Strategic planning in the areas of legal support, public administration, and public service improvements provides for the new legal technologies while there are still massive failures being registered. The author raises the question of the necessity to find the reasons for such disruption not only in insufficient discipline or qualifications of public officials but also in the specific ontological peculiarities inherent in the law and legal work. In the course of the work, the author analyzed international experience, as well as relevant practice in Khabarovsk Krai in 2020- 2022. The article applies scientific methods of analysis and synthesis, induction, deduction and abduction, formalization, classification, modeling, etc. In the paper, we can see the author’s definition of an «innovative public law regime». In addition, the author outlined and explained the determinants of distrust and avoidance by private law firms (legal departments of corporations) and legal departments of public authorities to adopt, implement and apply legal innovation in current or projected legal work. The regulatory environment is adaptive in nature (although there are objectively determined limits of such adaptability). The introduction of legal innovations is primarily associated with issues of thoughtfulness, intensity and scale, as well as the effectiveness of validation. Over time, the regulatory environment becomes more complex and heterogeneous, and this trend becomes more pronounced, while having a non-linear, exponential dependence. At the same time, the impact of technology on law and legal work, which is still poorly understood and explained, gradually creates the prerequisites for future tectonic changes in the nature and ontology of law, in regulatory landscapes.
DEGTYAREV MIKHAIL V.
State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation
Publications of the author
In the journal
In connection with the adoption of the Federal Law of July 31, 2020 No. 258-FZ “On Experimental Legal Regimes in the Field of Digital Innovations in the Russian Federation” and of the Federal Law of July 31, 2020 No. 247-FZ “On Mandatory Requirements in the Russian Federation” (Article 13 “Experimental legal regime”) the topic of experimental legislation was updated. The article is devoted to the application of the experimental approach in legal regulation. The author reveals the essence of the concept of experimental legislation, explains the goals and objectives of using the appropriate technologies. The author notes that although in a broad sense it can be said that the adoption of any new law is in itself an experiment, there are still significant differences within the experimental law. The author sets out the essential features of a legislative experiment. The article examines the reasons for the need and prerequisites for the rationality of the use of experimental legislation. The author shows the nature of legislative experimentation and the merits of this toolkit. The author shows the areas of relevant application of the method of experimental legislation. The species diversity of methods of experimental regulatory regulation is indicated. The article compares the method of practical experimental legislation and the method of thought experiment in norm-writing and law-making activities. The article compares the method of practical experimental legislation and the method of digital duplicate-models of legislative acts. The author substantiates the existence of limits of applicability of the method of experimental legislation and demonstrates selected technologies of experimental legislation. In conclusion, the author turns to the complex and controversial problems of using the method of experimental legislation.
The article is devoted to a comparative legal study of the fundamentals, tools and modalities of publicadministration and state policy in the field of countering doping in sport in foreign states. The author describes in detailthe concept and design of scientific research. The article demonstrates the regulatory framework of the study (thelegislation of 33 foreign states) and the empirical basis of the study (descriptions of law enforcement practices and policiesof 50 foreign states). The article is based on the use of research methods of system analysis, classification, synthesis,induction and deduction. By employing these methods, the essential features of the problematic field of regulation and ofthe realization of public administration and public policy in the field of countering doping in sport were revealed. As anempirical basis of the study were the answers of diplomatic institutions of the Russian Federation abroad. The articleshows the importance of administrative and legal regulation in the total volume of regulation of relations in this area. Publicadministration and anti-doping policies in sport are still far from perfect in all States of the world, have many shortcomingsand have a number of unresolved problems. The use of doping in sports has become a competitive race of nationalpharmaceutical corporations (a specific part of them) to develop new doping substances and mechanisms. Some of themhave not yet been included in the world anti-doping Agency's prohibition lists, as they are based on the latest technologiesand are therefore difficult to detect.
