The concept and history of the emergence of human and civil rights and freedoms

CONTENT

INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………….2

Chapter 1. The nature and essence of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen……….4

1.1. The concept and history of the emergence of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen……………………………………..…………………………………4

1.2. Personal (civil) rights and freedoms………….………………………….7

1.3. Political Rights………………………………………………………….10

Chapter 2. Human rights and civil rights……………………………..…..13

2.1. Human rights and citizen’s rights in civil legal relations … 13

2.2. The right of a citizen to a name: concept and essence…………………………..17

2.3. Protection of the right of a citizen to a name…………………………………………….20

CONCLUSION……………………………………..…………………………..….27

List of used literature………………………………………28

INTRODUCTION

The relevance of the topic of the course work is due to the need to solve at the state level the problem of ensuring and protecting the rights and freedoms of man and citizen. To date, the Russian state is not quite coping with the fulfillment of its main constitutional duty – the protection of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen. Both at the state level, and in public opinion, and in science, it is recognized that an unsatisfactory situation has developed in this area. One of the most important categories of rights that are currently subject to frequent violations in all regions of the state are political rights and freedoms. Every day the number of violations in this area is growing, in connection with which there is a loss of public confidence in all structures of state power.

In modern conditions of low living standards of the population, economic reforms, large-scale hidden pressure on the population from many power structures, corruption, low level of legal awareness in society, the problems of realizing political rights and freedoms of man and citizen are only exacerbated, to avoid distorting the actual will of citizens as participants in the political process is not always possible.

The mechanism for guaranteeing the exercise of political rights and freedoms in Russia is only being formed and is largely imperfect. The new Russian and Moscow constitutional legislation has made significant changes to the system of these guarantees, in connection with which the theoretical study of this legislation and the practice of its application becomes more relevant.

The object of the study is the public relations of citizens arising in the field of civil legal relations, considered in theoretical and practical aspects.

right consumer protection civil

The subject of the study is the civil law norms of the Russian Federation that regulate legal relations, as well as the practice of their application.

The purpose of this course work is to consider the concept and history of the emergence of human and civil rights and freedoms, as well as to touch upon the constitutional regulation of the rights to the name of a citizen.

To achieve this goal, specific tasks were solved.

Research objectives:

1. to study the concept of the right and freedom of man and citizen;

2. analyze the classification of rights;

3. to determine the differences between human rights and the rights of a citizen;

4. to characterize such concepts as human and civil rights in civil legal relations;

5. pay special attention to the constitutional regulation of the rights to the name of a citizen.

The theoretical and practical significance of the course work is determined by its focus on improving the guarantees for the implementation of political rights in the name of a citizen. The theoretical provisions and practical recommendations developed in the course of the study can contribute to the improvement of federal legislation in this area.

The structure of the work consists of an introduction, two chapters, including six paragraphs, a conclusion, a bibliographic dictionary.

Chapter 1. The nature and essence of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen

The concept and history of the emergence of human and civil rights and freedoms

Human rights are one of the eternal problems of human development in various fields, which is in the focus of philosophical, legal, political, religious thought. In different historical times, the very concept of law has changed. This was due to the fact that society, the state and law, to one degree or another, developed.

Human rights belong to every member of society and constitute one of the most important universal values, and the state, in turn, is obliged to ensure their protection and implementation.

Religious prohibitions, all sorts of taboos, were more effective means of ensuring the desired behavior than physical punishment or social coercion. With their help, incest was forbidden, hunting grounds were protected from unreasonable extermination, and other vital issues of human society were resolved.

The most important for a person were numerous myths and legends that substantiated patterns of proper and forbidden behavior. The social nature of customs, morality and religious norms did not correspond much to the specifics of the emerging relations. They did not fix either the proper parity of public and private interests, which the emerging system of social ties so needed, or a clear, detailed fixing of rights and obligations.

Scientists of different historical times, both foreign and domestic, had different ideas about law, about its formation and development. Here are quotes from some legal scholars.

Morozova L.A. considered law to be “the personification of political justice and the norm of political relations between people” Socrates (469-399 BC) and Plato (428/427-348/347 BC) [1] in their legal thinking also proceeded from the coincidence of fair and lawful. According to Cicero, the basis of law is its inherent justice.

Matuzov N.I. believed that “property stratification of society also actively contributed to the formation of law. Representatives of the emerging class of the propertied were extremely interested in creating such social norms that would not only protect, but also express their private interests. To do this, having secured their economic dominance, they gradually limited the circle of persons involved in the development of generally binding rules of conduct. Thanks to their position in society, they managed to achieve a change in the previously existing equality, having received, for example, a preferential opportunity to pay off financially for a committed offense.

R. Iering, a famous German lawyer, believed that “the content of law is the interests of the subjects of social interaction” i.e. e the interests of society as a whole, and the only source of law is the state.

Alekseev S.S., a Russian and Polish scientist, considered law as a phenomenon generated by personal consciousness, and not public. He considered individual consciousness to be the only source of law. “Any other right that exists outside of human consciousness is an optical illusion”[2]. According to S.S. Alekseev, “at the first phases of the development of human society (in Asian theocratic monarchies, in slave-owning and feudal states), there were, as a rule, undeveloped legal systems” [3]. We should agree with this opinion, since during the period of the slave-owning and feudal system, law was traditional, or customary. The underdevelopment of traditional law, first of all, consisted in the fact that it performed only a protective function and acted as part of a single system of social regulation, in which religion, morality and customs performed the regulatory function.

From the above, the following conclusions can be drawn:

First, human rights are universal. They apply to all people, are applicable in all countries, regardless of the latter’s membership in various international communities. Of course, the volume and effectiveness of the realization of rights and freedoms depends on a number of factors, and above all on the level of development of society as a whole.

Secondly, human rights are in constant development, reflect the dynamics of social relations and the growth of legal consciousness of citizens. An example is the emergence of the right to information and its consolidation in Article 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Third, human rights are not a legal dogma. They cannot be absolutized and separated from real life, from a reasonable person. A number of international legal and domestic documents allow restrictions on certain rights and freedoms due to public safety, ecological balance, etc. The legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy establishes the permissible limits of private property, emphasizes the need for its use in the interests of society.

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.