Accordingly, the date of adoption of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT" can be chosen as the starting point of the current stage of development of this legal phenomenon. At the same time, as noted in the legal doctrine, the legal regime is characterized by exceptional stability, as evidenced by the minimum (for example, in comparison with business legislation) number of changes made to this normative legal act. We would like to point out that the last large-scale changes to the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT" were made in 2003, which was due to the reform of local self-government. Consequently, the legislation regulating this sphere of public relations is quite conservative.

Approaches to the definition of key characteristics of BUT differ in the literature. In one case, the "emphasis" is on clarifying the "closeness" of a territorial entity: the presence of local governments, ensuring the safe functioning of organizations and facilities located on its territory to ensure the defense and security of the country, the conditions for establishing a special regime." [3]. In others, by highlighting the main features of the country: 1) they act as an element of the administrative–territorial division of the country; 2) they are territories with a special status; 3) they have a pronounced, fortified border on the ground; 4) the application of special regimes in this territory (special regime of movement and residence, special regime of management, special regime of use lands and the establishment of borders of the state, a special regime for the formation of the local budget, a special regime for the distribution of powers between levels of government); 5) are created and abolished administratively [14]. In addition, the duality of the legal nature of BUT is expressed in the fact that "as an administrative-territorial entity, it is not a subject of law, whereas BUT as a municipal entity has a general and constitutional legal personality." [15].

In turn, S. V. Praskova, highlighting the threefold legal nature of the BUT, reveals it through "a unit of administrative and territorial structure (1), which geographically coincides with the municipal formation - the urban district (2), within whose boundaries the scientific and production complex (3) is located, and its functioning requires a special security regime." [16]. At the same time, the dominant element of this triad is the first feature – the unit of administrative-territorial structure, which allows the scientist to put forward the thesis about the possibility of converting the BUT into a federal territory of a closed type [16]. When implementing this idea in practice, it will be possible, on the one hand, to withdraw "the territories of the BUT from the territory of the subject of the Russian Federation, thereby eliminating the problem of the discrepancy between the borders of the BUT and the regions; on the other, to form an absolutely new system of state bodies." [16], which in the future should lead to "more effective provision of special treatment safe functioning of organizations and facilities" [16] in comparison with the current legal regime.

Without detracting from the value of this scientific position for both doctrine, legislation and the development of the legal regime BUT per se, it seems to us that its effective legal support is also possible within the territories with a special (special) regime of entrepreneurial activity (hereinafter referred to as territories with a special regime), i.e. through the prism of entrepreneurial law.

3. In the study of territories with a special (special) regime of entrepreneurial activity, we have identified their key essential features: 1) a special (special) regime for carrying out entrepreneurial activity; 2) a separate territory; 3) the purpose (purpose of creation) of the territory; 4) the presence of a special subject of a public organization of entrepreneurial activity [17]. These signs act as peculiar markers that make it possible to attribute a particular legal phenomenon to territories with a special regime. The latter, in turn, act as a generic concept in relation to such specific concepts as, for example, territories with a special preferential regime for entrepreneurial activity (in particular, special economic zones, territories of advanced development, innovative scientific and technological centers, special administrative districts, etc.), territories with a special protective regime for entrepreneurial activity, including those to which we refer BUT.

In accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 1 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT", BUT is understood to mean an administrative-territorial entity having local self-government bodies, created in a special manner (which is provided for in Article 2 of this normative legal act), in order to ensure the safe functioning of organizations located on its territory engaged in the development, manufacture, storage and disposal of weapons mass destruction, processing of radioactive and other materials of a man-made nature that pose an increased danger, military and other facilities (hereinafter referred to as organizations and (or) facilities) for which, in order to ensure the defense of the country and the security of the state, a special regime of safe operation and protection of state secrets is established, including special living conditions for citizens. The analysis of this definition in conjunction with other provisions of this normative legal act (paragraphs 2, paragraph 3 of Article 1) allows us to talk about the presence of all the signs-markers characteristic of territories with a special regime. Let's look at them in more detail.

We define the special (special) regime of entrepreneurial activity as "the procedure for regulating entrepreneurial and other economic activities characterized by a combination of legal means of a stimulating and restrictive nature aimed at creating additional favorable conditions and/or protecting constitutionally significant values in the conduct of entrepreneurial activity." [17]. From this point of view, the special regime of entrepreneurial activity operating within the borders of the country will have a protective nature, since, firstly, legal means of a restrictive nature (prohibitions and restrictions) are predominant in it, and, secondly, the purpose of its establishment is to ensure the defense of the country and the security of the state, which is associated with restriction of the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens in accordance with Article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. It is no coincidence that only such legal entities and individuals who meet the requirements of ensuring a special regime for the safe functioning of organizations and facilities have the right to conduct business on the territory of the BUT (clause 2.4 of Article 3 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT").

Thus, on the territory of the Russian Federation, there is a ban on the creation and activities of organizations whose founders are foreign citizens, stateless persons and foreign organizations, foreign non-profit non-governmental organizations, branches of foreign non-profit non-governmental organizations, the activities of international organizations (associations), except in cases provided for by federal laws (for example, the State Corporation for Space Activities "Roscosmos" (hereinafter – Roscosmos) and its organizations have the right to involve citizens of the Republic of Belarus, legal entities of the Republic of Belarus, whose founders (participants) are the Republic of Belarus and (or) citizens of the Republic of Belarus and which are established in the organizational and legal form established by the legislation of the Republic of Belarus, to carry out activities on the territory of the Tsiolkovsky Amur Region, including for the performance of works and services related to the construction and reconstruction of objects of the ground-based space infrastructure of the Vostochny cosmodrome, in accordance with Federal Law No. 91-FZ dated April 15, 2022 "On the specifics of the Activities Carried out by Individuals on the territory of the closed Administrative-territorial formation Tsiolkovsky of the Amur Region and on Amendments to Article 3 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On a closed administrative-territorial entity").

As an example of restrictions, restrictions on the right to conduct economic and entrepreneurial activities, ownership, use and disposal of natural resources, real estate, arising from restrictions on entry and (or) permanent residence (Article 3 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT") can be cited. Thus, transactions for the acquisition of ownership of immovable property located on the territory of the BUT, or other transactions with such property, can only be made by citizens of the Russian Federation who permanently reside or have received a permanent residence permit on the territory of the BUT, by citizens of the Russian Federation working in this territory on the terms of an employment contract concluded for an indefinite period with organizations by type the activities of which were created by the BUT, and by legal entities located and registered on the territory of the BUT (paragraph 1 of Article 8 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT").

In addition, the participation of citizens and legal entities not specified in paragraph 1 of Article 8 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT" in the commission of these transactions is allowed by the decision of local governments of BUT, which is subject to approval by federal executive authorities, the State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom (hereinafter – Rosatom), Roscosmos, in which are managed by organizations and (or) objects, by the nature of which the BUT was created, together with the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation, i.e. there is a special (complicated) procedure for the participation of citizens and legal entities in transactions in respect of real estate located on the territory of the BUT, which is regulatedBy Order No. 84 of the Roscosmos State Corporation dated March 29, 2017 "On Approval of the Procedure for Approval by the Roscosmos State Corporation for Space Activities or Subordinate Organizations of the Roscosmos State Corporation for Space Activities together with the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation or Territorial Bodies of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation of Decisions of Local Governments of Closed Administrative-Territorial Entities on the participation of citizens and legal entities in transactions in respect of real estate objects located on the territory of a closed administrative-territorial entity."

It should also be noted that in the territory of the Russian Federation there is a special procedure for the creation and operation of organizations with foreign investments, which is determined by the Government of the Russian Federation (Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated May 22, 2006 No. 302 "On the creation and operation in the territory of a closed administrative-territorial formation of organizations with foreign investments"), taking into account the requirements of ensuring a special regime on the territory of these entities (clause 2.1 of Article 3 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT").

Revealing the sign of a separate territory in the framework of the study of territories with a special regime, we pointed out that this territory is always "a part of the space located within the borders of the state territory of the Russian Federation, which is subject to its sovereignty, but which has some features (related both directly to the territory itself and to the operation of a special legal regime of entrepreneurship)." [17]. With regard to the BUT, it is the need to ensure a special regime for the safe functioning of organizations and facilities (one of the elements of which is a special protective regime for entrepreneurial activity) that determines the choice of the territory and boundaries of the BUT, which, as emphasized in the literature, are clearly expressed (visible signs, designations, inscriptions) and reinforced on the ground [14]. At the same time, the boundaries of the BUT for the period of the special regime of safe operation may not coincide with the borders of the subjects of the Russian Federation (paragraph 2 of Article 1 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT").

The entire territory of the BUT is the territory of a municipality with the status of an urban district (clause 2 of Article 1 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT"). It is noted in the literature that the choice of such a form of territorial organization of the BUT is conditioned by the action of "a special regime for the safe functioning and protection of state secrets, requiring centralized management ... even if the BUT are created within small settlements, for example, settlements." [18].

The purpose (purpose of creation) of the BUT is to ensure the safe functioning of organizations and/or facilities located on its territory, for which, in order to ensure the defense of the country and the security of the state, a special regime of safe functioning and protection of state secrets is established (paragraph 1 of Article 1 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT"), i.e. we can talk about the presence of There are two goals: global – ensuring the defense of the country and the security of the state and local – ensuring the safe functioning of organizations and/or facilities located on the territory of the country.

In addition, in the legal doctrine, depending on the nature of the function performed by the state, the following grounds are distinguished for classifying the goals of establishing a special regime in the territory of the State: 1) "political, related to ensuring the country's defense and state security, fulfilling the international obligations of the Russian Federation on the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, suppression of terrorist, sabotage and other illegal actions); 2) socio-economic, aimed at providing support to citizens and their families living and working in the territory of the BUT, increasing the income of the population of the BUT, creating conditions for the development of educational and cultural potential." [3]. It seems that for the effective functioning of the BUT, especially in line with the digital economy and overcoming modern challenges, it is necessary to implement both political and socio-economic goals of establishing a special regime on the territory of the BUT.

Speaking about the presence of a special subject of public organization of entrepreneurial activity on the territory of the state, it is necessary to point out the peculiarities of the organization of public power due to the operation of a special regime for the safe functioning of organizations and/or facilities located on its territory, which manifests itself in the formation of the following power triad: "1) ordinary state authorities; 2) local self-government bodies that On the one hand, they are given additional powers, on the other – they are limited in the exercise of part of their own powers; 3) the relevant department" [16].

At the same time, currently all city-forming facilities and organizations are under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, Rosatom and Roscosmos. As it is rightly noted in the literature, "from a formal point of view, it depends on the higher (for the city-forming object and organization) department in matters of approving the master plan, socio-economic development programs, reserving land for municipal needs, appointing the head of administration" [14], transactions for the acquisition of ownership of real estate located on BUT territories , etc . De facto, local self-government bodies, being limited in terms of exercising their powers, become controlled by the relevant department, which, among other things, has a direct impact on the public organization of entrepreneurial activity in the territory of Ukraine. In this regard, the relevant department can be considered as a special subject of the public organization of entrepreneurial activity, while the public organization of entrepreneurship itself is based on centralized principles.

In addition, it should be noted that the adoption by the State of a decision on the creation and termination of the existence of a territory with a special regime acts as a formal sign of such territories. In turn, the decision on the creation, transformation or abolition of the BUT is made by the President of the Russian Federation (paragraph 1 of Article 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT").

Thus, as a result of the conducted research, we came to the following conclusions.

Firstly, at the present stage of development, BUT has not lost its relevance, the latter, on the contrary, acquires a new "sound", which is conditioned by the need to overcome challenges of both a political and socio-economic nature.

Secondly, the existing variety of approaches to the legal nature of the BUT (mainly constitutional and legal orientation, for example, in the context of considering the BUT as a type of federal territory of a closed type) enrich both doctrine and legislation, and also contribute to the development of this legal regime. However, in order to realize the potential inherent in it, it is proposed to consider the territory from an entrepreneurial and legal perspective, i.e. as one of the types of territory with a special regime of entrepreneurial activity.

Thirdly, the analysis of the signs-markers of territories with a special regime (a special (special) regime of entrepreneurial activity, a separate territory; the purpose of the territory; a special subject of public organization of entrepreneurial activity) allows us to classify them as territories with a special protective regime of entrepreneurial activity, which, in turn, act as one of the types of territory with a special regime.

It seems that the entrepreneurial and legal view of the country will contribute to strengthening the defense capability, internal unity and political stability, as well as the modernization of the economy and the development of the industrial potential of our country (the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation).

References
1. Gabov, A. V. (2023). Антисанкционные меры в российском праве [Anti-sanction Measures in Russian Law]. Proceedings of the Institute of State and Law of the RAS, 18(3), 96–141. doi:10.35427/2073-4522-2023-18-3-gabov
2. Ershova, I. V., & Laptev, V. A. (Eds.). (2024). Право и реальный сектор экономики России [The Law and the Real Sector of the Russian Economy], Moscow. Prospekt.
3. Mikheeva, I. V., & Cherkasov, K. V. (2016). «Болевые точки» закрытых территорий в современной России [Closed Territorial Formations in Modern Russia: “Burning Issues” of Legal Regulation]. Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences, 34, 379–390. doi:10.17072/1995-4190-2016-34-379-390
4. Tikhomirov, Yu. A. (2017). Правовое пространство: равновесие и отклонения [Legal Space: Balance and Deviations]. Law Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 4, 4–17. doi:10.17323/2072-8166.2017.4.4.17
5. Ivanchenko, E.A., & Vorotilina, T.V. (2024). Надзор за исполнением законодательства на территории закрытых административно-территориальных образований и закрытых военных городков [Supervision over Compliance with Legislation in Closed Administrative Terrritories and Closed Military Settlements]. Zakonnost', 4, 32–34.
6. Baburin, S.N. (1998). Территория государства: теоретико-правовые проблемы [The Territory of the State: Theoretical and Legal Problems]. Moscow.
7. Mikheeva, I. V., & Chesnokov, P.A. (2016). Режим «закрытых» территорий: о природе санкций за нарушение [The Closed Territorial Formations: about the Nature of Sanctions for Violation]. Science Vector of Togliatti State University. Series: Legal Sciences, 3(26), 60–63.
8. Mikheeva, I. V., & Loginova, A.S. (2016). Запреты пропускного режима закрытого административно-территориального образования: «Нарушения и наказания» в практике нормотворчества [Prohibitions of the Closed Administrative-Territorial Entity Admission Regime: "Offences and Penalties" in the Practice of Rulemaking]. Vestnik of Kostroma State University, 4, 212–217.
9. Novikov, A.A. (2010). Конституционно-правовые аспекты становления и развития муниципальных образований закрытых административно-территориальных образований (ЗАТО) [The Constitutional and Legal Aspects of the Formation and Development of Municipalities of Closed Administrative-Territorial Formation (CATF)]. Chelyabinsk.
10. Baydarov, D. Yu. (2014). Особенности правового режима закрытых административно-территориальных образований в Российской Федерации [Features of the Legal Regime of Closed Administrative-Territorial Formation in the Russian Federation]. Moscow.
11. Borenshtejn, А. L., & Pozdnyakova, E.V. (2015). Особенности бюджетного процесса в закрытых административно-территориальных образованиях. Вестник государственного и муниципального управления [Features of the Budget Process in Closed Administrative-Territorial Formaton]. Journal of Public and Municipal Administration, 2(17), 95–98.
12. А.Г. Быков: Человек, Ученый, Учитель [A. G. Bykov: The Human. The Scientist. The Teacher]. (2013). Moscow. Startap.
13. Shavrej, E.A. (2013). Исторический процесс формирования закрытых городов [The historical process of the formation of closed cities]. Vestnik universiteta, 9, 185–189.
14. Fajkov, D. Ju. (2012). Закрытые административно-территориальные образования. Системные трансформации [Closed Administrative-Territorial Formation. Systemic transformations], Sarov: FGUP “RFYAC-VNIIEF”.
15. Leksin, I.V. (2014). Территориальное устройство России: Конституционно-правовые проблемы [The territorial structure of Russia: Constitutional issues], Moscow. LENAND.
16. Praskova, S.V. (2023). К вопросу о преобразовании закрытых административно-территориальных образований в федеральные территории [To the question of conversion of closed administrative-territorial formations into federal territories]. Lomonosov Public Administration Journal. Series, 20(4), 40–65. doi:10.55959/MSU2073-2643-21-2023-4-40-65
17. Chereshneva, I. A. (2024). Территории с особым (специальным) режимом осуществления предпринимательской деятельности (частно-правовой аспект) [Territories with Special Regime of Business Activities (the Private and Legal Aspect)]. Moscow.
18. Novikov, A.A. (2010). О некоторых особенностях организации местного самоуправления в ЗАТО [About some Peculiarities of Local Self-Government Organization in CATE]. Russian Juridical Journal, 6, 84-87.

First Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The subject of the research in the article submitted for review is, as follows from its name, closed administrative-territorial entities. The author focused his attention on the study of the entrepreneurial and legal aspect of the problem. The declared boundaries of the study have been observed by the scientist. The methodology of the research is not disclosed in the text of the article. The relevance of the research topic chosen by the author is beyond doubt and is justified by him as follows: "The modern challenges faced by Russia require the state to promptly develop a set of necessary and sufficient measures [1, 2] of various orientations (political, economic, social, moral), their "seamless" (as far as possible) implementation into the existing social "fabric", as well as early adaptation to constantly changing the conditions of the surrounding world. At the same time, in order to overcome them, it is necessary to "take oneself into support", i.e. the main focus of the state should focus on the use of internal resources in order to ensure the realization of the national interests of the Russian Federation and strategic national priorities (in accordance with Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated July 02, 2021 No. 400 "On the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation"). In our opinion, closed administrative-territorial entities (hereinafter referred to as BUT), the legal regulation of which is carried out within the framework of the Law of the Russian Federation dated July 14, 1992 No. 3297-1 "On Closed Administrative–territorial Education" (hereinafter referred to as the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT"), could be a good help for this. After all, "intellectual, innovative, and industrial resources are concentrated on the territory of the Republic, which gives them special value in the overall strategic development of society, in ensuring economic growth, defense capability, and state security."[3]. This becomes especially relevant in conditions of constant imbalance in the legal space, when "the political and economic interests of individual states begin to prevail in bilateral and multilateral relations, when "resource" expediency and the desire for dominance prevail to the detriment of the principles of relations and agreements." [4]. Thus, the problem of ensuring the political and economic sovereignty of our state is brought to the fore [5], including by increasing the number of knowledge-intensive industries and high technologies, the functioning of which not only requires a material and technical base, but also appropriate human capital in the person of high-level specialists, for activities (both professional, and personal) which require a developed infrastructure. All this determines the appeal to the legal study of the law." Additionally, the scientist needs to list the names of the leading experts who have been engaged in the study of the problems raised in the article, as well as reveal the degree of their study. The scientific novelty of the work is manifested in a number of conclusions of the author: "Accordingly, the date of adoption of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT" can be chosen as the starting point of the current stage of development of this legal phenomenon. At the same time, as noted in the legal doctrine, the legal regime is characterized by exceptional stability, as evidenced by the minimum (for example, in comparison with business legislation) number of changes made to this normative legal act. We would like to point out that the last large-scale changes to the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT" were made in 2003, which was due to the reform of local self-government. Thus, the legislation regulating this sphere of public relations is quite conservative"; "Without detracting from the value of this scientific position, both for doctrine, legislation and the development of the legal regime, BUT per se, it seems to us that its effective legal support is also possible within the territories with a special (special) regime of entrepreneurial activity (hereinafter – territories with a special regime), i.e. through the prism of business law"; "In the study of territories with a special (special) regime of entrepreneurial activity, we have identified their key essential features: 1) a special (special) regime for carrying out entrepreneurial activity; 2) a separate territory; 3) the purpose (purpose of creation) of the territory; 4) the presence of a special subject of a public organization of entrepreneurial activity [10]. These signs act as peculiar markers that make it possible to attribute a particular legal phenomenon to territories with a special regime. The latter, in turn, act as a generic concept in relation to such specific concepts as, for example, territories with a special preferential regime for entrepreneurial activity (in particular, special economic zones, territories of advanced development, innovative scientific and technological centers, special administrative districts, etc.), territories with a special protective regime for entrepreneurial activity activities, including those to which we refer BUT", etc. Thus, the article makes a certain contribution to the development of domestic legal science and, of course, deserves the attention of potential readers. The scientific style of the research is fully sustained by the author. The structure of the work is quite logical. In the introductory part of the article, the scientist substantiates the relevance of his chosen research topic. In the main part of the work, the author examines closed administrative-territorial entities in the entrepreneurial and legal aspect, identifies the relevant problems of their legal status and suggests ways to solve them. The final part of the work contains conclusions based on the results of the study. The content of the article corresponds to its title, but is not devoid of shortcomings of a formal nature. So, the author writes: "Thus, the legislation regulating this sphere of public relations is quite conservative" - "Therefore, the legislation regulating this sphere of public relations is quite conservative." The scientist notes: "In others, by highlighting the main features of the country: 1) they act as an element of the administrative–territorial division of the country; 2) they are territories with a special status; 3) they have a pronounced, fortified border on the ground; 4) the application of special regimes in this territory (special regime of movement and residence, special regime of management, special regime the use of land and the establishment of land boundaries, a special regime for the formation of the local budget, a special regime for the distribution of powers between levels of government); 5) are created and abolished administratively [7]"- "have". The author points out: "Secondly, the existing variety of approaches to the legal nature of the BUT (mainly constitutional and legal orientation, for example, in the context of considering the BUT as a type of federal territory of a closed type) enrich both doctrine and legislation, and also contribute to the development of this legal regime" - a comma after the verb "enrich" I don't need it. Thus, the article needs additional proofreading - it contains typos, punctuation and stylistic errors (the list of typos and errors given in the review is not exhaustive!). The bibliography of the study is presented by 11 sources (monographs, dissertation work, scientific articles). From a formal and factual point of view, this is enough. The author managed to reveal the research topic with the necessary completeness and depth. There is an appeal to opponents, both general and private (I. V. Leksin, S. V. Praskova, etc.), and it is quite sufficient. The scientific discussion is conducted by the author correctly. The provisions of the work are justified to the appropriate extent and illustrated with examples.
There are conclusions based on the results of the study ("Firstly, at the present stage of development, BUT has not lost its relevance, the latter, on the contrary, acquires a new "sound", which is conditioned by the need to overcome challenges, both political and socio-economic in nature. Secondly, the existing variety of approaches to the legal nature of the BUT (mainly constitutional and legal orientation, for example, in the context of considering the BUT as a type of federal territory of a closed type) enrich both doctrine and legislation, and also contribute to the development of this legal regime. However, in order to realize the potential inherent in it, it is proposed to consider the territory from an entrepreneurial and legal perspective, i.e. as one of the types of territory with a special regime of entrepreneurial activity. Thirdly, the analysis of the signs-markers of territories with a special regime (a special (special) regime of entrepreneurial activity, a separate territory; the purpose of the territory; a special subject of public organization of entrepreneurial activity) allows us to classify them as territories with a special protective regime of entrepreneurial activity, which, in turn, act as one of the types of territory with a special regime. It seems that the entrepreneurial and legal view of the BUT will contribute to strengthening the defense capability, internal unity and political stability, as well as the modernization of the economy and the development of the industrial potential of our country"), they are clear, specific, have the properties of reliability, validity and undoubtedly deserve the attention of the scientific community. The interest of the readership in the article submitted for review can be shown primarily by specialists in the field of constitutional law, business law, provided that it is finalized: disclosure of the research methodology, additional justification of the relevance of its topic (within the framework of the comment made), elimination of violations in the design of the work.

Second Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

A REVIEW of an article on the topic "Closed administrative-territorial entities: an entrepreneurial and legal aspect". The subject of the study. The article proposed for review is devoted to topical issues of the legal regime of closed administrative-territorial entities in modern Russia. The author studies the historical aspect of the topic, legal regulation, practical aspects, and draws important conclusions in the context of how the BUT can be effective and useful in the current conditions. The originality of the study also lies in the fact that the stated problem is considered from the point of view of business law, which includes both public law and private law aspects. The specific subject of the study was the provisions of current legislation, the opinions of scientists, practice materials and historical data. Research methodology. The purpose of the study is not stated directly in the article. At the same time, it can be clearly understood from the title and content of the work. The purpose can be designated as the consideration and resolution of certain problematic aspects of the issue of the legal regime of closed administrative-territorial entities in modern Russia. Based on the set goals and objectives. The author has chosen the methodological basis of the study. As indicated by the author of the reviewed work himself, a study is being conducted, "the methodological basis of which is the general philosophical (dialectical method), general scientific (for example, generalization and abstraction, induction and deduction, analogy, analysis and synthesis) and private scientific (formal legal, historical and legal) methods of scientific cognition." In particular, the author uses a set of general scientific methods of cognition: analysis, synthesis, analogy, deduction, induction, and others. In particular, the methods of analysis and synthesis made it possible to summarize and share the conclusions of various scientific approaches to the proposed topic, as well as draw specific conclusions from the materials of practice. The most important role was played by special legal methods. In particular, the author actively applied the formal legal method, which made it possible to analyze and interpret the norms of current legislation. For example, the following conclusion of the author: "As an example of restrictions, restrictions on the right to conduct economic and entrepreneurial activities, ownership, use and disposal of natural resources, real estate, arising from restrictions on entry and (or) permanent residence (Article 3 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT") can be cited. Thus, transactions for the acquisition of ownership of immovable property located on the territory of the BUT, or other transactions with such property, can only be made by citizens of the Russian Federation who permanently reside or have received a permanent residence permit on the territory of the BUT, by citizens of the Russian Federation working in this territory on the terms of an employment contract concluded for an indefinite period with organizations, the activities of which were created by the BUT, and by legal entities located and registered on the territory of the BUT (paragraph 1 of Article 8 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT")". It is necessary to positively assess the possibilities of the historical and legal research method associated with the generalization of historical experience and the study of the declared topic, taking into account the genesis of its development. So, we note the following author's conclusion: "Historical roots can be found " in the structure of Arakcheev military settlements (they operated in some southern and western provinces of Russia from the beginning to the middle of the XIX century.); military fortresses can also be attributed to them: Kronstadt, Kars or Sevastopol (XIX - early XX centuries.)." [13]. In turn, in the USSR, "the first BUT were created back in the late 1930s." [13], however, their main development took place in the post-war period, which was associated with the need for "high-security work (for example, the creation of atomic weapons), the deployment of strategic military forces; subsequently, landfills and cosmodromes, as well as those settlements where the disposal and elimination of chemical weapons took place." [14]". Thus, the methodology chosen by the author is fully adequate to the purpose of the study, allows you to study all aspects of the topic in its entirety. Relevance. The relevance of the stated issues is beyond doubt. There are both theoretical and practical aspects of the significance of the proposed topic. From the point of view of theory, the topic of the legal regime of closed administrative-territorial entities in modern Russia is complex and ambiguous. It may seem that the necessity and importance of BUT has become less recently, so it is important to show their role at the current stage of legal development. It is difficult to argue with the author that "The modern challenges faced by Russia require the state to promptly develop a set of necessary and sufficient measures [1, 2] of various directions (political, economic, social, moral), their "seamless" (as far as possible) implementation into the existing social "fabric" as well as early adaptation to the constantly changing conditions of the world around us. At the same time, in order to overcome them, it is necessary to "take oneself into support", i.e. the main focus of the state should focus on the use of internal resources in order to ensure the realization of the national interests of the Russian Federation and strategic national priorities (in accordance with Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated July 02, 2021 No. 400 "On the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation" (hereinafter – The National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation)). In our opinion, closed administrative-territorial entities (hereinafter referred to as BUT), the legal regulation of which is carried out within the framework of the Law of the Russian Federation dated July 14, 1992 No. 3297-1 "On Closed Administrative–territorial Education" (hereinafter referred to as the Law of the Russian Federation "On BUT"), could be a good help for this. After all, "intellectual, innovative, and industrial resources are concentrated on the territory of the Republic, which gives them special value in the overall strategic development of society, in ensuring economic growth, defense capability, and state security." [3]" Thus, scientific research in the proposed field should only be welcomed. Scientific novelty. The scientific novelty of the proposed article is beyond doubt. Firstly, it is expressed in the author's specific conclusions. Among them, for example, is the following conclusion: "Firstly, at the present stage of development, BUT has not lost its relevance, the latter, on the contrary, acquires a new "sound", which is conditioned by the need to overcome challenges of both a political and socio-economic nature. Secondly, the existing variety of approaches to the legal nature of the BUT (mainly constitutional and legal orientation, for example, in the context of considering the BUT as a type of federal territory of a closed type) enrich both doctrine and legislation, and also contribute to the development of this legal regime. However, in order to realize the potential inherent in it, it is proposed to consider the territory from an entrepreneurial and legal perspective, i.e. as one of the types of territory with a special regime of entrepreneurial activity. Thirdly, the analysis of the signs-markers of territories with a special regime (a special (special) regime of entrepreneurial activity, a separate territory; the purpose of the territory; a special subject of public organization of entrepreneurial activity) allows us to classify them as territories with a special protective regime of entrepreneurial activity, which, in turn, act as one of the types of territory with a special regime." These and other theoretical conclusions can be used in further scientific research. Secondly, the author suggests ideas for generalizing practice, which ultimately leads to the general conclusion that "an entrepreneurial and legal view of Russia will contribute to strengthening defense capability, internal unity and political stability, as well as modernization of the economy and development of the industrial potential of our country (the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation)." This may be useful for specialists in the field under consideration.
Thus, the materials of the article may be of particular interest to the scientific community in terms of contributing to the development of science. Style, structure, content. The subject of the article corresponds to the specialization of the journal "Law and Politics", as it is devoted to legal problems related to the legal regime of closed administrative-territorial entities in modern Russia. The content of the article fully corresponds to the title, since the author considered the stated problems and fully achieved the purpose of the study. The quality of the presentation of the study and its results should be recognized as fully positive. The subject, objectives, methodology and main results of the study follow directly from the text of the article. The design of the work generally meets the requirements for this kind of work. No significant violations of these requirements were found. Bibliography. The quality of the literature used should be highly appreciated. The author actively uses the literature presented by authors from Russia (Vorotilina T.V., Gabov A.V., Ivanchenko E.A., Mikheeva I.V., Tikhomirov Yu.A., Cherkasov K.V. and others). Thus, the works of the above authors correspond to the research topic, have a sign of sufficiency, and contribute to the disclosure of various aspects of the topic. Appeal to opponents. The author conducted a serious analysis of the current state of the problem under study. All quotations of scientists are accompanied by author's comments. That is, the author shows different points of view on the problem and tries to argue for a more correct one in his opinion. Conclusions, the interest of the readership. The conclusions are fully logical, as they are obtained using a generally accepted methodology. The article may be of interest to the readership in terms of the systematic positions of the author in relation to the development of the legal regime of closed administrative-territorial entities in modern Russia. Based on the above, summing up all the positive and negative sides of the article, "I recommend publishing"
Nota Bene
 
For authors
 
Other
 
Our sites
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.