Statistical data: 1 January 1997 - 30 April 1997

Total number of decisions: 7 Types of decisions:
• Rulings: 7
• Opinions: 0
Categories of cases:
• Interpretation of the Constitution: 0
• Conformity with the Constitution of acts of State bodies: 7
• Conformity with the Constitution of international treaties: 0
• Conflicts of competence: 0
• Observance of a prescribed procedure for charging the President with high treason or other grave offence: 0
Types of claim:
• Claims by State bodies: 6
• Complaints of individuals: 2
• References from courts: 2
(Some claims were dealt with jointly during the same proceedings).

Important decisions

Identification: RUS-1997-1 -001
a) Russia / b) Constitutional Court / c) / d) 24.01.1997 / e) / f) / g) Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 06.02.1997 / h).

Keywords of the systematic thesaurus:
Institutions - Executive bodies-Territorial administrative decentralisation - Municipalities.
Institutions - Federalism and regionalism – Institutional aspects.
Institutions - Federalism and regionalism - Distribution of powers - Subjects.
Fundamental Rights - Civil and political rights -Electoral rights.

Keywords of the alphabetical index:
Local authorities / Self-governing territories / Local self-government.

Headnotes:
In the setting up or changing of the territorial administra-tive structure and types of self-governing territories, it is unacceptable to terminate prematurely the powers of local self-government bodies without taking account of the opinion of the population of these territories. This would amount to a violation of the constitutional right of citizens to exercise local self-government. The transformation of local self-government bodies into organs of state authority and the exercise by the latter of local government is not admissible either.

Summary:
The Constitutional Court examined the case relating to the review of the constitutionality of the Udmurtian Republic's law on "the system governing the organs of state authority in the Urdmurtian Republic". Proceedings were opened in response to applications from the President of the Russian Federation and a group of parliamentarians in the State Duma of the Federal Assembly as well as a complaint lodged by citizens of Ijevsk against the violation of their constitutional right to exercise local self-government.
The Constitutional Court found that the law at issue provided for the setting up of representative and executive organs of state authority for territorial administrative entities {raion or town) and for city sub-districts; this means that villages, market towns and the urban centres are regarded as municipalities within which local self-government is exercised.
In accordance with the Constitution, State authority in the subjects of the Russian Federation is exercised by the organs of State authority that they set up. The system of such organs is established by the subjects of the Russian Federation autonomously and in accordance with the foundations of the Russian Federation's constitutional order and the general principles governing the organisation of representative and executive organs of State authority, laid down by federal law. The nature of the State of Russia means that the federal structure is the responsibility of the federation and the territorial structure of their republics making up the federation is the responsibility of those republics. The Constitution of the Republic of Udmurtia deals with this matter. It lists the raions and Republican main cities which are directly part of the Republic of Udmurtia as territorial administrative entities. Territorial entities at a different level, namely raion capitals, towns and villages within the raion and other urban centres (parts of towns, sub-districts, residential complexes) inside the republican main cities, do not have this status. For this reason representative and executive State authorities of such entities cannot be created. At this level, public authority is exercised through local self-government and bodies which are not part of the State authority system.
The Constitutional Court decided to recognise the provision at issue, according to which the State Council of the Republic of Udmurtia is free to establish a system of State authority within the Republic of Udmurtia, as complying with the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
The provision for the setting up of representative and executive State authorities within urban centres (city sub-districts and towns within the raion) which do not have the status of territorial administrative entities, was found to be not in compliance with the Constitution. For the same reasons, the provisions governing the status of representative and executive bodies of State authority of city sub-districts and towns within the raion, and the status of their officials were also found to be unconstitutional.
The provision stating that the raion Soviet of deputies shall appoint the "administrators of the Soviets and rural towns" is also unconstitutional.
The provision stating that villages, market towns and residential parts of urban centres represent municipalities exercising self-government, is unconstitutional because it rules out the creation of municipalities in other residential areas (towns within the raion, city sub-districts, etc) without the status of territorial administrative entities. If organs of state authority are set up within raions and republican main cities and the respective transformation of types of municipalities, the local self-government bodies of raions and cities with the status of territorial administra-tive entities may not be terminated prematurely, without consulting the population as regards the motives and in the form stipulated in the Urdmurtian Republic's legislation, adopted in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The most appropriate means of consulting public opinion in such circumstances is by referendum.
The provisions providing for the creation of unified Soviets of deputies for the transition period, the conversion of governors of municipalities into State officials, and their appointment or dismissal by State authorities of the Republic of Udmurtia, were regarded as unconstitutional, in so far as the organs of self-government of the raion and the town are virtually incorporated into the State authority system.

Languages: Russian.

Identification: RUS-1997-1 -002
a) Russia / b) Constitutional Court / c) / d) 18.02.1997 / e) / f) / g) Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 26.02.1997 / h).

Keywords of the systematic thesaurus:
General Principles - Separation of powers.
General Principles - Legality.
Institutions - Public finances - Taxation - Principles.
Fundamental Rights - Civil and political rights - Rights in respect of taxation.

Keywords of the alphabetical index: Licence, duty / Alcohol production.

Headnotes:
The introduction by act of government of a tax on the issuing of licences for the exercise of any activity represents the establishment of a new tax. This is contrary to the Constitution, which provides that new taxes must be introduced by a fiscal law passed according to the statutory procedure.

Summary:
The Constitutional Court examined the case relating to the review of constitutionality of the government decision "on the introduction of a tax on the issuing of licences for the production, bottling, stocking and wholesale of spirits". Proceedings were opened following applications by the People's Assembly of the Republic of Daghestan, the State Duma of Stavropol kray (territory) and the regional Duma of Toula. According to the applicants the government has introduced new federal taxes infringing several articles of the Constitution, according to which federal taxes and duties fall within the competence of the Russian Federation and can be established only by federal law.
The Constitutional Court found that the government decision regulated:
1. taxes on the production, bottling and storing of spirits and a tax for the inspection of the companies to establish whether they operate in accordance with the regulations;
2. the amount of the aforementioned taxes and the distribution of the amounts of these taxes;
3. penalties for operation without a licence.
According to the Constitution, everyone is required to pay legally established taxes and duties. The Constitution provides that federal taxes and duties are the responsibility of the Russian Federation, that the system of taxes collected for the federal budget and the general principles of taxation are established by federal law, and that the federal laws passed by the State Duma on matters of federal taxes and duties must be examined by the Council of the Federation.
According to these provisions, federal taxes and duties are regarded as "legally established" if they have been established in the statutory form by the federal legislative organ.
The above-mentioned taxes were not established in that way, even though it is stipulated in several federal budget laws that they are one of the sources of federal budget revenue. However, the mere fact that they are mentioned in budget laws does not amount to their being legally established since these laws do not contain any substantial elements of fiscal obligations. According to the Constitution, federal taxes and duties and the federal budget are autonomous spheres of legal regulation, which means that federal duties and taxes must be established by federal fiscal legislation.
Consequently, when presenting the draft budgets for 1995,1996 and 1997, the government was required to present the draft federal laws on the establishment of taxes (licence duties) for the production, bottling, storing and wholesale of ethyl alcohol and spirits. Therefore from the point of view of limits to the powers of the central authority federal organs, the establishment by the government of the above-mentioned taxes is not in compliance with the Constitution.
The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is also required to consider that the licence duty introduced by the government is a source of federal budget revenue. Consequently, the immediate finding that the decision at issue is invalid could result in the non-execution of the federal budget as a whole and lead to a violation of a series of constitutional rights and freedoms and citizens. For this reason, the Constitutional Court thought it necessary to grant the Federal Assembly the possibility of settling the matter by legislative means.

Languages: Russian.

Identification: RUS-1997-1 -003
a) Russia / b) Constitutional Court / c) / d) 04.03.1997 / e) / f) / g) Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 18.03.1997 / h).

Keywords of the systematic thesaurus:
Institutions - Federalism and regionalism – Distribution of powers - Subjects.
Institutions - Economic duties of the State.
Fundamental Rights - Civil and political rights - Freedom of expression.
Fundamental Rights - Economic, social and cultural rights - Commercial and industrial freedom.

Keywords of the alphabetical index: Advertising.

Headnotes:
Relations arising during the production, placing and circulation of advertising are by their nature civil law relationships. They are linked to the establishment of the legal foundations of the single market of the country and to the guarantee of freedom of information. Such relationships are regulated by the Russian Federation and must be done so through federal legislation.

Summary:
Proceedings were opened further to the applications of the Legislative Assembly of Omsk oblast and the Duma of the city of Moscow for a verification of the con-stitutionality of Section 3 of the Federal Law on Advertising. The reason for which proceedings were opened was uncertainty about the constitutionality of these provisions.
In its application, the Moscow Duma relies on the fact that legislation on advertising is not mentioned either in Article 71 of the Constitution (powers and responsibilities of the Russian Federation) nor in Article 72 of the Constitution (joint powers and responsibilities of the Russian Federation and its subjects) and advertising cannot therefore be regulated by normative acts of the subjects of the Russian Federation. Given that Section 3 of the federal law on advertising does not provide for the adoption by subjects of the Russian Federation of normative acts on matters regulated by that law, the applicant considers that the above section of the law is not in compliance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
In the opinion of the Legislative Assembly of Omsk oblast, legislation on advertising is a part of legislation on culture, and is therefore the joint responsibility of the Russian Federation and its subjects.
The meaning of Section 3 of the federal law on advertising cannot be considered to be unconnected with the purpose of the regulation, the objectives and the field of implementation of the law.
The law in question regulates relationships arising during the production, placing and circulation of advertising on the goods, works and services markets.
These relationships are governed by civil law because they are created during the exercise of business activity and must be regulated by civil legislation.
The Constitution states that civil legislation is the competence of the Russian Federation. This means that legislation on advertising, regulating civil law relations in the field of advertising activity, may not be the joint responsibility of the Russian Federation and its subjects nor the responsibility of the subjects of the Russian Federation, such that they are not entitled to produce their own regulations in this field.
Since Section 3 of the law in question deals with normative acts regulating relations under civil law, this section does not comply with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, with regard to sharing of respon-sibilities among the Russian Federation and its subjects.
Article 8 of the Constitution mentions as a foundation of the constitutional system, unity of the economic area, the free movement of goods, services and financial resources, competition and freedom of economic activity, which are guaranteed in the Russian Federation. Establishing this as a State obligation, the Constitution assigns responsibility for laying down the legal founda-tions of the single market to the Russian Federation.
Under Section 2 of the federal law on advertising, advertising is regarded by the legislator as a means of promoting goods, works and services in the market of the Russian Federation and, consequently, contributes to the creation of the economic area. The federal law on advertising also aims to provide protection against unfair competition in advertising.
This means that legal regulations on advertising also in the field in which such regulations are related to the laying down of legal foundations for the single market, is the competence of the federal legislator. Consequently, Section 3 of the law is not contrary in this respect to the Constitution.
Unity of the economic area can not be achieved without the creation of a single information system. In this respect, advertising (advertising information) is the foundation for such an information system.
The right to seek, obtain, convey, produce and circulate information freely is enshrined in the Constitution and relates to the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals, responsibility for the regulation of which lies with the Russian Federation. The rights and freedoms of citizens including those relating to advertising information, cannot be limited by a federal law.
Consequently, in this respect the provisions of Article 3 of the law are not contrary to the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
The Constitutional Court decided to recognise Section 3 of the federal law of 18 July 1995 on advertising as complying with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, because it regulates relations in the field of advertising which belong to the domain of civil legislation and form the foundations of the single market.

Languages: Russian.